32xx movement problem poll and data thread

[SearChart]

Originally Posted by Mountain

Perhaps I’m misunderstanding, but the second of Bas’s photos in the post just above implies any amplitude above 200’ is acceptable for the vertical positions. However, It’s not clear (to me) whether that relates to a fully wound movement.

That is after 24hrs. It has to be above 200 degrees in vertical positions.

[Mountain]

Originally Posted by SearChart

That is after 24hrs. It has to be above 200 degrees in vertical positions.

Thanks, very clear. Appreciate the help.

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by SearChart

As requested, PR tolerance for the 32××:

Just curious, do similar guides for other movements all direct the watchmaker to demagnetize (and has that always been a standard instruction)?

[SearChart]

Originally Posted by dannyp

Just curious, do similar guides for other movements all direct the watchmaker to demagnetize (and has that always been a standard instruction)?

In the whole industry? No.
Rolex is quite extreme and tries to idi0t-proof all their more modern guides.
Older movements like the 30××, 15××, 12×× have old school technical documentation, which I prefer. I don't need a step by step guide like a Lego set.

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by SearChart

In the whole industry? No.
Rolex is quite extreme and tries to idi0t-proof all their more modern guides.
Older movements like the 30××, 15××, 12×× have old school technical documentation, which I prefer. I don't need a step by step guide like a Lego set.

I meant is that standard in today's Rolex-provided guides, or is it specific to the guide for the 32xx? If so, I'd be curious as to why Rolex all of a sudden started including that instruction.

[SearChart]

Originally Posted by dannyp

I meant is that standard in today's Rolex-provided guides, or is it specific to the guide for the 32xx? If so, I'd be curious as to why Rolex all of a sudden started including that instruction.

It's in all the modern Rolex guides, at various stages of a service you're 'required' to demagnetise.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by SearChart

.

Thanks for the Rolex timing analysis and performance tests documents you shared.



A few remarks/questions:

It's the first time that I see the 53° lift angle confirmed (for 32xx movements) in an official Rolex document, also the 69 h power reserve, good.

When you do rate measurements 24 hours after full winding, I remember that you do not wait 24 hours, but you use the ratchet wheel (3.4 rotations) and the winding stem (12.4 rotations) specifications.

My question: How do you do the small 0.4 rotations? Or do you do 3.5 and 12.5 rotations?

The rate 2nd criterion (average rate at 0 hr in 5 test positions) with tolerances -1/+3 s/d is also no surprise to me. I heard that from an AD watchmaker already a few years before, but even he did not understand this tolerance which he thought should be -2/+2 s/d.

My question: Why does Rolex specify the famous -2/+2 s/d and the testing tolerance is -1/+3 s/d?

[bubbaeggs]

Hi all

New to the group but thought id post here as ive just purchased my first Rolex and am a little dissapointed with its performance.

40 mm Explorer June 2023


FULL WIND 12HR 24HR

DU 0 259 0 240 0 239

CL -21 177 -6 207 -3 213

CU -7 197 -7 201 -7 193

CD -7 175 -4 206 -8 171

DD -4 234 -4 231 -3 230

The watch has been worn in between these measurements.
I am reluctant to send it back as i am enjoying wearing the watch as its my first Rolex but its kind of soured my first taste into the brand.

[Kevin of Larchmont]

Originally Posted by bubbaeggs

Hi all

New to the group but thought id post here as ive just purchased my first Rolex and am a little dissapointed with its performance.

40 mm Explorer June 2023


FULL WIND 12HR 24HR

DU 0 259 0 240 0 239

CL -21 177 -6 207 -3 213

CU -7 197 -7 201 -7 193

CD -7 175 -4 206 -8 171

DD -4 234 -4 231 -3 230

The watch has been worn in between these measurements.
I am reluctant to send it back as i am enjoying wearing the watch as its my first Rolex but its kind of soured my first taste into the brand.

Welcome to the forum.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by bubbaeggs

Hi all

New to the group but thought id post here as ive just purchased my first Rolex and am a little dissapointed with its performance.

40 mm Explorer June 2023


FULL WIND 12HR 24HR

DU 0 259 0 240 0 239

CL -21 177 -6 207 -3 213

CU -7 197 -7 201 -7 193

CD -7 175 -4 206 -8 171

DD -4 234 -4 231 -3 230

The watch has been worn in between these measurements.
I am reluctant to send it back as i am enjoying wearing the watch as its my first Rolex but its kind of soured my first taste into the brand.

Welcome Alex.

[Toshk]

Originally Posted by bubbaeggs

Hi all

New to the group but thought id post here as ive just purchased my first Rolex and am a little dissapointed with its performance.

40 mm Explorer June 2023


FULL WIND 12HR 24HR

DU 0 259 0 240 0 239

CL -21 177 -6 207 -3 213

CU -7 197 -7 201 -7 193

CD -7 175 -4 206 -8 171

DD -4 234 -4 231 -3 230

The watch has been worn in between these measurements.
I am reluctant to send it back as i am enjoying wearing the watch as its my first Rolex but its kind of soured my first taste into the brand.

Many thanks for your feedback. So what is the actual timekeeping on the wrist?

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by bubbaeggs

The watch has been worn in between these measurements.

Welcome! Not clear to me why you have worn this watch between measurements. Did you read this thread? For better understanding, are your results as follows?

After full winding:
DU 0 259
CL -21 177
CU -7 197
CD -7 175
DD -4 234

Then start watch wearing, data 12 hrs. after full winding:
DU 0 240
CL -6 207
CU -7 201
CD -4 206
DD -4 231

Then continue watch wearing, data 24 hrs. after full winding:
DU 0 239
CL -3 213
CU -7 193
CD -8 171
DD -3 230

To achieve full movement winding how many turns of the crown you did? What was the lift angle setting on your timegrapher?

[77T]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Welcome! Not clear to me why you have worn this watch between measurements. Did you read this thread?

He gives a clue in his post. After all these ARE wristwatches - not lab rats.

The flaws that have been identified are outside the control of the owner. The point is made.

My advice is to wear the watch, enjoy the watch, and don’t dwell on the minutiae.

Originally Posted by bubbaeggs

Hi I am reluctant to send it back as i am enjoying wearing the watch

Welcome to the forum.

Perfectly normal for you to enjoy your watch. Don’t let this dissuade you from doing that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[saxo3]

Great reply and proposal for a watch with vertical amplitudes of 175, 177, 197 degrees after full winding.

[77T]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Great reply and proposal for a watch with vertical amplitudes of 175, 177, 197 degrees after full winding.

I know you know that the amplitude means nothing to 99.8% of owners.

Their indication that a watch is becoming inaccurate is whether they lose minutes in a day.

Upon purchase, there is no action that an owner can take to mitigate a flaw in the movement.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[goodolejr]

Originally Posted by 77T

I know you know that the amplitude means nothing to 99.8% of owners.

Their indication that a watch is becoming inaccurate is whether they lose minutes in a day.

Upon purchase, there is no action that an owner can take to mitigate a flaw in the movement.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Respectfully, couldn't the owner return it for a refund and use the proceeds toward the purchase of an NOS 214270 from a trusted seller?

[77T]

Originally Posted by goodolejr

Respectfully, couldn't the owner return it for a refund and use the proceeds toward the purchase of an NOS 214270 from a trusted seller?

Rolex doesn’t ordinarily accept returns for a 32xx warranty problem - they provide a free repair instead.

But an owner could have their 32xx powered Rolex fixed and then sell it themselves. This proceeds could go towards a purchase of a 31xx powered Rolex.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[goodolejr]

Originally Posted by 77T

Rolex doesn’t ordinarily accept returns for a 32xx warranty problem - they provide a free repair instead.

But an owner could have their 32xx powered Rolex fixed and then sell it themselves. This proceeds could go towards a purchase of a 31xx powered Rolex.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I agree that Rolex does not ordinarily accept returns. I'm thinking more along the lines of the AD accepting the return and issuing a refund. Yes, yes, ADs are disinclined to do this as well.

I know consumer law treats personal items such as jewelry different than automobiles, but I wonder what relief a buyer has via the lemon laws of his/her respective jurisdiction.

[77T]

Originally Posted by goodolejr

I agree that Rolex does not ordinarily accept returns. I'm thinking more along the lines of the AD accepting the return and issuing a refund. Yes, yes, ADs are disinclined to do this as well.

I know consumer law treats personal items such as jewelry different than automobiles, but I wonder what relief a buyer has via the lemon laws of his/her respective jurisdiction.

In US, virtually none for a luxury watch made in Switzerland.

“Lemon laws” were created for a different type of situation.

If Rolex did admit to an inherent design flaw, I’d suggest a recall for movement repair/replacement. Not going to happen methinks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[goodolejr]

Originally Posted by 77T

In US, virtually none for a luxury watch made in Switzerland.

“Lemon laws” were created for a different type of situation.

If Rolex did admit to an inherent design flaw, I’d suggest a recall for movement repair/replacement. Not going to happen methinks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Agree, there's not much in terms of a path towards refund. Perhaps his AD might agree out of sympathy or to save face, but unlikely as well.

[bubbaeggs]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Welcome! Not clear to me why you have worn this watch between measurements. Did you read this thread? For better understanding, are your results as follows?

After full winding:
DU 0 259
CL -21 177
CU -7 197
CD -7 175
DD -4 234

Then start watch wearing, data 12 hrs. after full winding:
DU 0 240
CL -6 207
CU -7 201
CD -4 206
DD -4 231

Then continue watch wearing, data 24 hrs. after full winding:
DU 0 239
CL -3 213
CU -7 193
CD -8 171
DD -3 230

To achieve full movement winding how many turns of the crown you did? What was the lift angle setting on your timegrapher?

hi it was 48 winds approx and the lift angle was set at 53º

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by bubbaeggs

hi it was 48 winds approx and the lift angle was set at 53º

Thanks. I would repeat the timegrapher measurement as follows:

- After full winding (t = 0).

- Do not wear but keep the watch in DU position on the timegrapher.

- Measure again all 5 positions after 24 hours.

- Afterwards leave the watch in DU position (not moving) and wait until the caliber stops running, then determine the power reserve.

- The PR is the total time between full winding until the movement stops.

I'm (very) surprised that a June 2023 watch delivers such data after full winding:
DU 0 259
CL -21 177
CU -7 197
CD -7 175
DD -4 234

Is CL -21 s/d real or a typo?

[SearChart]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Thanks for the Rolex timing analysis and performance tests documents you shared.


A few remarks/questions:

It's the first time that I see the 53° lift angle confirmed (for 32xx movements) in an official Rolex document, also the 69 h power reserve, good.

When you do rate measurements 24 hours after full winding, I remember that you do not wait 24 hours, but you use the ratchet wheel (3.4 rotations) and the winding stem (12.4 rotations) specifications.

My question: How do you do the small 0.4 rotations? Or do you do 3.5 and 12.5 rotations?

The rate 2nd criterion (average rate at 0 hr in 5 test positions) with tolerances -1/+3 s/d is also no surprise to me. I heard that from an AD watchmaker already a few years before, but even he did not understand this tolerance which he thought should be -2/+2 s/d.

My question: Why does Rolex specify the famous -2/+2 s/d and the testing tolerance is -1/+3 s/d?

We do indeed try to get as close to the 3.4 rotations as possible, so slightly off 3.5 is fine. You can judge it quite well by the screw slot on the ratchet wheel.

As for the difference between after sales tolerance and sales tolerance, it beats me. I don't have an explanation, but I will ask around and see if I can get a more definitive answer.

[bubbaeggs]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Thanks. I would repeat the timegrapher measurement as follows:

- After full winding (t = 0).

- Do not wear but keep the watch in DU position on the timegrapher.

- Measure again all 5 positions after 24 hours.

- Afterwards leave the watch in DU position (not moving) and wait until the caliber stops running, then determine the power reserve.

- The PR is the total time between full winding until the movement stops.

I'm (very) surprised that a June 2023 watch delivers such data after full winding:
DU 0 259
CL -21 177
CU -7 197
CD -7 175
DD -4 234

Is CL -21 s/d real or a typo?

It was a real reading which concerned me!
I will try again as it seems to have improved whilst being unworn whilst at work and see if this has changed.

[shedlock2000]

I came across this on the Tok:

https://vm.tiktok.com/ZM2meYJRF/

This guy is in China and does a lot of rebuilds. There’s a couple of interesting things to note, though the rebuild is quick.

• Firstly, the watch is running very slowly (as has been reported here and many places).

• Secondly, even when he has finished the rebuild it’s still outside of RSC’s accuracy parameters. I know he’s not at an RSC, but he’s almost always able to tweak other watches down to +/- 0.1-0.5spd; I find it interesting that he hasn’t done so with this one!

If anyone could tell me how to upload a video to here I can share the actual TikTok itself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Andad]

Thanks for the link Steve.

So no parts were replaced, just a strip down and relube?

[bubbaeggs]

Ok i have re done the tests with 2 minutes to settle between positions and the watch left to rest dial up between.

FULL WIND:

DU 0 TO +1 251º

CL -1 TO -4 215 TO 217º

CU -2 TO -5 218 TO 219º

CD -1 TO -2 217 TO 221º

DD -1 TO -2 236 TO 239º

Not perfect but much improved results from before.

12HR

DU +3 TO +4 239º

CL -1 TO -2 212 TO 218º

CU -3 TO -6 189 TO 193º

CD -1 TO -5 196 TO 205º

DD -2 TO 0 230 TO 232º

24HR

DU +3 TO +4 236 TO 231º

CL -2 TO -4 186 TO 200º

CU -11 TO -6 175 TO 180

CD -3 TO -7 170 TO 174

DD -1 TO -4 221 TO 223

[saxo3]

24HR
DU +3 TO +4 236 TO 231º
CL -2 TO -4 186 TO 200º
CU -11 TO -6 175 TO 180
CD -3 TO -7 170 TO 174
DD -1 TO -4 221 TO 223

Amplitudes of all vertical positions are out of Rolex SA specs (min. 200º after 24 h)

[shedlock2000]

Originally Posted by Andad

Thanks for the link Steve.

So no parts were replaced, just a strip down and relube?

Yeah, I’d say so. Presumably to fix the accuracy. It was interesting to watch the procedure.

[avera]

I took my BLRO in for the 32xx problem. It was “fixed” and not details were provided about what was done.