32xx movement problem poll and data thread

[Murdoc370]

Very well said.

I hope you can enjoy your beautiful watch now, keeping a good amplitude, for the next years to come.

[Rocket_Man]

I really like this watch. It took me about 2 years to add this watch to my humble collection. I don't buy any watches with the plan to flip them. I plan to own them and wear them and enjoy them. Some day when I'm too old to do those things I'll either give them away or sell them. But I hope that is many years from now. I added an Exp II to my collection a month ago for my upcoming 60'th birthday. That was a 3186 movement made in 2008 and running very nicely. Beautiful polar dial in 40mm.

My own belief is that Rolex pushed too fast to respond to the competition by adding 70 hrs of power reserve. Honestly I don't need 70 hrs and if I could choose to have better timekeeping or longer power reserve I'd choose better timekeeping every time. Everyone realizes Roles moves slowly and methodically, but there is clearly some thing amiss in this movement. If it were an easy fix they would have done it. It is clearly complicated. Could they fix it? Sure. But unlike the Cyclops issue they can't fix the timekeeping issue by removing the 70hr PR claim. They are stuck between the technical fix and their marketing claims.

If there is a fix that is being incorporated in service and my watch has it I'll be happy. But Rolex is silent on the issue and the fix. They seem to think more like a jewelry company than a tool watch company. And like Boeing they may be losing a culture that made them successful. There is enough hype about their product and other luxury brands that ensure for the time being they will sell every watch they can make. It takes time to build a reputation and you can wash issues under the rug with a good reputation, but like Boeing once your reputation is gone, and people no longer trust you, they no longer buy your BS either.

[SearChart]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

Have you read these multiple 32XX threads? The obsession is legendary.

Your obsession with their obsession is quite legendary as well

[Idcutthat13]

Beat Rate Error was 0.0, 0.1. Excel was printing a 0 and I didn't feel like figuring out how to fix it for the 10th time.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Idcutthat13

Attachment 1382522

Beat Rate Error was 0.0, 0.1. Excel was printing a 0 and I didn't feel like figuring out how to fix it for the 10th time.

Excel
Format
Cells
Category: Number
Decimal places: choose 0,1,2, …

[Idcutthat13]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Excel
Format
Cells
Category: Number
Decimal places: choose 0,1,2, …

What’s your opinion of my results?

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Idcutthat13

What’s your opinion of my results?

Looks ok.

It would have been interesting, probably only for me, to measure for this new 32xx watch until the end of the power reserve and with a time interval of 12 hours, i.e., at t = 0,12,24,36,48,60 h.

I understand that is not interesting for most owners, but such data (which I can not produce myself) would yield to some stuff I'm looking into, isochronism, which changes when a 32xx degrades.

[Idcutthat13]

Well I was doing 12 hour increments. If you would have asked I would have gone further, I can if you want. I was asking that question yesterday.

[saxo3]

I'm not here to tell members what to do, only propose something.

Instead, I aim to better understand things myself and try to help others, if they ask.

Do whatever YOU like, e.g., start wearing this nice watch and forget about any more measurements

[Idcutthat13]

I did ask, yesterday, and this morning.
And I am wearing my watch, but thanks for not telling members what to do……

[Rocket_Man]

Update: at 48hrs into my post-service check...

- Dial up 0 spd, 219 degree amplitude
- 6Up, -9 spd, 175 degrees amplitude

Not sure what it should be at 48 hrs. I'll give it a week or two and do a better baseline test.

I noticed I didn't get a warranty card after service. Do they no longer include a card when you get your watch back?

Thanks,

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Idcutthat13

I did ask, yesterday, and this morning.
And I am wearing my watch, but thanks for not telling members what to do……

No need to be sarcastic in this thread ...

You can repeat a PR scan at any time, just stop wearing the watch, do a full winding .... no big deal.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Rocket_Man

Update: at 48hrs into my post-service check...

- Dial up 0 spd, 219 degree amplitude
- 6Up, -9 spd, 175 degrees amplitude

Not sure what it should be at 48 hrs. I'll give it a week or two and do a better baseline test.

I noticed I didn't get a warranty card after service. Do they no longer include a card when you get your watch back?

Thanks,

You could compare your result with previous data/graphs in this thread, e.g., have a look at the new YG SUB and the repaired DD 40 power reserve data shown in 4318

[steubi1]

Originally Posted by Rocket_Man

I really like this watch. It took me about 2 years to add this watch to my humble collection. I don't buy any watches with the plan to flip them. I plan to own them and wear them and enjoy them. Some day when I'm too old to do those things I'll either give them away or sell them. But I hope that is many years from now. I added an Exp II to my collection a month ago for my upcoming 60'th birthday. That was a 3186 movement made in 2008 and running very nicely. Beautiful polar dial in 40mm.

My own belief is that Rolex pushed too fast to respond to the competition by adding 70 hrs of power reserve. Honestly I don't need 70 hrs and if I could choose to have better timekeeping or longer power reserve I'd choose better timekeeping every time. Everyone realizes Roles moves slowly and methodically, but there is clearly some thing amiss in this movement. If it were an easy fix they would have done it. It is clearly complicated. Could they fix it? Sure. But unlike the Cyclops issue they can't fix the timekeeping issue by removing the 70hr PR claim. They are stuck between the technical fix and their marketing claims.

If there is a fix that is being incorporated in service and my watch has it I'll be happy. But Rolex is silent on the issue and the fix. They seem to think more like a jewelry company than a tool watch company. And like Boeing they may be losing a culture that made them successful. There is enough hype about their product and other luxury brands that ensure for the time being they will sell every watch they can make. It takes time to build a reputation and you can wash issues under the rug with a good reputation, but like Boeing once your reputation is gone, and people no longer trust you, they no longer buy your BS either.

I think this is an excellent summary of the actual situation.
Of course, there is a basic design bug in the 32.. family with only one main spring. It is actually a trade-off between power reserve and precision.

What I would like to add is the following:
Looking back on 40 years of Rolex ownership, I have always chosen this brand because it was based on three pillars: Robustness, reliability and precision. These pillars have been important to me because I actually wear and enjoy my watches on a daily basis.
Now, I really don't understand how Rolex could abandon two of their three pillars (reliability and precision), without any need or urge to do so. I think this is a major management error, and now there is, unfortunately, no easy way to get out of this situation.
The best way in my customer's view would be a straight forward approach by Rolex: "OK guys, we made a basic error, but we have a retrofit kit with reduced power reserve to fix it definitely. Please send your watch in, it will be free of charge and it will cost you nothing."
But, of course, this will not happen, I am afraid that Rolex chose the way of no communication at all, they are most probably already working on the new family 33.. with two main springs or reduced power reserve again.

By the way, I had my Submariner 216610 serviced this year, it lost about 10 secs per day after 18 months, and is now running perfectly precise. The question is for how long..Not sure wether I am going to sell it.

Have a good day all,
Tom

[Rocket_Man]

Originally Posted by saxo3

You could compare your result with previous data/graphs in this thread, e.g., have a look at the new YG SUB and the repaired DD 40 power reserve data shown in 4318

Maybe this weekend I'll do a more methodical test. These datapoints I just did are not complete with all watch positions. My guess is they will be pretty close to that post. The timekeeping in Dial Up was rock solid. Amplitude at full wind was around 260. But at 24 hrs in a vertical position the amplitude was hovering around 200. Sometimes over, sometimes slightly under.

The watch ran down today and I calculated ~72.5 hrs of PR. A few hours more than pre-service, but other than to support the test, I'm not really concerned about the PR.

It feels like Rolex replaced the barrel/mainspring during this service. The winding feels different, I can hear the gears more clearly. At a full wind the date wheel snaps with authority. With a cleaning and lube this may have increased the amplitude and PR. But I am just speculating. But if this is all Rolex did it just enforces that they don't have a fix. Just trying to address the symptoms.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by steubi1

I think this is an excellent summary of the actual situation.
Of course, there is a basic design bug in the 32.. family with only one main spring. It is actually a trade-off between power reserve and precision.

What I would like to add is the following:
Looking back on 40 years of Rolex ownership, I have always chosen this brand because it was based on three pillars: Robustness, reliability and precision. These pillars have been important to me because I actually wear and enjoy my watches on a daily basis.
Now, I really don't understand how Rolex could abandon two of their three pillars (reliability and precision), without any need or urge to do so. I think this is a major management error, and now there is, unfortunately, no easy way to get out of this situation.
The best way in my customer's view would be a straight forward approach by Rolex: "OK guys, we made a basic error, but we have a retrofit kit with reduced power reserve to fix it definitely. Please send your watch in, it will be free of charge and it will cost you nothing."
But, of course, this will not happen, I am afraid that Rolex chose the way of no communication at all, they are most probably already working on the new family 33.. with two main springs or reduced power reserve again.

By the way, I had my Submariner 216610 serviced this year, it lost about 10 secs per day after 18 months, and is now running perfectly precise. The question is for how long..Not sure wether I am going to sell it.

Have a good day all,
Tom

Agreed 100%
Well put

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Rocket_Man

Maybe this weekend I'll do a more methodical test.

I would rotate the watch by 180 degrees and use the Weishi 1900 in the higher accuracy mode.

[Easy E]

Just re-measured my BLNR (and New-ish) LV. I totally forgot to change the resolution on the meter until halfway through this deal. Doesn't really bother me, the point is made. My BLNR is still strong like the bull.

[Easy E]

126610LV Purchase date Apr 13, 2023 (I didn't pick it up until early May). I have worn this watch once, maybe twice. It's effectively brand new condition. I won't say bad, time is ok, V amplitude @24hr is...meh. I make no statement either way, just posting my readings.

[alphadweller]

Originally Posted by Easy E

126610LV Purchase date Apr 13, 2023 (I didn't pick it up until early May). I have worn this watch once, maybe twice. It's effectively brand new condition. I won't say bad, time is ok, V amplitude @24hr is...meh. I make no statement either way, just posting my readings.

It's not terrible, 0h and 24h accuracy is good, but it fails the 24h amplitude test where it should be above 200 degrees in all vertical positions.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Easy E

Just re-measured my BLNR (and New-ish) LV. I totally forgot to change the resolution on the meter until halfway through this deal. Doesn't really bother me, the point is made. My BLNR is still strong like the bull.

Originally Posted by Easy E

126610LV Purchase date Apr 13, 2023 (I didn't pick it up until early May). I have worn this watch once, maybe twice. It's effectively brand new condition. I won't say bad, time is ok, V amplitude @24hr is...meh. I make no statement either way, just posting my readings.

Thanks for sharing all these interesting and useful timegrapher data

I learn (a lot) about the isochronism of sick and healthy 32xx movements; learning and better understanding (or research) is the only reason why I am still here.

[trali]

I just want to thank everyone contributing with data. Especially Saxo3 for his titanic work analizing and presenting it in a very professional way. Threads like this are real treasure.

[Easy E]

Originally Posted by trali

I just want to thank everyone contributing with data. Especially Saxo3 for his titanic work analizing and presenting it in a very professional way. Threads like this are real treasure.

I agree, this has been helpful for me.

[LNGSD43]

SD43 back from uk RSC after second visit. Watch was away just over 4 weeks, surprisingly quick I thought. Running +0.5/day. Let’s see what happens this time!

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by LNGSD43

SD43 back from uk RSC after second visit. Watch was away just over 4 weeks, surprisingly quick I thought. Running +0.5/day. Let’s see what happens this time!

Thanks for the update.
You know that timekeeping is not the first 32xx health criteria. Amplitude values after 2023 RSC repair would be very interesting to measure

[danimal107]

Has anyone heard about a recent TSB from Rolex that fixes the low amplitude issues?
I saw someone post there was one announced in a different watch forum but I'm not sure that info is accurate.

[Saint_Tail]

Originally Posted by danimal107

Has anyone heard about a recent TSB from Rolex that fixes the low amplitude issues?
I saw someone post there was one announced in a different watch forum but I'm not sure that info is accurate.

May we have the link to that forum (and post)?

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by trali

I just want to thank everyone contributing with data. Especially Saxo3 for his titanic work analizing and presenting it in a very professional way. Threads like this are real treasure.

Originally Posted by Easy E

I agree, this has been helpful for me.

Thank you

[danimal107]

Originally Posted by Saint_Tail

May we have the link to that forum (and post)?

Unfortunately I can not find it again. It wasn’t on one of the major 32XX issues threads.

The only info the guy said is what I just relayed. Zero other posts talking about it. Maybe he’s misinformed and posting incorrect info. That’s why I posted the question here to see if anyone can confirm or deny

[csaltphoto]

Originally Posted by CedCraig

I really doubt Rolex tests for this. „Hey, our watches work REALLY well when worn all the time, but suck if not. Don‘t let your Rolex become a low amplitude safe queen! Wear your ROLEX proudly.“

Originally Posted by danimal107

Unfortunately I can not find it again. It wasn’t on one of the major 32XX issues threads.

The only info the guy said is what I just relayed. Zero other posts talking about it. Maybe he’s misinformed and posting incorrect info. That’s why I posted the question here to see if anyone can confirm or deny

I remember that actually but as I recall it was either posted on April 1 or the TSB was dated April 1 so there was some suspicion...