32xx movement problem poll and data thread

[Omarion07]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Charles,

Somebody?

Get the Explorer II Ref. 216570 (3187) with a white dial.

Movement data were given already in posts #414 and #1189.


Then you can forget your (Chinese) timegrapher and start to the next level, a precision measurement.

Btw, my friend, the 3285 has been measured for two GMT-Master II (CHNR, BLRO), several results are in this thread.

I think what Charles meant (and correct me Charles if I'm wrong) was that 3285 movement inside the 226570 hasn't been tested, referring to 2021 batches of this calibre (to see if the associated issues have been fixed by Rolex). I don't think you can purchase the 226570 as of yet.

[saxo3]

Amplitudes, Rates, Precision of 32xx and 31xx calibers

I have investigated 6 watches in parallel and measured under identical conditions their amplitudes, rates, and precision along the entire power reserve.

The following movements were investigated in dial up position:
3235, 3285, 3285, 3130, 3185, 3187

Amplitudes (Figure 1)

Four watches had excellent high amplitudes (>290 degrees) after full winding, and >260 degrees after 24 hours.
The other two 3285 movements were significantly lower in amplitudes.

All 31xx calibers showed similar values during the power test, while the 3235 was significantly better than the two 3285 calibers.



Rates (Figure 2)

Good results were measured for all three 31xx calibers and the 3235.
Rate values where siginficantly worse for the two 3285, which also had low amplitudes.



Precision (Figures 3, 4)

The precision of a caliber can be measured by repeating many times the same rate measurement, which I did.
The standard deviation of the rate measurement is called precision.

The graph below shows the precision values of all 6 calibers measured during the entire power reserve, individually for each 31xx (48 hours) and 32xx (70 hours) movement.



The next graph shows the same result as a function of the remaining power reserve.
From 100 % (full winding) until 0 % (watch stopped).



It can be clearly seen that all 31xx and the 3235 remain very precise (+/- 1 s/d) from full winding until the end of the power reserve.
This is an excellent result.

The two 3285 are a bit worse but still remain within Rolex specs of -2/+2 s/d

The next graph summarizes the dependency between amplitudes and precision for all watches.



One can see that even for very low amplitudes, down to 120 degrees, all 31xx and 32xx are precise, i.e. within Rolex specifications.

Conclusions:

All 6 tested 31xx and 32xx caliber watches fulfil the -2/+2 s/d precision specification published by Rolex SA.

None of the tested calibers lost significantly in precision during the entire power reserve, not even at rather low amplitudes when a movement is not any longer accurate, especially the two tested 3285 movements.

[Omarion07]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Amplitudes, Rates, Precision of 32xx and 31xx calibers

I have investigated 6 watches in parallel and measured under identical conditions their amplitudes, rates, and precision along the entire power reserve.

The following movements were investigated in dial up position:
3235, 3285, 3285, 3130, 3185, 3187

Amplitudes (Figure 1)

Four watches had excellent high amplitudes (>290 degrees) after full winding, and >260 degrees after 24 hours.
The other two 3285 movements were significantly lower in amplitudes.

All 31xx calibers showed similar values during the power test, while the 3235 was significantly better than the two 3285 calibers.



Rates (Figure 2)

Good results were measured for all three 31xx calibers and the 3235.
Rate values where siginficantly worse for the two 3285, which also had low amplitudes.



Precision (Figures 3, 4)

The precision of a caliber can be measured by repeating many times the same rate measurement, which I did.
The standard deviation of the rate measurement is called precision.

The graph below shows the precision values of all 6 calibers measured during the entire power reserve, individually for each 31xx (48 hours) and 32xx (70 hours) movement.



The next graph shows the same result as a function of the remaining power reserve.
From 100 % (full winding) until 0 % (watch stopped).



It can be clearly seen that all 31xx and the 3235 remain very precise (+/- 1 s/d) from full winding until the end of the power reserve.
This is an excellent result.

The two 3285 are a bit worse but still remain within Rolex specs of -2/+2 s/d

The next graph summarizes the dependency between amplitudes and precision for all watches.



One can see that even for very low amplitudes, down to 120 degrees, all 31xx and 32xx are precise, i.e. within Rolex specifications.

Conclusions:

All 6 tested 31xx and 32xx caliber watches fulfil the -2/+2 s/d precision specification published by Rolex SA.

None of the tested calibers lost significantly in precision during the entire power reserve, even at rather low amplitudes when a movement is not any longer accurate, especially the two tested 3285 movements.

I'm breathing a sigh of relief after seeing the 32xx movement results. Thank you Saxo for all your hard work over the last few months. I appreciate it a lot. It was very educational for me.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Omarion07

I'm breathing a sigh of relief after seeing the 32xx movement results. Thank you Saxo for all your hard work over the last few months. I appreciate it a lot. It was very educational for me.

Thank you!
It is also interesting for me and feels good that somebody reads and appreciates.
I hope it explains and demonstrates the huge difference between accuracy (rates) and precision.

[CharlesN]

Is it Christmas already ?

I now have a lot of good data to read over and absorb

The graphs show so very clearly all the comparisons and also the steady running properties of each movement.

Saxo3, I don’t know how you do it so well, I am in the dark ages still with my charts.

Thank you

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by CharlesN

Is it Christmas already ?

I now have a lot of good data to read over and absorb

The graphs show so very clearly all the comparisons and also the steady running properties of each movement.

Saxo3, I don’t know how you do it so well, I am in the dark ages still with my charts.

Thank you

Thanks Charles!

You are doing very well with all your time consuming measurements.
A pleasure to assist you with some simple graphs.

You can hopefully say that you now understood what PRECISION is and that you read it first here.

The bottom line is simple:

- An inaccurate caliber can still be very precise.

- Rolex SA specifies the precision and not the accuracy.

[CharlesN]

I am getting more data together which might create an interesting comparison

I am now measuring 3 watches and this will probably take 2 days each minimum.

Then the figures can speak for themselves and one of your graphs will say so much more

[JRell]

Lol here we go! I lost a second the other day...think I might sue!

[SearChart]

Started on a 3235 service before the weekend, will post data + service pics when I'm finished.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by SearChart

Started on a 3235 service before the weekend, will post data + service pics when I'm finished.

[Omarion07]

Originally Posted by SearChart

Started on a 3235 service before the weekend, will post data + service pics when I'm finished.

Than you Bas! Is this watch a 2020 or 2021 model by any chance? Just trying to figure out if Rolex managed to sort out the issue with the 32xx movements.

[SearChart]

Originally Posted by Omarion07

Than you Bas! Is this watch a 2020 or 2021 model by any chance? Just trying to figure out if Rolex managed to sort out the issue with the 32xx movements.

It is a Datejust 36 sold in 2018.

As of now I have not yet seen a new 2020 or 2021 model with the known issue. I will keep TRF updated if I do.

[Omarion07]

Originally Posted by SearChart

It is a Datejust 36 sold in 2018.

As of now I have not yet seen a new 2020 or 2021 model with the known issue. I will keep TRF updated if I do.

Thank you!

[CharlesN]

Originally Posted by Omarion07

Just trying to figure out if Rolex managed to sort out the issue with the 32xx movements.

My Sub date with a 3235 movement was bought in September 2020.

So far I have not found any fault at all.

In fact I have forund it to be extreemly good as many of the previously posted graphs show.

I am beginning to think that Rolex have done something to improve the problems, but they just will never let anyone know if they did anything or not and if they did, what it was.

[Driver8]

Originally Posted by CharlesN

My Sub date with a 3235 movement was bought in September 2020.

So far I have not found any fault at all.

In fact I have forund it to be extreemly good as many of the previously posted graphs show.

I am beginning to think that Rolex have done something to improve the problems, but they just will never let anyone know if they did anything or not and if they did, what it was.

And that is why this thread is so important IMO. It's only through anecdotal evidence supplied here that we will ever have a clue if the issue has been resolved.

[CharlesN]

I was hoping a few more forum members would joinn in as a few of them have said they have a timegrapher.
its such a simplem process to moontor and log the data collected.
With a few more participantsts we could reallylly see whats what and even loo at other movements.
I am currently also monitoring 3 Patek Philippe movements as well. This may show up some differences in the drops that we have detected at around the 36 hour point.

We have not finished yet, even though this theread is quiet at the moment.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by CharlesN

I was hoping a few more forum members would joinn in as a few of them have said they have a timegrapher.

Agreed, but the collection of data and their graphical display is not sufficient.

It's interesting to observe that nobody asks any questions about published data and/or graphs.

For example, my precision results for 6 watches (post #1232) are not echoed at all.

[CharlesN]

I do hope people are not afraid to ask questions in case they appear stupid

It is important for all to know ……. There are no stupid questions.

The only stupid part is to NOT ask and therefore learn some more.


Sent from my iPhone 12 using Tapatalk

[Annan]

Originally Posted by Driver8

And that is why this thread is so important IMO. It's only through anecdotal evidence supplied here that we will ever have a clue if the issue has been resolved.

One of our TRF watchmakers will have to get an opportunity to open up one of the newer (2020/2021) models to see if there have been any changes.

[Omarion07]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Agreed, but the collection of data and their graphical display is not sufficient.

It's interesting to observe that nobody asks any questions about published data and/or graphs.

For example, my precision results for 6 watches (post #1232) are not echoed at all.

I do have a question Saxo3, you know the way you mentioned in a previous thread that amplitude is the measurement of health of a watch movement, how would you interpret your two 3285 watches being precise at such low amplitudes? What's the correlation? Will we see deterioration of precision and consequently "movement health" over time? I'm genuinely interested in learning so forgive my ignorance in advance.

[Omarion07]

Originally Posted by Annan

One of our TRF watchmakers will have to get an opportunity to open up one of the newer (2020/2021) models to see if there have been any changes.

What if Rolex did something to the movement but it's not a physical (hardware) part? What if they only changed the type of adhesive for example? How would a watchmaker detect that? I'm totally speculating here btw

[Annan]

Originally Posted by Omarion07

What if Rolex did something to the movement but it's not a physical (hardware) part? What if they only changed the type of adhesive for example? How would a watchmaker detect that? I'm totally speculating here btw

I can only guess that Rolex might release such information in the technical data made available to their watchmakers (those who work directly for Rolex within their service centers.) I'm totally speculating here too.

[CharlesN]

Originally Posted by Omarion07

What if Rolex did something to the movement but it's not a physical (hardware) part? What if they only changed the type of adhesive for example? How would a watchmaker detect that? I'm totally speculating here btw

Rolex AUTHORISED watchmakers receive teahnical bulletins on every movement.

That is how the AUTHORISED watchmakers are kept upto date.

Non-authorised watchmakers dont get the information, can not officially get genuine rolex parts and are a bit "In the dark: about improvements and changes.

It was reported earlier in this thread that there was an "Oil Change" bulletin a short while ago.

[CharlesN]

Originally Posted by Annan

I can only guess that Rolex might release such information in the technical data made available to their watchmakers

I have the Rolex parts lists for many movements (around 50 or more of them).

I am looking at revisions, There are occasionally updates to a page in the list which shows a slight change to a part via a new part number.

Only the AUTHORISED watchmakers get these parts lists direct from Rolex.

[Omarion07]

Originally Posted by CharlesN

Rolex AUTHORISED watchmakers receive teahnical bulletins on every movement.

That is how the AUTHORISED watchmakers are kept upto date.

Non-authorised watchmakers dont get the information, can not officially get genuine rolex parts and are a bit "In the dark: about improvements and changes.

It was reported earlier in this thread that there was an "Oil Change" bulletin a short while ago.

That makes sense. I remember reading a post by Bas where he said that he didn't receive any updates on the 2020/21 batches of 32xx of movements. So I'm not sure what changes Rolex implemented exactly, if any.

[CharlesN]

Originally Posted by Omarion07

I'm not sure what changes Rolex implemented exactly, if any.

A problem that does exist is that Rolex do NOT make it well known or obvious what changes they make.

Rolex are constantly researching, monitoring and developing their existing movements let alone the ones they already have on the drawing board for the future.

Rolex seem to be better than any nation's government at keeping things very secret.

I can understand why Rolex keep things so secretive in relation to updates on movements.
If they made it well known then just about everybody would rush off to their nearest AD or RSC and have their watch upgraded.
I have no idea how many Rolex watches are out there in 'The wild" but as Rolex make aroung 1 million watches per year there must be very many millions in use, I wont hazard a guess at that but it would be fun to know - thats something for another thread possibly.
The queue at the AD's and RSCs around the world would just be never ending.

Updates and improvements happen during a Servicevice of a watch and the owners are oblivious to what actually gets changed as they are not told.

[Driver8]

Originally Posted by Annan

One of our TRF watchmakers will have to get an opportunity to open up one of the newer (2020/2021) models to see if there have been any changes.

I'll certainly interested to know what Bas (and/or any other watchmakers) have to say about the internal condition of later models when they start coming in for service.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Omarion07

I do have a question Saxo3, you know the way you mentioned in a previous thread that amplitude is the measurement of health of a watch movement, how would you interpret your two 3285 watches being precise at such low amplitudes? What's the correlation? Will we see deterioration of precision and consequently "movement health" over time? I'm genuinely interested in learning so forgive my ignorance in advance.

To answer your good questions, one needs to understand the difference between accuracy and precision, which is illustrated in the following graph (sketch made for you!).



- There is no direct correlation between accuracy and precision.
- One can have all combinations as shown below.



- As measured (for 6 watches) at low amplitudes, the tested 32xx and 31xx still run with good precision towards the end of the power reserve, see post #1232.

- I cannot say if one will see a deterioration of precision over time. The two tested 3285 (in #1232) are not in good health but still have a precision within the range of -2/+2 s/d.

- For the 32xx movement series, Rolex SA specifies PRECISION of -2/+2 sec/day after casing together with a POWER RESERVE of approximately 70 hours, see below for 3285.


Source: https://www.rolex.com

- Rolex SA does NOT specify ACCURACY and also not TIMEKEEPING, which is logical and smart too.

- I could confirm these specification for three 3235 and 3285 movements.

- The tested 3130, 3185, 3187 calibers showed a precision of -1/+1 sec/day towards the end of the 48 hours power reserve, see post #1232.

[SearChart]

As promised, 3235 service data.

Watch came in with the usual symptoms, it did sustain a hard knock which gave it a decentred hairspring and thus a slightly high heat error. This was corrected as good as possible.

Amplitude and rate before the service were dramatic:



Some service pics, also replaced the balance staff, because it had a significant amplitude difference between dial up and down.





Data after service at 0hrs:



Data after 24hrs:

[CharlesN]

Bas,
Wow,
Firstly .. hgreat photos.
secondly, thats great info.
You now have one very happy customer I am sure.

I have noticed that you say that elves are employed to polish the platinum .... I bet you are one of the amazing elves that look after all our watches so well.