32xx movement problem poll and data thread

[OrangeSport]

Originally Posted by saxo3

How do you know that?

Agreed.

Because you (we) don’t know the details.

No.

I don’t know, but do doubt

Rolex has never been too bothered about what customers (as a group) want

It is a pretty pedestrian movement, which is what Rolex has usually done.
Solid, reliable movements (with a few exceptions and innovations over the years)

[Omarion07]

Originally Posted by saxo3

How do you know that?

Agreed.

Because you (we) don’t know the details.

No.

100% agreed Saxo


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CedCraig]

I have a 2022 Air-King, my first Rolex, and the winding action is rough and „sandy,“ worse than even my 500 euro kickstarter watch. It‘s keeping good time, -1 spd, but so far I‘m not that impressed. At least I won‘t lose money if it turns out to be a lemon.

[Lol-x]

75+% saying no timekeeping problem, is overwhelming evidence of no defect in the 32XX movement.

You can't have an inherent defect that is selective to 24% of movements.
So any timekeeping issue would be in the assembly of the movement or the accuracy of the assertion of the watch being inaccurate.

Defects in the assembly of the movement (eg proper lubrication) are why Rolex has a 5 year warranty, so if you need you can return and get it remedied.

The onus is on those asserting to prove the precise defect, not to ask people to prove their watch is functioning accurately.

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

75+% saying no timekeeping problem, is overwhelming evidence of no defect in the 32XX movement.

You can't have an inherent defect that is selective to 24% of movements.
So any timekeeping issue would be in the assembly of the movement or the accuracy of the assertion of the watch being inaccurate.

Defects in the assembly of the movement (eg proper lubrication) are why Rolex has a 5 year warranty, so if you need you can return and get it remedied.

The onus is on those asserting to prove the precise defect, not to ask people to prove their watch is functioning accurately.

Hi there.

So you can’t take this poll result like that but say hypothetically we could and you accept this 24% defect rate. Are you saying that 24% is an acceptable rate of defect and the manufacturer wouldn’t need to take corrective action? Almost 1 in 4 break down and this won’t harm reputation etc?

We are not watchmakers but we have over and over again shown data that shows this issue.

If a car kept breaking down would a normal consumer have to prove the exact fault or report the symptoms?

Is it our fault Rolex choose to be very secretive about all this?

[Lol-x]

Originally Posted by amanbra

Hi there.

So you can’t take this poll result like that but say hypothetically we could and you accept this 24% defect rate. Are you saying that 24% is an acceptable rate of defect and the manufacturer wouldn’t need to take corrective action? Almost 1 in 4 break down and this won’t harm reputation etc?

We are not watchmakers but we have over and over again shown data that shows this issue.

If a car kept breaking down would a normal consumer have to prove the exact fault or report the symptoms?

Is it our fault Rolex choose to be very secretive about all this?

That is 1 in 4 of a very small overall number and is it really a defect or just a maintenance issue? If it just needs a service/lubrication its not a defect.

"If a car kept breaking down" that is a false and exaggerated analogy.

Rolex doesn't have to tell you anything, where does it say that in your warranty? They just have to honour their 5 year warranty which they tend to do, or are you saying they have breached that too?

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

That is 1 in 4 of a very small overall number and is it really a defect or just a maintenance issue? If it just needs a service/lubrication its not a defect.

"If a car kept breaking down" that is a false and exaggerated analogy.

Rolex doesn't have to tell you anything, where does it say that in your warranty? They just have to honour their 5 year warranty which they tend to do, or are you saying they have breached that too?

1 in 4 is an enormous number for defects.

My DJ (2019) had to go in twice for the same issue under warranty, what happens after warranty expires in another year’s time or so? This normal? The number of people here posting about issues with the exact same symptoms normal to you?

Car analogy is actually spot on here, the key difference here is there is no safety issue so no one needs to do a recall etc.

The part they are lubricating is not a normal spot they need to lubricate. Our resident watchmaker has confirmed this.

[Lol-x]

Originally Posted by amanbra

The part they are lubricating is not a normal spot they need to lubricate. Our resident watchmaker has confirmed this.

On the millions of watches produced and sold there is no evidence to conclude there is an inherent defect.

I can't comment on your isolated case and by the same token you cannot judge the making of millions of watches by your singular personal experience.

[mountainjogger]

Originally Posted by amanbra

1 in 4 is an enormous number for defects.

My DJ (2019) had to go in twice for the same issue under warranty, what happens after warranty expires in another year’s time or so? This normal? The number of people here posting about issues with the exact same symptoms normal to you?

Car analogy is actually spot on here, the key difference here is there is no safety issue so no one needs to do a recall etc.

The part they are lubricating is not a normal spot they need to lubricate. Our resident watchmaker has confirmed this.

Not to detract from this thread which is certainly more interesting and relevant than "Which Rolex should I buy as an investment?" But...

To be fair, the poll is not vetted. Are all of the 1/4 verified owners of watches that have never been damaged? Are they all accurately tracking time? And is there any other explaination besides a problem in manufacture?

Would like some definitive answers. But the poll does not give that.

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by amanbra

Hi there.

So you can’t take this poll result like that but say hypothetically we could and you accept this 24% defect rate. Are you saying that 24% is an acceptable rate of defect and the manufacturer wouldn’t need to take corrective action? Almost 1 in 4 break down and this won’t harm reputation etc?

We are not watchmakers but we have over and over again shown data that shows this issue.

If a car kept breaking down would a normal consumer have to prove the exact fault or report the symptoms?

Is it our fault Rolex choose to be very secretive about all this?

mountainjogger

[Lol-x]

Nice anecdotal claims, but again far from conclusive evidence of any inherent defect in millions of watches.

Can you please share the link to the 'photo essay'?

[OrangeSport]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

Nice anecdotal claims, but again far from conclusive evidence of any inherent defect in millions of watches.

Can you please share the link to the 'photo essay'?

We have a rolex watchmaker confirming the issue...

The search option will help you if you won't believe others..

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

Nice anecdotal claims, but again far from conclusive evidence of any inherent defect in millions of watches.

Can you please share the link to the 'photo essay'?

You don’t appear to be a person who’d really change their mind even when facts are presented but here is the photo essay you put in quotation marks.

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=664616

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

Nice anecdotal claims, but again far from conclusive evidence of any inherent defect in millions of watches.

Can you please share the link to the 'photo essay'?

To do a "quick summary" of the state of this issue we have:

User searchart, a Rolex trained watchmaker who has seen and shared photos of this issue. He believes that the "just needs more lube fix" is a band-aid that will not last.

User wm82, a Rolex trained watchmaker, has shared seeing this and a date wheel post issue. He says his medium sized AD receives multiple 32xx watches a week with problems. He says he would not personally buy a 32xx based watch at this point since he believes it is not ready for prime time. That speaks volumes to me.

Elsewhere on the internet I have spoken with professional watchmakers who have colleagues working directly at RSCs. They are claiming burnout over large caseloads related to these movements. And the fact that they are sending them back out with no actual known long-term fix is not leading to good morale.

So, in summary, none of us know anything with enough precision to put a number on this. But there are way, way, WAY too many datapoints emerging for this to be some one in a million fluke the likes of which any manufactured product can suffer from. I believe as time goes on this will become accepted as fact. And for that we owe some thanks to Saxo and the others who have persisted to bring this information forward. And, of course, to you Steve for providing us the venue to do so.

[Blue September]

My brand new 124060 is returning the following, with 2 minutes to settle, monitored over 3 minutes, fully wound:
DU -2 to -3 s/d (271-282 degrees)
CU -3 to -7 s/d (223-236 degrees)
DD 0 s/d (274 degrees)
CD -1 to -6 s/d (236-241 degrees)

This does NOT fill me with confidence.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Blue September

My brand new 124060 is returning the following, with 2 minutes to settle, monitored over 3 minutes, fully wound:
DU -2 to -3 s/d (271-282 degrees)
CU -3 to -7 s/d (223-236 degrees)
DD 0 s/d (274 degrees)
CD -1 to -6 s/d (236-241 degrees)

This does NOT fill me with confidence.

Thanks for joining with some interesting data about a NEW 3230 caliber.

3U = CU = crown up?
9U= CD = crown down?
6U = CL = crown left is missing?

Why do the CU and CD rates vary over such a wide range?

It would be interesting to measure also after 24 hours at rest, adding 6U position.

[JoseR]

I purchased a DJ41 Blue in 2019 and had it for 3 years and even thou I didn't wear it every day it ran spot on. I just sold a couple months ago because it was getting almost no wrist time and I couldn't justify have it seat in the box. Maybe I was lucky, but I never had a problem with it as long as I had it.

[CedCraig]

Here‘s a good summary of the fundamental design flaw with the 32xx movements, paraphrased from one of the responses to the photo essay thread. The problem is not a lack of lubrication. The issue is there should not be a friction on the dial side seconds wheel pivot. The temporary fix consists in replacing the part and lubricating to mitigate the friction, but this is a temporary fix, a paliative, it delays the reocurence of the drag, but eventually it manifests itself again after a year or so, having to pay another visit to the RSC. Rolex need to redesign the part or other elements of the movement to fix the problem once for all.

Recall from that thread that it‘s not one watchmaker saying this, it‘s multiple watchmakers.

As to the size of the problem, I think it‘s far larger than the naysayers here claim. A majority of Rolex buyers aren‘t WIS with timegraphers who post on forums, but people who don‘t know a balance spring from a mainspring, they just want a quality, prestigious watch. And lots of newer Rolex buyers stick their watches in the safe and wait for the investment to pay off. Most of these people will never notice the low amplitude problem.

My plan is to see if my 2022 Air-King develops the problem within the warranty period. If so, I‘ll get it fixed and sell it and enjoy my other watches that don‘t have design defects. If the problem doesn‘t develop in 5 years, I‘ll consider myself lucky.

[OrangeSport]

Originally Posted by CedCraig

Here‘s a good summary of the fundamental design flaw with the 32xx movements, paraphrased from one of the responses to the photo essay thread. The problem is not a lack of lubrication. The issue is there should not be a friction on the dial side seconds wheel pivot. The temporary fix consists in replacing the part and lubricating to mitigate the friction, but this is a temporary fix, a paliative, it delays the reocurence of the drag, but eventually it manifests itself again after a year or so, having to pay another visit to the RSC. Rolex need to redesign the part or other elements of the movement to fix the problem once for all.

Recall from that thread that it‘s not one watchmaker saying this, it‘s multiple watchmakers.

As to the size of the problem, I think it‘s far larger than the naysayers here claim. A majority of Rolex buyers aren‘t WIS with timegraphers who post on forums, but people who don‘t know a balance spring from a mainspring, they just want a quality, prestigious watch. And lots of newer Rolex buyers stick their watches in the safe and wait for the investment to pay off. Most of these people will never notice the low amplitude problem.

My plan is to see if my 2022 Air-King develops the problem within the warranty period. If so, I‘ll get it fixed and sell it and enjoy my other watches that don‘t have design defects. If the problem doesn‘t develop in 5 years, I‘ll consider myself lucky.

Note to self;

Don’t buy an AK from @CedCraig. :)

[CedCraig]

Originally Posted by OrangeSport

Note to self;

Don’t buy an AK from @CedCraig. :)

Perhaps you meant to say don‘t buy any used Rolex with a 32xx movement? Lol. Pretty good chance the seller realized s/he had a lemon and is passing it on.

[MikeyV]

Originally Posted by CedCraig

Here‘s a good summary of the fundamental design flaw with the 32xx movements, paraphrased from one of the responses to the photo essay thread. The problem is not a lack of lubrication. The issue is there should not be a friction on the dial side seconds wheel pivot. The temporary fix consists in replacing the part and lubricating to mitigate the friction, but this is a temporary fix, a paliative, it delays the reocurence of the drag, but eventually it manifests itself again after a year or so, having to pay another visit to the RSC. Rolex need to redesign the part or other elements of the movement to fix the problem once for all.

Recall from that thread that it‘s not one watchmaker saying this, it‘s multiple watchmakers.

As to the size of the problem, I think it‘s far larger than the naysayers here claim. A majority of Rolex buyers aren‘t WIS with timegraphers who post on forums, but people who don‘t know a balance spring from a mainspring, they just want a quality, prestigious watch. And lots of newer Rolex buyers stick their watches in the safe and wait for the investment to pay off. Most of these people will never notice the low amplitude problem.

My plan is to see if my 2022 Air-King develops the problem within the warranty period. If so, I‘ll get it fixed and sell it and enjoy my other watches that don‘t have design defects. If the problem doesn‘t develop in 5 years, I‘ll consider myself lucky.

My watch was sent in for this problem, came back perfect, then went to running slow again. When it was running at 6-7 spd slow, one damned day (literally) , it went back to running perfectly. Ran very well for 9-10 months and now has slowly gone to hell again. 10 -12 spd slow.

How can that be explained by second wheel pivot wear? I'm not saying anyone is wrong - I know who said this first - and I believe.

I just can't fathom how it could get better after it got worse if it's a wear/friction issue. Oil Migration?

I have YEARS of data where I check the time on my watch daily.


My warranty is up in June - I'll send it in again I guess.

[Omarion07]

Originally Posted by amanbra

really sucks how it's still bad after 2 rounds at RSC. If my DJ goes bad after the 2nd warranty job I'll be selling it... =(

Based on what I’ve read It’s only been to the RSC once .. Mikey can correct me if I’ve misunderstood


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MikeyV]

Yeah, one time to RSC Dallas.

But it went bad again, then got better for 9-10 months, then got sick again.

I do expect this to happen again after sending it back a second time.

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by MikeyV

How can that be explained by second wheel pivot wear? I'm not saying anyone is wrong - I know who said this first - and I believe.



I just can't fathom how it could get better after it got worse if it's a wear/friction issue. Oil Migration?

Looking at those pics of the wear, it's possible a burr could develop and provide more friction, then break off or smooth out, then develop another, etc. That's just speculation of course, but certainly possible for the friction to vary over time between two rubbing parts, especially if the lubrication is changing.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

Looking at those pics of the wear, it's possible a burr could develop and provide more friction, then break off or smooth out, then develop another, etc. That's just speculation of course, but certainly possible for the friction to vary over time between two rubbing parts, especially if the lubrication is changing.

We are potentially touching on surface finishing and definately metalurgy here

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by MikeyV

M
How can that be explained by second wheel pivot wear? I'm not saying anyone is wrong - I know who said this first - and I believe.

I just can't fathom how it could get better after it got worse if it's a wear/friction issue. Oil Migration?

More likely the seconds wheel pivot wear is a symptom, rather than the cause, of the loss of timekeeping.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by MikeyV

How can that be explained by second wheel pivot wear? I'm not saying anyone is wrong - I know who said this first - and I believe.

I just can't fathom how it could get better after it got worse if it's a wear/friction issue. Oil Migration?

Is it an "Oil Migration" issue or something that looks like it might be migration to the layman?
I'm not suggesting anything here except that it may be symptomatic of another more sinister factor not yet fully explored in these discussions around this.

I believe my long held theory will adequately address this phenomenon.
Somehow we've got to be able to drill down into it some more and fully explore the options and the factors which can potentially come into play

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Dirt

I believe my long held theory will adequately address this phenomenon.

Dirt, what is your long held "theory"?

Can you please explain it in a short, specific, and comprehensible form?

I remember that you (and your wife) have no 32xx watch and therefore have no practical experience yourself.

"Theory" in quotation marks because I don't see how you can explain the problems theoretically, without own hands-on experience; also without R&D that only Rolex SA can do.

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Dirt, what is your long held "theory"?

Can you please explain it in a short, specific, and comprehensible form?

I remember that you (and your wife) have no 32xx watch and therefore have no practical experience yourself.

"Theory" in quotation marks because I don't see how you can explain the problems theoretically, without own hands-on experience; also without R&D that only Rolex SA can do.

+1000

Sorry Dirt, I'm not going to engage if you keep speaking in riddles. I asked you in the other thread to spell out what your hypothesis was and you said I was being a meanie. I don't need to hear how I'm disappointing you, I need to hear something concrete as to what you think the problem is. Then we can hash through it and possibly move the conversation forward.

[Andad]

Originally Posted by Dirt

Is it an "Oil Migration" issue or something that looks like it might be migration to the layman?
I'm not suggesting anything here except that it may be symptomatic of another more sinister factor not yet fully explored in these discussions around this.

I believe my long held theory will adequately address this phenomenon.
Somehow we've got to be able to drill down into it some more and fully explore the options and the factors which can potentially come into play

I am interested in your explanation for this phenomenon…..theoretically.