32xx movement problem poll and data thread

[saxo3]

Happy Guessing Hour

Originally Posted by DJ2020

If I had a guess (and this is purely speculation) I would say problems started occurring 2019 thru late 2021 (movement production years) When employes were put in roles to fill in during covid issues.
Indeed, pure speculation and NOT correct. You did not read this thread?

I believe Rolex has the arduous task of weeding out issues of simple regulation versus real problems with the movement.
That is not correct from what I know.

Then determining if it is a assembly, manufacturing or design issues for each questionable component. Then determine a correction to be taken.
One should not underestimate the diagnostic tools they have and use to characterize brand-new and returning watches.

Early models did not seem to have any issues other than regulation from consumers who demanded the +2/-2 be adhered to.
That is completely wrong. For example, all my three 3235/3285 watches, purchased in 2017 and 2018, had and still have problems which has nothing to do with regulation, other watches are described in this thread.

This takes time. I'm certain any company who has been faced with this type of problem wants desperately to get to the bottom of it. The cost of scraping a movement is just to high and well as developing a new one.
I fully agree with you.

In time I am confident it will be rectified but in a smooth quiet way.
I fully agree with you, I named that in this thread the "silent repair", movement upgrades they do anyhow.

The "brand" is what sells Rolex. No problem will be officially admitted even after it's resolved to preserve the name and propitiate the illusion Rolex has masterfully created.
I fully agree with you.

Finally, nothing learned (at least me)

[thesingularity7]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Congratulations and thanks for your interesting contribution and data.

I have a few comments:

(1) The lift angle for 32xx movements is 53 degrees, not 52. A change of your timegrapher settings will increase the amplitude values by about 6 degrees but will not impact on the rates.

(2) I assume that you did a full winding of the caliber before you took the data?

(3) Rolex calibers are regulated in 5 (not 6) positions and 12U position is normally not measured.

(4) Maybe the caliber can be regulated in the future, but I would not touch it now and observe timekeeping during the coming weeks/months.

Thanks for the information! I'll make the necessary adjustments to the TG when I do another test run in a few weeks. Yep, the watch was fully wound before these experiments.

As for the positions - I just threw in the extra position for the sake of symmetry

I don't plan on sending it in since it isn't too far off from what is promised. I also don't want to have this new shiny toy spend its initial days in a dark corner of a service center!

[CharlesN]

I have, yet again, done a series of measurements on my watch, An Explorer II reference 226570 bought in July 2021.

It has a 3285 caliber as its “heart”.

It has been running virtually constantly since then, but not always worn.

This series of measurements were started off with a full manual winding of the watch.

It was then left for 15 mins on the measuring arm of my Witschi TimeGrapher.

Measurements were all done with a 20 second stabilisation time between positions, followed by a 60 second measuring time.

The sequence of measuring was CH, 6H, 9H, 3H, CB. I have done the 5 positions as specified leaving out the 12H position.

The location for the test was a room I use for my hobbies and near silence was observed.

The ambient temperature was a steady 24 degrees celsius.

Air pressure was pretty constant at around 10 100000 Pa mark for all the tests.

The watch was checked and found to be not magnetised before starting the tests.

Below you can see 4 pictures of the screen of my timegrapher.

The first is a copy of the results I had way back on 23th July 2021 followwd by one done in August and then November 2021.

The following 3 are from a few days ago.

These results clearly show a degradation of timekeeping. This is also called “The Problem” that we have been discussing in this thread.

Hopefully some of the readers here will be able to understand what they are seeing but if not, just pose your questions below and I feel sure you will receive your answers shortly.

It is also clear from these readings that without a TimeGrapher there is little to no chance of anyone being able to spot the problem arising and even growing.

Please enjoy what you see below, I have enjoyed preparing them for you all.


The first record i have from 23 July 2021



My second recording done on 30 August 2021



The Start on 11 November 2021.



The First of the latest set of measurements done on 19 August 2022.



24 Hours later on 20 August 2022.



After about 45 Hours of testing on 21 August 2022.

[Tommy125]

Originally Posted by CharlesN

I have, yet again, done a series of measurements on my watch, An Explorer II reference 226570 bought in July 2021.

It has a 3285 caliber as its “heart”.

It has been running virtually constantly since then, but not always worn.

This series of measurements were started off with a full manual winding of the watch.

It was then left for 15 mins on the measuring arm of my Witschi TimeGrapher.

Measurements were all done with a 20 second stabilisation time between positions, followed by a 60 second measuring time.

The sequence of measuring was CH, 6H, 9H, 3H, CB. I have done the 5 positions as specified leaving out the 12H position.

The location for the test was a room I use for my hobbies and near silence was observed.

The ambient temperature was a steady 24 degrees celsius.

Air pressure was pretty constant at around 10 100000 Pa mark for all the tests.

The watch was checked and found to be not magnetised before starting the tests.

Below you can see 4 pictures of the screen of my timegrapher.

The first is a copy of the results I had way back on 23th July 2021 followwd by one done in August and then November 2021.

The following 3 are from a few days ago.

These results clearly show a degradation of timekeeping. This is also called “The Problem” that we have been discussing in this thread.

Hopefully some of the readers here will be able to understand what they are seeing but if not, just pose your questions below and I feel sure you will receive your answers shortly.

It is also clear from these readings that without a TimeGrapher there is little to no chance of anyone being able to spot the problem arising and even growing.

Please enjoy what you see below, I have enjoyed preparing them for you all.


The first record i have from 23 July 2021



My second recording done on 30 August 2021



The Start on 11 November 2021.



The First of the latest set of measurements done on 19 August 2022.



24 Hours later on 20 August 2022.



After about 45 Hours of testing on 21 August 2022.

Doesn’t seem all too bad yet, even with 24h after. The largest deviation being about 8-9s, the amplitudes being above 200, and the beat error below 0.4. The major change occurred after 45h but that’s already more than halfway into the power reserve.

[Bizcut1]

Damn! Nice work on this, guys!

I just strap that sucker on and head out.

Ignorance is bliss, I guess.

[Omarion07]

Originally Posted by CharlesN

I have, yet again, done a series of measurements on my watch, An Explorer II reference 226570 bought in July 2021.

It has a 3285 caliber as its “heart”.

It has been running virtually constantly since then, but not always worn.

This series of measurements were started off with a full manual winding of the watch.

It was then left for 15 mins on the measuring arm of my Witschi TimeGrapher.

Measurements were all done with a 20 second stabilisation time between positions, followed by a 60 second measuring time.

The sequence of measuring was CH, 6H, 9H, 3H, CB. I have done the 5 positions as specified leaving out the 12H position.

The location for the test was a room I use for my hobbies and near silence was observed.

The ambient temperature was a steady 24 degrees celsius.

Air pressure was pretty constant at around 10 100000 Pa mark for all the tests.

The watch was checked and found to be not magnetised before starting the tests.

Below you can see 4 pictures of the screen of my timegrapher.

The first is a copy of the results I had way back on 23th July 2021 followwd by one done in August and then November 2021.

The following 3 are from a few days ago.

These results clearly show a degradation of timekeeping. This is also called “The Problem” that we have been discussing in this thread.

Hopefully some of the readers here will be able to understand what they are seeing but if not, just pose your questions below and I feel sure you will receive your answers shortly.

It is also clear from these readings that without a TimeGrapher there is little to no chance of anyone being able to spot the problem arising and even growing.

Please enjoy what you see below, I have enjoyed preparing them for you all.


The first record i have from 23 July 2021



My second recording done on 30 August 2021



The Start on 11 November 2021.



The First of the latest set of measurements done on 19 August 2022.



24 Hours later on 20 August 2022.



After about 45 Hours of testing on 21 August 2022.

Thanks for the massive effort and dedication Charles.. I appreciate that. It’s just a bit frustrating to see these results especially the “after 45 hours” on 21st of this month. The PR wasn’t even depleted for X to have such a value. You’d expect it to be - 4 max after 45 hours and not - 10.5.
On a separate note my 124300 with cal 3230 was within specs right before I sold it (for personal reasons) few months ago. I had it for about a year and a half.
I’ve placed a deposit on a DJ41 and I’ll be getting early next year (special order according to AD), but seeing your second half 2021 Explorer ll potentially developing “the curse” has left me with a bittersweet feeling.

The only silver lining in this situation is that I know Rolex will fix this issue because their reputation is literally on the line!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[saxo3]

Explorer II (caliber 3285) timegrapher measurement data, presented by CharlesN in post #2793, are graphically displayed from the date of purchase (09.07.2021) until 19.08.2022.

Only his measurements after full winding of the movement are shown in the 3 graphs below.


FIG. 1: Amplitudes: horizontal AND vertical decrease since purchase date.


FIG. 2: Rates: horizontal remain constant BUT vertical decrease since purchase date.


FIG. 3: Amplitudes and rates are correlated and decrease since purchase date.

For this 3285 the movement issue has started within the first year after watch purchase in July 2021. There are not enough data to conclude much more.

It should be mentioned that the timekeeping of this watch is still very good. Therefore, it is difficult to identify without instrumentation if a 32xx is good or not.

I hope that helps all interested TRF members.

[Aerogph]

Originally Posted by amanbra

Welcome

I totally agree with this observation, once I notice my phone app show the timing go slow I check this and bingo below 250 dial up. And yes it gets worse over time from there.

These watches seem to be regulated very close to 0 and this is also, in my opinion, one of the causes that shows long term a negative value in some cases.

Originally Posted by saxo3

Welcome and thanks for your contribution with 3230 data.

Which timegrapher model you are using?

Can you compare TG rates/amplitudes/beat errors (for all 5 positions) when the watch was new / very good with the present situation? Simply TG screenshots.

Also interesting to see the difference between full winding (t=0) and after 24 hours at rest.

You have an explanation for the change in timekeeping and how much it is?
270-280° are good 32xx values in H-positions, what are the amplitudes in V-positions?

Thank you Saxo

the watchmakers I brought it to, used the Chronoscope X1, Chronoexpert III, Chronoscope S1 (G2) and all test are always done on full wind at 53° Lift angle. Don't have one of my own XD

After roughly 6 months, I've done some other measurments (not all positions), but here the value for amplitude, daily rate and beat error

DU +0.1 s/d - 293° - 0.1 ms
CD -0.1 s/d - 249° - 0.2 ms
DD +0.1 s/d - 283° - 0.0 ms
CU -0.3 s/d - 247° - 0.1 ms

One more mont after
DU +0.1 s/d - 300° - 0.0 ms (only have the DU on this)

This is the highest amplitude value I have had

Last one is this month
DU -0.2 s/d - 288° - 0.0 ms
DD -1.0 s/d - 285° - 0.0 ms
CD +0.0 s/d - 246° - 0.1 ms
6H -1.6 s/d - 249° - 0.0 ms
CU -3.3 s/d - 241° - 0.2 ms

To be honest, I have no idea why the timekeeping changed, but from the recordings is different.

Originally Posted by Tommy125

Doesn’t seem all too bad yet, even with 24h after. The largest deviation being about 8-9s, the amplitudes being above 200, and the beat error below 0.4. The major change occurred after 45h but that’s already more than halfway into the power reserve.

Curiosly is always showing good enough value but yes, is more sensible to the power reserve

[Omarion07]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Omarion, what you say is NOT correct.
Here is the relevant paragraph from the link you quote:

-------------
THE SUPERLATIVE CHRONOMETER CERTIFICATION

For each Rolex watch, the Superlative Chronometer certification comprises checks to guarantee the key areas of performance that may be disrupted during the course of the manufacturing process – precision, power reserve, waterproofness and self-winding.

All tests are conducted after the movement has been cased, to be as faithful as possible to the conditions under which the watch will be worn by its owner. Exclusive testing methodologies are employed, making use of entirely automated high-technology equipment developed by Rolex. Each movement is submitted to COSC (the Swiss Official Chronometer Testing Institute) for its official certification, after 15 days and 15 nights of testing involving seven eliminating criteria in five static positions and at three temperatures. All Rolex movements obtain this official Swiss chronometer certificate.

• PRECISION
After casing the movement (an operation which can affect precision by several seconds per day), Rolex tests the precision of each watch over a 24-hour cycle, in seven static positions as well as in a rotating rack, according to an exclusive methodology that simulates real-life wear. The tolerance criteria are much stricter than for the official certification with regard to the average rate deviation, the daily precision as perceived by the wearer. The deviation for a Rolex Superlative Chronometer must not exceed −2/+2 seconds per day, after casing, versus −4/+6 seconds per day required by COSC for the movement alone.
-------------

Rolex does not REGULATE but measure the PRECISION in 7 static positions. That is completely different.

I do not know what the quoted 7th position could be.

Why would Rolex test in only one additional position, i.e., one intermediate angle between the known positions / angles for DU, DD, 9U, 6U, 3U?

Is the "seven" in the text a simple Rolex typo error undiscovered since March 2017?

I wrote that the 32xx movements are REGULATED in 5 positions, which is correct.

One can verify and see it on the 32xx engravings 5 POS. + TEMP.


Rolex caliber 3235


Rolex caliber 3255

Ah ok.. I assumed they were the same. Thanks for the explanation Saxo3. But why would test precision in “7” positions when they regulate in 5 only as shown on the movement? And I doubt it’s a typo tbh


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Omarion07]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Explorer II (caliber 3285) timegrapher measurement data, presented by CharlesN in post #2793, are graphically displayed from the date of purchase (09.07.2021) until 19.08.2022.

Only his measurements after full winding of the movement are shown in the 3 graphs below.


FIG. 1: Amplitudes: horizontal AND vertical decrease since purchase date.


FIG. 2: Rates: horizontal remain constant BUT vertical decrease since purchase date.


FIG. 3: Amplitudes and rates are correlated and decrease since purchase date.

For this 3285 the movement issue has started within the first year after watch purchase in July 2021. There are not enough data to conclude much more.

It should be mentioned that the timekeeping of this watch is still very good. Therefore, it is difficult to identify without instrumentation if a 32xx is good or not.

I hope that helps all interested TRF members.

How is it good when X is 10.5 after 45 hours.. I expect this result to be much less if the calibre is performing within specs aka -2/+2 spd?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Omarion07

How is it good when X is 10.5 after 45 hours.. I expect this result to be much less if the calibre is performing within specs aka -2/+2 spd?

I said that the timekeeping of this watch is still very good and should have added when Charles is wearing his Explorer II during daytime with rest in dial up position overnight.

In this configuration, the 3285 caliber is never at complete rest for either 24 or 45 hours but gets wound during wrist movement the day. That keeps the amplitudes high enough to prevent a significant loss, integrated over 24 hours.

With dial up position overnight, this caliber can be position-compensated for time losses, which happens during the day. All together the timekeeping rests very good, but that will very likely change during the coming months if the amplitudes (after full winding!) continue to decrease.

My 3 graphs do not show (very) bad movement characteristics, but the 32xx issue has started to develop within the first year.

In simple words: this 3285 loses time (on the wrist) during the day and gains at rest in dial up position overnight. The net effect is good timekeeping, as long as the amplitudes do not further decrease in the coming months.

Understood?

The -2/+2 sec/day specs for movement precision is something different.

PS: X = -10.3 s/d is of course not good after 45 hours!

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by Tommy125

Doesn’t seem all too bad yet, even with 24h after. The largest deviation being about 8-9s, the amplitudes being above 200, and the beat error below 0.4. The major change occurred after 45h but that’s already more than halfway into the power reserve.

Tommy can you see how his amp is dropping at full wind since purchase?

It’s only 260 du in Aug 2022. This for me is early signs of it going bad. My bad watches did the same thing.

Because I only test when my watch tracker app tells me the timing has changed when I do the test du is usually 250 or lower at that point. And not holding 200 after 24 hours in some vertical positions.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by CharlesN

I have, yet again, done a series of measurements on my watch, An Explorer II reference 226570 bought in July 2021.

It has a 3285 caliber as its “heart”.

It has been running virtually constantly since then, but not always worn.

This series of measurements were started off with a full manual winding of the watch.

It was then left for 15 mins on the measuring arm of my Witschi TimeGrapher.

Measurements were all done with a 20 second stabilisation time between positions, followed by a 60 second measuring time.

The sequence of measuring was CH, 6H, 9H, 3H, CB. I have done the 5 positions as specified leaving out the 12H position.

The location for the test was a room I use for my hobbies and near silence was observed.

The ambient temperature was a steady 24 degrees celsius.

Air pressure was pretty constant at around 10 100000 Pa mark for all the tests.

The watch was checked and found to be not magnetised before starting the tests.

Below you can see 4 pictures of the screen of my timegrapher.

The first is a copy of the results I had way back on 23th July 2021 followwd by one done in August and then November 2021.

The following 3 are from a few days ago.

These results clearly show a degradation of timekeeping. This is also called “The Problem” that we have been discussing in this thread.

Hopefully some of the readers here will be able to understand what they are seeing but if not, just pose your questions below and I feel sure you will receive your answers shortly.

It is also clear from these readings that without a TimeGrapher there is little to no chance of anyone being able to spot the problem arising and even growing.

Please enjoy what you see below, I have enjoyed preparing them for you all.


The first record i have from 23 July 2021



My second recording done on 30 August 2021



The Start on 11 November 2021.



The First of the latest set of measurements done on 19 August 2022.



24 Hours later on 20 August 2022.



After about 45 Hours of testing on 21 August 2022.

Ah that’s sad to see for a 2021 watch.

You sending the watch in early or will you wait and send it in when it’s worse?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Omarion07]

Originally Posted by amanbra

Ah that’s sad to see for a 2021 watch.

You sending the watch in early or will you wait and send it in when it’s worse?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Jeez I know man it’s becoming a joke really .. now we have to assume and speculate that the movement is from an older batch and was placed in 2021 year model. I suppose we’ll have to wait for your YM40 to (kinda) guess whether the issue still occurs in 2022 models (hopefully not)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by Omarion07

Jeez I know man it’s becoming a joke really .. now we have to assume and speculate that the movement is from an older batch and was placed in 2021 year model. I suppose we’ll have to wait for your YM40 to (kinda) guess whether the issue still occurs in 2022 models (hopefully not)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah I love the watch on it’s own but part of the reason I got it is for a 2022 example.

I’m made the initial data capture. +2 on the wrist dial up amp 282 crown down 241.

I’ll check it up at Christmas time and if it goes bad people here will know. Doubt it will show much then. For me next July is key.

I really do hope they have fixed it or at least I win the lottery this time…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Omarion07]

Originally Posted by amanbra

Yeah I love the watch on it’s own but part of the reason I got it is for a 2022 example.

I’m made the initial data capture. +2 on the wrist dial up amp 282 crown down 241.

I’ll check it up at Christmas time and if it goes bad people here will know. Doubt it will show much then. For me next July is key.

I really do hope they have fixed it or at least I win the lottery this time…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It’s a gorgeous watch btw! Saw the pics on the other thread. Hope you enjoy it for many years to come. Hopefully the issue will get fixed for both our sakes as I’m getting a new DJ in the next few months.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by Omarion07

It’s a gorgeous watch btw! Saw the pics on the other thread. Hope you enjoy it for many years to come. Hopefully the issue will get fixed for both our sakes as I’m getting a new DJ in the next few months.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yeah cheers,

wouldn't it be just great to be able to just enjoy these again without worrying about this in the background? I'm sure it will happen one day. Hopefully sooner rather than later.

[omar-rye]

You guys are a bunch of nerds

P.S. I appreciate all of the info, data, and personal experiences

[Megalobyte]

When I recently decided to get another James Cameron DeepSea to replace the one I foolishly traded away a few years ago, I was very pleased to find a fully stickered new old stock 3135 powered one from 2017. It has begun its life gaining a steady 3 a day. I expect it’ll slow slightly in time. But not 32 series slow. :)

My prior JC was amazingly accurate, gained a rock solid one second a day. I’m of the opinion that 31 series is still the way to go if you care about accuracy.

[Tommy125]

Originally Posted by Megalobyte

When I recently decided to get another James Cameron DeepSea to replace the one I foolishly traded away a few years ago, I was very pleased to find a fully stickered new old stock 3135 powered one from 2017. It has begun its life gaining a steady 3 a day. I expect it’ll slow slightly in time. But not 32 series slow. :)

My prior JC was amazingly accurate, gained a rock solid one second a day. I’m of the opinion that 31 series is still the way to go if you care about accuracy.

Just curious, when you say steady, are you talking about regardless of wearing conditions? Because for my watch now (2019 datejust), it can gain between -1 to +1 (values rounded up/down) depending on how long I sleep and leave the watch dial up.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Tommy125

Just curious, when you say steady, are you talking about regardless of wearing conditions?
I don't expect that, neither for a 31xx nor 32xx nor 15xx.

Because for my watch now (2019 datejust), it can gain between -1 to +1 (values rounded up/down) depending on how long I sleep and leave the watch dial up.
That is normal. All my mechanical watches show a day-night variance. It only is a question how close you are looking at it.

[CharlesN]

Just for clarity I have just completed another Power Reserve test on my ..

Rolex Explorer II 226570 that has a 3285 caliber movement.

I have only shown below the reading at the start of the test and one after 62 Hours. The watch has not stopped but all meaningful data has been collected.

Asa usual all the normal parameters, method and behaviour was followed.,

The purpose of this is just to show the variance between start and end. I thought some of you might find it interesting. (If you don't feel free to ignore this post).



The Start of the Power Reserve Test.




After 62 Hours of the Power Reserve Test.



To add a more graphic view perhaps at the same time as doing the Power treserve test I also ran a WatchTracker log.

The watch was in the CH (Thats Dial Up) position all the time unless it was being measured on the Timegrapher which happened 6 times each time for a total of 320 seconds out of the CH position.
That gives atotal of 320 x 6 = 1920 seconds or 32mins. That is too insignificant to alter any readings.

Of course here the Watchtracker graph for you to see as well.



WatchTracker Log during Power Reserve Test

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by omar-rye

You guys are a bunch of nerds

P.S. I appreciate all of the info, data, and personal experiences

Not sure if some would accept an additional title like DrTechXnerd? Anyhow, simple graphs just fall down for free from the blue sky here?

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by amanbra

Yeah totally agree this is beyond finding and collating more info.

The thing is we have had watchmakers analyse the issue and show us which part is showing the wear issues. Then everything went quiet yet the issues kept appearing.

What we (as wearers, not watchmakers) don't know is whether that part is the culprit or the victim, so to speak. Yes, one in particular shows wear, but is it wearing out because of poor design/placement, or is it wearing out because some other part is poorly designed/placed and inflicting damage to this one as a result?

Originally Posted by amanbra

Wow really this would be the first time anyone has report Rolex quoting a %.

You serious at 32%

How sure are you about this? We have so many questions for you.

32% is insane considering many people don’t even wear Rolexes they buy…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My interpretation is that this is being reported from a couple of AD/placque service center-based Rolex-certified watchmakers, not RSC-based Rolex-employed watchmakers.

So while still "real" not necessarily "official" stats.

Originally Posted by amanbra

Yeah I love the watch on it’s own but part of the reason I got it is for a 2022 example.

Ah yes. A new Rolex purchase all in the name of science...

[Aerogph]

This was one of the highest recordings

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Aerogph

This was one of the highest recordings

Interesting, an old Witschi Watch Expert, market introduction was in 1989.

Probably 20-30 years old? I would check its calibration

What do we learn from this single photo?

[CharlesN]

Originally Posted by Aerogph

This was one of the highest recordings

Its great to see another Witschi in use here, regardless of age.

[omar-rye]

Excuse my ignorance as I have only skimmed through a small portion of this thread, but is this issue also found on pieces that were sold in 2022 or late 2021?

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by omar-rye

Excuse my ignorance as I have only skimmed through a small portion of this thread, but is this issue also found on pieces that were sold in 2022 or late 2021?

Late 2021 yes I personally have a Nov 21 DD that has gone bad. Fair few others as well.

2022 I think so but can't 100% confirm.

I recently got a july 22 32xx, I'll report back if it goes bad. likely need to wait awhile.

[WatchSmith]

About a year and a half ago I built a 3235 using a broken clone movement and adding genuine parts. It has run perfectly since the day I built it. At full wind the amplitude gets in the 270s. This is off the wrist this morning and not getting much winding motion. I think the 3235 is a solid movement. At least my hybrid is.