Isn't anyone else impressed by the technical releases at Basel?

[TheVTCGuy]

Ok, we all have opinions of the new models, the Daytona, Air King and (My favorite and next watch ) the DJ41, some of us like, others not so much. But, maybe it's because I'm an engineer, has no one else noticed the INCREDIBLE technical advances introduced? I am talking about the "Superlative Chronometer"

The Daytona movement, the 4130, the Air King, 3131 and the DJ41 3135 all have this designation and are rated at: +2-2

WOW!!!!! So much for +6 -4, that accuracy seems so archaic right now.

I am very impressed and encouraged by these new movements and Rolex's achievement. The one advantage Quartz watches have over mechanicals is (was) the accuracy. They still have it, but the line is getting a lot thinner!

Weather you like the new models or not, I say congratulate Rolex on their exceptional technical achievement.

[themast]

It seems to me that now all calibers (including the "old" ones) are reported as +-2 secs on the website. That is a bit confusing.

[jkf2112]

Originally Posted by themast

It seems to me that now all calibers (including the "old" ones) are reported as +-2 secs on the website. That is a bit confusing.

That is because all Rolex are now tested to the +2/-2 standard, above and beyond the COSC standards. The final round of testing before all Rolex leave tests to +2/-2. They also test in more positions than COSC.

[themast]

Originally Posted by jkf2112

That is because all Rolex are now tested to the +2/-2 standard, above and beyond the COSC standards. The final round of testing before all Rolex leave tests to +2/-2. They also test in more positions than COSC.

What puzzles me is how this applies to "old" movements. A 3186 was -4+6 and now is -2+2. So, if it is just regulation, could they have done it years ago?

[jkf2112]

Originally Posted by themast

What puzzles me is how this applies to "old" movements. A 3186 was -4+6 and now is -2+2. So, if it is just regulation, could they have done it years ago?

The reason they are now the +2/-2 is because of the new testing regiment and facility that Rolex has. This facility is new(er) and so is the testing to -2/+2. I think the movements always probably could have been at these standards but they did not have the testing facility or the use of the technology that they do now.

Kind of cool to see honestly.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by jkf2112

The reason they are now the +2/-2 is because of the new testing regiment and facility that Rolex has. This facility is new(er) and so is the testing to -2/+2. I think the movements always probably could have been at these standards but they did not have the testing facility or the use of the technology that they do now.

Kind of cool to see honestly.

The lubes have improved as well
That's got to help a lot.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by themast

What puzzles me is how this applies to "old" movements. A 3186 was -4+6 and now is -2+2. So, if it is just regulation, could they have done it years ago?

Most probably.
But it adds extra cost base to the manufacturing process.
Obviously they are confident that the price point is acceptable to them.

Frankly it wouldn't have happened if Omega hadn't moved the goal posts in terms of accuracy and service intervals.
Rolex has responded accordingly.

[Dyim]

It is certainly nice to have it +/- 2.

Afaik, they are the same movements, correct?

It seemed to me Rolex improved their QC so that all these movements will now be able to leave the factory with better tolerances.

[GordonC]

Yeah, these aren't new for Basel - Rolex introduced their revised, updated, in-house Superlative Chronometer standard in June 2015 on a couple of the watch models, and a couple of months ago announced that all Rolex would soon meet their Superlative Chronometer standard.

The movements aren't changed at all for this, it's just that Rolex has reached the stage of quality control that they are confident that they can certify all watches, movement installed in case, to -2/+2.

So, uh, while I'm impressed with the quality control advances over the past few years that have allowed them to reach this level, there were no real technical advances introduced at Basel 2016 at all.

[jkf2112]

Originally Posted by Dyim

It is certainly nice to have it +/- 2.

Afaik, they are the same movements, correct?

It seemed to me Rolex improved their QC so that all these movements will now be able to leave the factory with better tolerances.

This is correct. I can get more into it if people like.

[GB-man]

They aren't really new movements are they? Forgive my ignorance

[KarlS]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Ok, we all have opinions of the new models, the Daytona, Air King and (My favorite and next watch ) the DJ41, some of us like, others not so much. But, maybe it's because I'm an engineer, has no one else noticed the INCREDIBLE technical advances introduced? I am talking about the "Superlative Chronometer"

The Daytona movement, the 4130, the Air King, 3131 and the DJ41 3135 all have this designation and are rated at: +2-2

WOW!!!!! So much for +6 -4, that accuracy seems so archaic right now.

I am very impressed and encouraged by these new movements and Rolex's achievement. The one advantage Quartz watches have over mechanicals is (was) the accuracy. They still have it, but the line is getting a lot thinner!

Weather you like the new models or not, I say congratulate Rolex on their exceptional technical achievement.

I am sure the 3135 movement launched last year with YM Everose was rated the same. Could be wrong

[jkf2112]

Originally Posted by KarlS

I am sure the 3135 movement launched last year with YM Everose was rated the same. Could be wrong

The 3135 is not a new movement at all.

[KarlS]

Originally Posted by jkf2112

The 3135 is not a new movement at all.

Poor phrasing...the YM launched last year with 3135 movement...

[jkf2112]

Originally Posted by KarlS

Poor phrasing...the YM launched last year with 3135 movement...

But last year is not this year.

[KarlS]

Originally Posted by jkf2112

But last year is not this year.

And thus the logical extension is that the -2/2 is not new for Basel 2016

[subtona]

Perhaps machine tolerances have improved over the years increasing accuracy by making the gears and teeth just a bit more precisely?

We know the hair springs have had improvements.

[southcarolina1801]

Direct quote from the Rolex site:

"Superlative Chronometer certification redefined by Rolex in 2015"

That being said, sounds like regardless of the movement that is specification Rolex started using in 2015. Also the 3132 movement in the Explorer is the same movement used in the previous Explorer and OP 39... No new parts needed for this new specification. Just better regulation during the QC stage.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[landroverking]

Even vintage watches could make the 2/2.
It's all marketing to combat Omega.

[Cru Jones]

Originally Posted by landroverking

It's all marketing to combat Omega.

the truth.

[kilyung]

I used to be able to run a mile in 20 minutes... now I can run a mile in 10 minutes. Next year, I'm sure I'll get my time down to 7 minutes. I've become bionic.

[breitlings]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Ok, we all have opinions of the new models, the Daytona, Air King and (My favorite and next watch ) the DJ41, some of us like, others not so much. But, maybe it's because I'm an engineer, has no one else noticed the INCREDIBLE technical advances introduced? I am talking about the "Superlative Chronometer"

The Daytona movement, the 4130, the Air King, 3131 and the DJ41 3135 all have this designation and are rated at: +2-2

WOW!!!!! So much for +6 -4, that accuracy seems so archaic right now.

I am very impressed and encouraged by these new movements and Rolex's achievement. The one advantage Quartz watches have over mechanicals is (was) the accuracy. They still have it, but the line is getting a lot thinner!

Weather you like the new models or not, I say congratulate Rolex on their exceptional technical achievement.

Pretty Sure the DJ41 gets the new movement (not 3135) !!!! So does the DD iirc.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by themast

What puzzles me is how this applies to "old" movements. A 3186 was -4+6 and now is -2+2. So, if it is just regulation, could they have done it years ago?

The COSC test is just a test nothing more,its just to say the bare uncased movement has passed said test, and certification is for the time of testing only.Truth be told most modern day movements could with careful regulation pass the now quite antiquated test. Regulation is one of the main factors to do with accuracy on any watch. Now they say they are further tested to inside the COSC spec to AVERAGE of -2+2 seconds over any 24 hour period.Just wonder what some will do with this extra 2 seconds accuracy out of 86400 in a day, perhaps the extra time to write a book.Myself have timed a Chinese Seagull ST19 movement that has amazed me with its accuracy to a consistent +2 seconds a day cost of complete watch just $60.

The term "Superlative Chronometer" is a now trademark of Rolex. The addition of the word "Superlative" in front of the official designation of Chronometer is merely a Rolex marketing angle to give a more distinguished sound to the chronometer status of their products . As all watches that have earned the privilege of bearing the official Swiss designation of "Chronometer" have to meet the exact same C.O.S.C. standards . Any words added before or after the official designation of "Chronometer" are merely more marketing which Rolex is very good at.There are not any different grades or levels of chronometer certification for movements of Rolex size, but Rolex would like you to think there are."Certified Chronometer" also means nothing different than just "Chronometer." It is a redundant phrase--since Chronometer status is the certification the certified is just more pure marketing, and you know what they say Paul about marketing well it often baffles brains.

[beshannon]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Isn't anyone else impressed by the technical releases at Basel?

What was "technical" about what was released?

Tuning to a tighter performance spec is not a new release.