Shock protection 32xx vs 31xx vs ETA2824-2

[Mountain]

I’d be very interested to understand thoughts from watchmakers or other technically inclined enthusiasts on the relative robustness of the ETA 2824-2 vs Rolex 31xx vs the infamous 32xx movements, please. Which do you think has better overall shock protection?

For context, I do a lot of hiking & climbing in the mountains and use poles almost all the time. The wrist gets repeated sharp shock from the poles striking rock. I typically wear my usual Explorer 124270 with a 32xx movement, but do have other watches I could wear instead.

Thanks!

[SearChart]

Having worked on all of that I'd say there's no noticeable difference for the end user.
Incabloc (most common anti-shock), KIF (what Rolex used to use and still does in some movements), and Paraflex are all excellent shock absorber mechanisms and basically work the same.

[Mountain]

Originally Posted by SearChart

Having worked on all of that I'd say there's no noticeable difference for the end user.
Incabloc (most common anti-shock), KIF (what Rolex used to use and still does in some movements), and Paraflex are all excellent shock absorber mechanisms and basically work the same.

Perfect, thank you very much for the response. This is exactly what I was looking for!

[007Sub]

Originally Posted by SearChart

Having worked on all of that I'd say there's no noticeable difference for the end user.
Incabloc (most common anti-shock), KIF (what Rolex used to use and still does in some movements), and Paraflex are all excellent shock absorber mechanisms and basically work the same.

Perfectly summed up!


The other thing to consider when assessing shock resistance is the hairspring. I'm not sure of the validity behind this but have seen some literature stating that Rolex's Parachrom hairsprings are more resistant to deformation from shock than that which you might find in a 2824 which i believe is Nivarox. In practice both will be fine for those activities listed.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by 007Sub

Perfectly summed up!


The other thing to consider when assessing shock resistance is the hairspring. I'm not sure of the validity behind this but have seen some literature stating that Rolex's Parachrom hairsprings are more resistant to deformation from shock than that which you might find in a 2824 which i believe is Nivarox. In practice both will be fine for those activities listed.

The Kif system what Rolex used for decades,and others like the Incabloc are just shock protection systems,much like the now in-house Rolex Paraflex system and basically they all do the same job.Its the same with the hairsprings parachrom in the real world would doubt if the average wearer would find any real major difference.Now if the movement is correctly regulated there is no reason than say one movement with the parachrom and paraflex,will perform any better that one with the KIF shock and Nivarox hairsprings.The ETA 2824 is a great movement especially the top chronometer grade, and in all its forms have powered countless millions of watches over the production years.

[Old Expat Beast]

Bas, am I right in thinking that Tudor upgraded the the ETA 2824, etc from incabloc to kif when putting them in Black Bays, Rangers, etc?

[SearChart]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

Bas, am I right in thinking that Tudor upgraded the the ETA 2824, etc from incabloc to kif when putting them in Black Bays, Rangers, etc?

Yes, but you can still see incabloc in some older 80s and 90s Tudors sometimes.

[Old Expat Beast]

Thanks!

[Mountain]

Thanks for the additional input everyone!

[Ron P]

My 2 cents: Paraflex is probably 0.1 % better but from patent and royalties 99,9% better.

[watchluvr4ever]

They all work within the same principle and each one is probably equally susceptible to the same damage if a watch is dropped. Where they really differ in my opinion is how easy they are to open and/or remove during service or replacement. The most used in the industry would be Incabloc which is probably the easiest to service and there are many different Kif variation and hundreds (not exaggerating)of others that have existed over the years. As someone who works on watches I prefer Incabloc all day long.

[Mountain]

Originally Posted by watchluvr4ever

They all work within the same principle and each one is probably equally susceptible to the same damage if a watch is dropped. Where they really differ in my opinion is how easy they are to open and/or remove during service or replacement. The most used in the industry would be Incabloc which is probably the easiest to service and there are many different Kif variation and hundreds (not exaggerating)of others that have existed over the years. As someone who works on watches I prefer Incabloc all day long.

Interesting, good to know, thank you.