New Sub 126040 - 3230 losing time

[Scottyboy]

Originally Posted by padi56

Only have one it was bought as a present off my sons, had it for around two years, never been anal about the exact second. But did do a check several weeks ago was running inside COSC spec that's accurate enough for me. My life was never ran to the exact second, the most important thing for me at the moment, is that every day I beat my own record for the numbers of days I stayed alive.

Arguably, there are far more important things going on than arguing over peoples issues with their watches. You are lucky enough not to have run into any issues, plenty of others haven't been.

I wish you all the best with your battle, and hope you come out victorious

[belutak]

Originally Posted by forcinitijp

Yes, of course! That's why Rolex is so reliable... and it's not the first time that a Rolex movement delays, advances or has problems... remember that before the warranty was 2 years .... now it's 5... that tells you that they expect the movement to present some mismatch ......

In addition, the reliability is given by the support that the brand puts in the face of any event, not if the watch delays or advances 1 second more than in the controlled laboratory tests they have done!

I am concerned about the long term reliability of my own watch and not about the reliability of the Rolex watches in general

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Scottyboy

Arguably, there are far more important things going on than arguing over peoples issues with their watches. You are lucky enough not to have run into any issues, plenty of others haven't been.

I wish you all the best with your battle, and hope you come out victorious

And millions now sold with the 32 series movement are mostly all happy, life too short to worry and fret about whether a movement might of might not slow down seconds out of spec over a period of ownership. I remember a few years ago when I bought my new car salesman made a big deal that I would get 45 miles to the gallon. Have I ever achieved this no, why to many variations like how heavy foot on the gas pedal driving habits, traffic etc, did I take the car back no.

[forcinitijp]

Originally Posted by belutak

I am concerned about the long term reliability of my own watch and not about the reliability of the Rolex watches in general

You could sell it and look for a watch that meets your expectations! Go back to an older Rolex movement or maybe venture into some other model.

But you're probably going to have the same problems...

As they said in the previous post... the best example is the car...

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Easy E

The linked graph should be a sticky. Perfect visual. Thanks.

For Your Eyes Only

[Roddypeepa]

It had been a really good thread.

If I’m understanding where we now are my 3135 is highly precise losing around 3 seconds per day every day. Never 1 second. Never 4 seconds. Always around 3. This is extremely repeatable.

It’s quite accurate, seemingly beating 28799 times per hour instead of the desired 28800.

Hope I’ve got this right….


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gamingdoctor]

From my understanding from OP, his watch is *not* precise +/- 2 seconds, as he is losing more and more time on his submariner.

I think it's OK to send in.

I don't think it would bother me, personally, but I don't hold it against OP to get it fixed.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by gamingdoctor

From my understanding from OP, his watch is *not* precise +/- 2 seconds, as he is losing more and more time on his submariner.

I understand what you mean.

OP measured accuracy, not precision, read posts 154 and 185.

OP's watch did not lose 3.5 s/d but 3.5 s overnight, in dial up position, after full winding before, see his post 35.

With a resting time of assumed 12 hours this would mean a rate of -7 s/d in dial up position!

A shorter rest period (e.g. 8 h) leads to an even worse rate of -10.5 s/d.

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by Jim_K

Not this american. You have a very good point in your posts.

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by forcinitijp

You could sell it and look for a watch that meets your expectations! Go back to an older Rolex movement or maybe venture into some other model.

But you're probably going to have the same problems...

As they said in the previous post... the best example is the car...

Using a car’s fuel consumption is no where near the best example/analogy.

For one, your Rolex movement in normal use “beats” at a constant 28,800 with a constant torque demand.

You as the “operator” cannot change that in daily use other than by allowing the power reserve to deplete beyond operating parameters.

The torque demand on an internal combustion engine however will vary significantly depending on load, gear selection, number of passengers, driving habits, amount of fuel on board, how fast you drive, etc etc

All of which the operator has direct influence and control over.

Many other factors also influence fuel consumption such as braking (energy converted to heat) weather conditions and so forth.

It is absolutely possible to get pretty close to manufacturers quoted figures and indeed to better them with the right driving approach.

But to say that driving a car the way you choose to do so and not getting claimed fuel economy figures is the same as expecting your watch to perform as advertised is, frankly, ridiculous.

[Easy E]

Originally Posted by Devildog

Using a car’s fuel consumption is no where near the best example/analogy.

For one, your Rolex movement in normal use “beats” at a constant 28,800 with a constant torque demand.

You as the “operator” cannot change that in daily use other than by allowing the power reserve to deplete beyond operating parameters.

The torque demand on an internal combustion engine however will vary significantly depending on load, gear selection, number of passengers, driving habits, amount of fuel on board, how fast you drive, etc etc

All of which the operator has direct influence and control over.

Many other factors also influence fuel consumption such as braking (energy converted to heat) weather conditions and so forth.

It is absolutely possible to get pretty close to manufacturers quoted figures and indeed to better them with the right driving approach.

But to say that driving a car the way you choose to do so and not getting claimed fuel economy figures is the same as expecting your watch to perform as advertised is, frankly, ridiculous.

Agreed. Fuel economy is somewhat of a default analogy around here and I don’t think it really fits well.

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by padi56

Well tell you what it was originally about, the OP was worried that his watch was running 2.5 to 3 seconds slow a day. Then the 32 movement haters stepped in, and at every opportunity to say how bad this movement was, if it did not run exactly daily to Rolex stated precision -2+2 seconds spec.

Peter.

Please, there’s not a single hate of the 32xx movements post on this entire thread. There was no stepping in by the haters.

Just because someone doesn’t agree with what you consider is acceptable performance isn’t hate for the 32xx.

By all means take the view that it all amounts to nothing but please don’t disrespect those who hold an opposing view.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by Easy E

Agreed. Fuel economy is somewhat of a default analogy around here and I don’t think it really fits well.

Actual vs quoted power output would be closer - still not great but more realistic i feel




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[forcinitijp]

Hahaha you were studying!! Very good... I wanted to get the best out of you!

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Devildog

Peter.

Please, there’s not a single hate of the 32xx movements post on this entire thread. There was no stepping in by the haters.

Just because someone doesn’t agree with what you consider is acceptable performance isn’t hate for the 32xx.

By all means take the view that it all amounts to nothing but please don’t disrespect those who hold an opposing view.

Well said.

Hate? No! This is more fake news and nonsense as some people just can't handle 32xx facts, measured data, timegrapher, apps, tools, logical reasoning, ... as you (and others) have patiently explained in this thread, and elsewhere. It comes across as constant mockery of other forum members, but basically are desperate attempts to sink any discussion of the 32xx issues that are well documented, since several years, also on this forum, with a lot of factual input of Rolex watchmakers like Bas and a few others.

[Kevin of Larchmont]

Originally Posted by Devildog

Peter.

By all means take the view that it all amounts to nothing but please don’t disrespect those who hold an opposing view.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is quite something coming from the fella who called roddypeepa’s views “wrong and irrelevant.”

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

This is quite something coming from the fella who called roddypeepa’s views “wrong and irrelevant.”

If you can’t see the difference between disputing a point based on and supported by factual evidence and someone who continually dismisses the views of others as stupid just because he doesn’t get it, then that’s really on you.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[brandrea]

Any way ….. did the OP decide to have his watch serviced because it’s out of spec?

Too lazy to scroll back through the thread to find out

[Kevin of Larchmont]

Originally Posted by Devildog

If you can’t see the difference between disputing a point based on and supported by factual evidence and someone who continually dismisses the views of others as stupid just because he doesn’t get it, then that’s really on you.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I just follow the words man, they tell the story.