Hot Water: A Fix for Slow 32xx Movements?

[mrmahdi]

Greetings,

I have a Datejust 41 with the 3235 movement from 2019 that went to the RSC in Beverly Hills TWICE for accuracy issues. After a while, it was running within specs (still slow but within -2 seconds a day) and recently, it was running about 4-5 seconds a day.

I then read that running your watch under hot water can work because of the lubricants collecting in the movement, causing it slow down.

So I ran it under hot water under a sink, showered with it and put the watch in a bowl of hot water up to ten minutes.

It seems to have fixed it. It’s running again within specs or slightly out of spec at certain days but not the 4-5 seconds it was before.

So is the slowing of 32xx movements mainly due to the lubricants being used in the movements?

[codecow]

If a movement is running too fast, submerge in a bowl of warm milk. It will make it sleepy and therefore run slower.

[mrmahdi]

Originally Posted by codecow

If a movement is running too fast, submerge in a bowl of warm milk. It will make it sleepy and therefore run slower.

Whole milk 🥛 does a better job than almond milk.

[omar-rye]

Originally Posted by mrmahdi

Whole milk 🥛 does a better job than almond milk.

I dipped mine in soy milk and it came out fabulous

[codecow]

Originally Posted by mrmahdi

Whole milk 🥛 does a better job than almond milk.

Agreed. I have never seen an almond with nipples.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by codecow

If a movement is running too fast, submerge in a bowl of warm milk. It will make it sleepy and therefore run slower.

Have to agree some guys and the watches today.

[codecow]

Originally Posted by padi56

Have to agree some guys and the watches today.

It seems simple to me. If it’s not working properly take it to a watchmaker.

[77T]

Originally Posted by codecow

It seems simple to me. If it’s not working properly take it to a watchmaker.

I certainly agree with letting a watchmaker address a movement that isn't working properly.

But around here some think that +/-3 is a disaster

So it's all in the owner's interpretation of "properly".

I wonder how many take their car back to the dealer's service lane because they are getting 24.9mpg for a car advertised as having 25mpg...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[codecow]

Originally Posted by 77T

I certainly agree with letting a watchmaker address a movement that isn't working properly.

But around here some think that +/-3 is a disaster

So it's all in the owner's interpretation of "properly".

I wonder how many take their car back to the dealer's service lane because they are getting 24.9mpg for a car advertised as having 25mpg...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Agreed.

I have chimed in on some of those threads in the past. Everyone has a phone in their pocket and it’s simple to get an atomic clock sync app so you have perfectly accurate time always unless you lose internet access.

I use such an app to set a watch when I pick it up to wear it. If it’s not losing minutes over a few days (ex time is off from phone such that I notice) then the watch is working. If it is off, it’s broken.

If the power reserve is such it can’t keep power when wound each day, then it’s broken.

All this other stuff is dumb. If accuracy is important there are MANY MANY better choices than traditional mechanical watches.

[CarlOver]

Originally Posted by 77T

I certainly agree with letting a watchmaker address a movement that isn't working properly.

But around here some think that +/-3 is a disaster

So it's all in the owner's interpretation of "properly".

I wonder how many take their car back to the dealer's service lane because they are getting 24.9mpg for a car advertised as having 25mpg...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

.1 our 25 is 4 tenths of 1 percent. 1 additional second out of 2 seconds is, well, quite a bit more. I think we know what your saying though.

[enjoythemusic]

Originally Posted by codecow

If a movement is running too fast, submerge in a bowl of warm milk. It will make it sleepy and therefore run slower.

OMG this TOTALLY now makes sense. i was wondering why..... You see, the bottle of VIAGRA on my nightstand spilled onto the G-Shock, and so now it (insert your own joke here).

[Old Expat Beast]

I've read about this, too. If it seemed to work for you then that's interesting and it would be good to see others give it a go, too. I wonder how long-lasting a fix it would be.

[mrmahdi]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

I've read about this, too. If it seemed to work for you then that's interesting and it would be good to see others give it a go, too. I wonder how long-lasting a fix it would be.

Good question. If it’s just a lubricant issue, it might be long lasting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Blanch]

Hot water makes you pee.

[881]

So, under cold water if it’s fast?

[mrmahdi]

Originally Posted by 881

So, under cold water if it’s fast?

I know with my Datejust 41 it’s slower in colder weather. But once it’s warm again, it will go heck to previous speeds.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[saxo3]

Migration of lubricants and epilames has been discussed as a possibility to explain the 32xx low amplitude issue. But … I can't see that a rather high temperature would reverse such migration effect, i.e., why, after migration, lubricants would move back to their required locations? The contrary could happen with too high temperature, lubricants migrate all over the caliber?

But who knows, a small fraction of lubicrants might migrate back to completely dry caliber locations yielding to a temporary improvement. For this to happen many properties would play a role, including temperature and duration, caliber geometry, physical prooerties of the lubricants and many more. Tribology is a very complex physics topic.

[mrmahdi]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Migration of lubricants and epilames has been discussed as a possibility to explain the 32xx low amplitude issue. But … I can't see that a rather high temperature would reverse such migration effect, i.e., why, after migration, lubricants would move back to their required locations? The contrary could happen with too high temperature, lubricants migrate all over the caliber?

But who knows, a small fraction of lubicrants might migrate back to completely dry caliber locations yielding to a temporary improvement. For this to happen many properties would play a role, including temperature and duration, caliber geometry, physical prooerties of the lubricants and many more. Tribology is a very complex physics topic.

While I’m not advocating this “hot water” approach to dealing with a slow 32xxx movement, I do wonder if the apparent “fix” will be long term or short term.

And why are 32xx movements plagued with this issue?

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by mrmahdi

While I’m not advocating this “hot water” approach to dealing with a slow 32xxx movement …

I understood this.

Originally Posted by mrmahdi

…I do wonder if the apparent “fix” will be long term or short term.

A 32xx can run very accurately and with -2/+2 sec/day (precision) but already or, in your case, still have the low amplitude issue! Measure the amplitudes in all horizontal and vertical positions with a timegrapher. That's the only way you can check it yourself. It would be nice to report the results in the long 32xx thread.

[mrmahdi]

Originally Posted by saxo3

I understood this.

A 32xx can run very accurately and with -2/+2 sec/day (precision) but already or, in your case, still have the low amplitude issue! Measure the amplitudes in all horizontal and vertical positions with a timegrapher. That's the only way you can check it yourself. It would be nice to report the results in the long 32xx thread.

Since I don’t have a time grapher, I might visit a watchmaker to see if he can run my watch on one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by mrmahdi

Since I don’t have a time grapher, I might visit a watchmaker to see if he can run my watch on one.

Buy a Weishi 1900 model for about 200 USD?

Measurement should be done after full winding (t = 0) and 24 hours later, without moving the watch in between.

[Jackie Daytona]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Migration of lubricants and epilames has been discussed as a possibility to explain the 32xx low amplitude issue. But … I can't see that a rather high temperature would reverse such migration effect, i.e., why, after migration, lubricants would move back to their required locations? The contrary could happen with too high temperature, lubricants migrate all over the caliber?

But who knows, a small fraction of lubicrants might migrate back to completely dry caliber locations yielding to a temporary improvement. For this to happen many properties would play a role, including temperature and duration, caliber geometry, physical prooerties of the lubricants and many more. Tribology is a very complex physics topic.

To your point, my Datejust 41 just came back from service and this is exactly what they cited, the migration of lubricants.

They claimed that I had banged the crown into something very hard and that is the reason it occurred. They cited the lubricants being out of place as evidence of me banging into something. I doubt that actually occurred, however there was no damage to the crown noted by either myself or the AD before we sent it. Additionally, if the watch is so delicate that they can cite that particularly it makes me a bit curious.

But a full service for $40. I’ll take it I guess….

[Pepperjack]

Originally Posted by Jackie Daytona

To your point, my Datejust 41 just came back from service and this is exactly what they cited, the migration of lubricants.

They claimed that I had banged the crown into something very hard and that is the reason it occurred. They cited the lubricants being out of place as evidence of me banging into something. I doubt that actually occurred, however there was no damage to the crown noted by either myself or the AD before we sent it. Additionally, if the watch is so delicate that they can cite that particularly it makes me a bit curious.

But a full service for $40. I’ll take it I guess….

What was the $40 for, if you don't mind my asking?

[Jackie Daytona]

Originally Posted by Pepperjack

What was the $40 for, if you don't mind my asking?

No worries at all.

I believe they stated to replace the crown tube. The receipt was kinda vague even honestly. I’ll look again in a moment. Essentially they said they would service for free as long as I paid for whatever with the crown was mysteriously damaged.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Jackie Daytona

…They cited the lubricants being out of place as evidence of me banging into something...

[mrmahdi]

Originally Posted by Jackie Daytona

To your point, my Datejust 41 just came back from service and this is exactly what they cited, the migration of lubricants.

They claimed that I had banged the crown into something very hard and that is the reason it occurred. They cited the lubricants being out of place as evidence of me banging into something. I doubt that actually occurred, however there was no damage to the crown noted by either myself or the AD before we sent it. Additionally, if the watch is so delicate that they can cite that particularly it makes me a bit curious.

But a full service for $40. I’ll take it I guess….

Is your watch being serviced by Rolex or by an independent watchmaker?

[Jackie Daytona]

Originally Posted by Pepperjack

What was the $40 for, if you don't mind my asking?

Unfortunately, my AD sort of shorthanded the receipt. It just states sent to RSC for service. I can’t recall completely the details my SA said unfortunately.

Originally Posted by mrmahdi

Is your watch being serviced by Rolex or by an independent watchmaker?

It went to RSC.

[Gearjockey]

I think what some are saying on here is that Rolex movements have now become cold blooded and that is BACKWARDS evolution.

[alphadweller]

I did the opposite once, froze my Rolex for 1 hour. As a result, it lost 2s, or slowed down at a rate of 48 s/d.

The watch didn't seem to suffer damage as it's still running normally, keeping the same deviation rates of +2.5 s/d when worn and +1 s/d in 9up resting position.

This was done out of curiosity to test the resistance of the movement to extreme cold and check the effect on deviation. I'm surprised the movement was still ticking fine and the second hand moving while the watch looked frozen. Also, I didn't expect it to slow down that much (2s) in just 1h of being exposed to a freezing temperature.

This was done in the name of science, I'm happy with the result but I shall not repeat the experiment. So now that you know, no need for anyone to try that kind of stunt at home.

[winst]

Originally Posted by alphadweller

I did the opposite once, froze my Rolex for 1 hour. As a result, it lost 2s, or slowed down at a rate of 48 s/d.

The watch didn't seem to suffer damage as it's still running normally, keeping the same deviation rates of +2.5 s/d when worn and +1 s/d in 9up resting position.

This was done out of curiosity to test the resistance of the movement to extreme cold and check the effect on deviation. I'm surprised the movement was still ticking fine and the second hand moving while the watch looked frozen. Also, I didn't expect it to slow down that much (2s) in just 1h of being exposed to a freezing temperature.

This was done in the name of science, I'm happy with the result but I shall not repeat the experiment. So now that you know, no need for anyone to try that kind of stunt at home.

Really Cool!