[Devildog]

Originally Posted by Dirt

Way more than a million 32xx movements in circulation, but they are over represented in terms of appearances at RSCs for ongoing timekeeping issues and in polls to that effect.
In comparison to the even greater numbers of 31xx movements that Rolex built a solid reputation on, the relevant number would be smaller.

I wonder what the perception of the movements would be if Rolex hadn't got ahead of themselves and gone for trumpeting the in-house and exclusive +2/-2 tolerance and 5 year warranty with 10 year service intervals to try and out do Omega
If Rolex were playing poker, they would've done their ass with a bluff like that.
It's a bit like bringing a knife to a gunfight in comparison. Even if it had the Rolex logo and name on the handle of the knife.

The sad part is that some people got caught and will continue to do so.
Also that all 6 digit Rolex watches are unfairly tarnished by the bad rep of what may lurk within, when not all 6 digit watches have a 32xx movement with some of the best of them also have 31xx movements and have done so since 2001.

Well said

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

It has nothing to do with what is acceptable to me and everything to do with what is objectively statistically meaningful.

I would agree that without knowing the total number of movements in circulation - or more correctly the total number of movements in regular use (as opposed to being in a safe or hardly worn) the poll result is not statistically representative of 32xx movements generally.

And as such it's incorrect to assume 25% of all 32xx movements are affected.

It could be significantly less than 25%. But equally, it could be significantly more and just not being picked up by owners who don't care.

We cannot establish that.

But the poll is meaningful. It means that circa 25% of those who responded out of 1400 had an actual issue with the 32xx movement. That in itself cannot simply be ignored just becase the result is not statistically relevant

Its also meaningful in that the issue is consistently the same for those movements that are affected.

Just because we cannot accurately establish the percentage of affected 32xx movements with statistical relevance (by total in use or by year of production) doesn't mean the issue should be dismissed as irrelevant (which many continue to do)

It does, however, appear that the issue is lessening (certainly from what Bas has reported he's seeing coming through the RSC he works in) but of course that information is not statistically relevant either