Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirt
The poll is the best set of numbers we have available to us.
|
Yes, but I draw different conclusions than you and others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirt
As most people are drawn to this thread and the thread title spells out its intent, I believe it's entirely reasonable to refer to it or draw conclusions based on the figures.
|
The intention of the OP and me was to have a data-based discussion on the 32xx topic, which was heavily bombarded by some prominent member who did not deliver one single fact, others joined him as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirt
As has been discussed in this thread and others that relate to the issue, nobody can possibly know what the actual figure is …
|
Correct, because it depends on (what I call) the 32xx defect rate, which is not known to us.
About the poll numbers: in my view these numbers are totally misleading since many of the "no-problem voters" did not participate with one single post in this thread and also never proofed that their 32xx watches have NO problem with loo low amplitudes. It's easy to vote "no problem" and move on without any contribution and without any data input.
Therefore, I believe that the defect rate is MUCH higher than the 29.6 % taken from the poll as of today.
Let's take your approximate 75 % of "good" 32xx movements and about 25 % of "bad" 32xx movements.
Now have a look at my post
3860 and explain how one member (Easy_E) can own 6 (out of 8
*) watches with the well-known 32xx low amplitude issue.
Explain that to me, with numbers, assuming that the defect rate only is about 25%.
*6 out of 8 was in April 2023. As of today, Easy_E had owned 7 defective 32xx watches (out of 9 in total so far), see his
post #43 in another thread.