32xx movement problem poll and data thread

[SOG DIVER]

Originally Posted by maratka

**My humble opinion:** Unfortunately, I probably have to agree with you. Rolex is a very large company with surely competent engineers on board. If the problem hasn't been definitively solved in 6 years (or more?), it's likely that the solution somehow impacts the claims they've made (particularly regarding the power reserve). However, as we know, creating a movement with a 70-hour power reserve is not that difficult a task (considering we're talking about Rolex) and without losing accuracy. But I think the solution to this problem requires such a substantial change to the current design that most parts would need to be replaced, and it just wouldn't be the same anymore. Hence, I conclude that you are right, and there will either be a deep modernization or a new caliber (or they'll call this modernization a new caliber :) ). If we assume that fixing this defect involves replacing, say, 80% of the parts (I'm just making this up), then such an operation could likely only be done at the factory, which is essentially assembling new watches with a new mechanism that requires complex quality control and a lot of time. Currently, Rolex is focused on producing and selling rather than halting production to deal with millions of already released calibers. Therefore, I am almost certain that there will be no solution to this problem. They will continue with "quick" repairs that do not require large production capacities, which are much more needed for new watches. This conclusion makes me think that, unfortunately, the only options left are to either endure the problem and constantly take them to the service center, buy a 3135, or wait for the new generation.

I have been following this 32XX movement issue for awhile, and the 70-hour power reserve mentioned by MARATKA piqued interest and crossed a
separate research path that I am engaged in on the Blancpain 1315 caliber compared to recent Rolex calibers.
Keeping it VERY brief as this is/is not tangential to the 32xx caliber.
BUT the 1315 caliber is known to retain a 100+-hour power reserve while delivering startling accuracy over time.
It does invite a comparison of Rolex 3135 -32xx- and BP 1315 movements
as to their respective qualities, an activity that I am currently
engaged in. {Please excuse this insertion, in the interest of horological
research.} SD

[Easy E]

Originally Posted by SOG DIVER

I have been following this 32XX movement issue for awhile, and the 70-hour power reserve mentioned by MARATKA piqued interest and crossed a
separate research path that I am engaged in on the Blancpain 1315 caliber compared to recent Rolex calibers.
Keeping it VERY brief as this is/is not tangential to the 32xx caliber.
BUT the 1315 caliber is known to retain a 100+-hour power reserve while delivering startling accuracy over time.
It does invite a comparison of Rolex 3135 -32xx- and BP 1315 movements
as to their respective qualities, an activity that I am currently
engaged in. {Please excuse this insertion, in the interest of horological
research.} SD

Probably a topic for a separate thread, but the 1315 with 3 barrels brings the heat.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by SOG DIVER

I have been following this 32XX movement issue for awhile, and the 70-hour power reserve mentioned by MARATKA piqued interest and crossed a
separate research path that I am engaged in on the Blancpain 1315 caliber compared to recent Rolex calibers.
Keeping it VERY brief as this is/is not tangential to the 32xx caliber.
BUT the 1315 caliber is known to retain a 100+-hour power reserve while delivering startling accuracy over time.
It does invite a comparison of Rolex 3135 -32xx- and BP 1315 movements
as to their respective qualities, an activity that I am currently
engaged in. {Please excuse this insertion, in the interest of horological
research.} SD

The Blancpain caliber 1315 is a marvel compared to the Rolex 32xx calibers. The 120 h power reserve of the 1315, achieved with 3 barrels, beats by far the 31xx (44 h) and 32xx (70 h). Don't get me started on the 1315 accuracy.

[digiwatch]

One month old Submariner 124060. If the average is within Rolex specs, and each position individually is within COSC specs, that means it’s all good?

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by digiwatch

One month old Submariner 124060. If the average is within Rolex specs, and each position individually is within COSC specs, that means it’s all good?

Your new 32xx watch looks perfect after full winding. What you call "Sigma" is normally the "Delta". You continue to measure along the power reserve?

PS: "perfect" because 4 of the 5 rates are positive and one position (3U) is negative. With such a caliber regulation you are able to compensate, either gain or loss during a day, by choosing an appropriate rest position overnight. In addition, the 2 horizontal and 3 vertical amplitudes are very similar, which is the result of a very good movement regulation, including a positive X (average rate).

[digiwatch]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Your new 32xx watch looks perfect after full winding. What you call "Sigma" is normally the "Delta". You continue to measure along the power reserve?

PS: "perfect" because 4 of the 5 rates are positive and one position (3U) is negative. With such a caliber regulation you are able to compensate, either gain or loss during a day, by choosing an appropriate rest position overnight. In addition, the 2 horizontal and 3 vertical amplitudes are very similar, which is the result of a very good movement regulation, including a positive X (average rate).

Thanks saxo3! I'll repeat the test after 24 hours.

So 12U is not regulated by Rolex, right? Because the rate in that position was -5.5 s/d, amp was 234 deg and beat error was 0.2 ms.

Out of curiosity I also did the measurements for our almost 2 years old OP34 (2232) and our 1 year old DJ31 (2236):

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by digiwatch

One month old Submariner 124060. If the average is within Rolex specs, and each position individually is within COSC specs, that means it’s all good?

Rolex does not mention COSC in their timing tolerances for the basic (32xx) movement.

The paper copy below was posted 2 years ago in this thread. Look at the 1st criterion for the rate.

The maximum Delta is 9 s/d, for COSC this would be 10 s/d.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by digiwatch

Thanks saxo3! I'll repeat the test after 24 hours.

Good, you should not move the watch in-between (you certainly know). Keep it in DU position. You could continue taking measurements after 12,24,36,48,60 hours to get an idea about the amplitudes along the power reserve, as others have done before in this thread.

Originally Posted by digiwatch

So 12U is not regulated by Rolex, right? Because the rate in that position was -5.5 s/d, amp was 234 deg and beat error was 0.2 ms.

Correct, look above, this are the instructions given by Rolex SA: Test positions for the watch (or movement)

Originally Posted by digiwatch

Out of curiosity I also did the measurements for our almost 2 years old OP34 (2232) and our 1 year old DJ31 (2236):

Both caliber data sets look very good.
Sigma = Delta