ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
12 May 2024, 06:36 AM | #91 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Real Name: Scott
Location: UK
Watch: ^^^ for now
Posts: 5,723
|
New Sub 126040 - 3230 loosing time
Quote:
Ah my friend. You are comparing apples with, well, rocks. There is a reason your wife didn’t come with a written specification against which her performance can be measured. And that is because she doesn’t need one. Simply, she is always right. Therefore there can be no complaint because she has done nothing wrong. You should have know that. The responsibility is all on you. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Past: 6239 (yes, I know...), 16610, 16600, 116515, 116613LN, 126600, 126711 CHNR Present: 16600, 116509, Cartier Santos Green. |
|
12 May 2024, 06:39 AM | #92 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Real Name: Scott
Location: UK
Watch: ^^^ for now
Posts: 5,723
|
Quote:
And yet you commented. Where’s that multiple facepalm picture you always roll out - it’s quite appropriate here Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Past: 6239 (yes, I know...), 16610, 16600, 116515, 116613LN, 126600, 126711 CHNR Present: 16600, 116509, Cartier Santos Green. |
|
12 May 2024, 06:57 AM | #93 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2019
Real Name: Mark
Location: Southern England
Watch: DJ41 SubC SMPCcoax
Posts: 1,513
|
Quote:
It seems there are two people who are ALWAYS right: *His wife *Devil Dog What a thoroughly informative thread that has been and, I’m sure you’ll all agree one reason why we all love TRF so much. Thanks for taking the time to explain all that to us. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
12 May 2024, 07:01 AM | #94 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Middle Earth
Posts: 95
|
Quote:
Everything documented here is the exception and not the rule. The fact people keep suggesting there is a flaw with this movement series is pretty funny. Especially the whole "I'll only buy xxxx movement now" narrative. What is happening. But please...don't buy them so the rest of us have a shot at the AD |
|
12 May 2024, 08:02 AM | #95 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: .
Posts: 2,752
|
New Sub 126040 - 3230 loosing time
Q.E.D. All of this honorable member's argumentation and contradictions around this topic have now been completely dismantled by you, with facts, and proven to be useless and illogical individual pieces
|
12 May 2024, 08:52 AM | #96 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2023
Location: New Hampshire USA
Watch: 126610LN
Posts: 107
|
FWIW I picked up my Sub Date (3235) in Nov 22. Has been -1 / day ever since. Lay it dial up overnight which gains +1. It has never deviated from this.
|
12 May 2024, 09:15 AM | #97 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2023
Location: Pompano Beach, FL
Posts: 550
|
Quote:
__________________
Watches: More than I need, not as many as I want. |
|
12 May 2024, 09:38 AM | #98 | |
2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 X2 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Real Name: Kat
Location: Northern Ca, USA
Watch: 126233 Wimbledon T
Posts: 6,121
|
New Sub 126040 - 3230 loosing time
Quote:
I’m pretty sure everyone who frequents TRF is familiar with the problems some have had with their watches with 32xx movements. Personally, I’m not worried about it. Kat Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk |
|
12 May 2024, 09:48 AM | #99 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: USA
Posts: 402
|
|
12 May 2024, 10:08 AM | #100 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Underground
Posts: 2,283
|
Look at you lot, squabbling like seagulls fighting over a discarded french fry, while Rolex sits back, sipping fine champagne, and swimming in pools of cash.
|
12 May 2024, 07:13 PM | #101 | |
"TRF" Life Patron
Join Date: Jun 2005
Real Name: Peter
Location: Llanfairpwllgwyng
Watch: ing you.
Posts: 52,570
|
Quote:
Position Of Watch seconds Per Day this would still pass this precision -2+2 spec. Dial Up +2 Dial Down -1 6 o’clock +3 9 o’clock -4 3 o’clock +4
__________________
ICom Pro3 All posts are my own opinion and my opinion only. "The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop. Now is the only time you actually own the time, Place no faith in time, for the clock may soon be still for ever." Good Judgement comes from experience,experience comes from Bad Judgement,.Buy quality, cry once; buy cheap, cry again and again. www.mc0yad.club Second in command CEO and left handed watch winder |
|
12 May 2024, 09:44 PM | #102 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Brian (TBone)
Location: canada
Watch: es make me smile
Posts: 74,924
|
|
12 May 2024, 09:46 PM | #103 |
TechXpert
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Earth
Posts: 23,530
|
|
13 May 2024, 01:05 AM | #104 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 4,176
|
This might be the most boorish thread I have come across in recent time.
People can critique the fine print in Rolex marketing all they want, the +\-2 seconds is under a specific set of lab conditions and while many of their movements may continue to carry out this precision in the real world, sometimes and over time it may not to varying degrees of severity. The real problem it sounds like people have here is with Rolex advertising; good luck winning that battle. I have yet to own a single mechanical watch from a single brand that keeps absolute perfect time after a week or two if the watch is worn and used normally. If you want to take a watch to an RSC for losing a few seconds after a week; be my guest. Good luck winning the publicity war with what Rolex defines on their webpage. If your watch is severely out of spec, get it fixed. It happens. Has happened. Will continue to happen. These are all anecdotes that everyone here is presenting as factual evidence based flaws in a Rolex calibre. If there’s an endemic issue in the 32xx movement, what is it? What’s happening that something is going wrong? What’s the defect? What part of the movement is failing? Don’t tell me YOUR watch isn’t working. MINE are. What’s the critical flaw here? Anyone? |
13 May 2024, 01:16 AM | #105 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Real Name: Scott
Location: UK
Watch: ^^^ for now
Posts: 5,723
|
Quote:
This certification, unique to the Rolex Manufacture, guarantees an exceptional precision of –2/+2 seconds per day Thats an on an event (certification) something else applies (the guarantee of exceptional precision) or, once certified, precision of -2/+2 is guaranteed. Nothing to do with it only applying during testing under laboratory conditions. You can argue the definition of precision vs accuracy all day long. So let's see what the Oxford Dictionary defines it as, shall we? Precision the quality, condition, or fact of being exact and accurate. Exact and accurate. By definition, Rolex guarantees their (green seal) watches to be exact and accurate to within +/- 2 seconds per day. That it. No 'ifs", no "buts" and no "subject to" anything. If that's not what Rolex means, they would undoubtedly have written it differently. I've presented facts, documents, Rolex's own written statements and now a definition. You and Roddypeepa have presented nothing other than an assumption that Rolex "Superlative" certification is just the same as COSC but to a smaller margin.
__________________
Past: 6239 (yes, I know...), 16610, 16600, 116515, 116613LN, 126600, 126711 CHNR Present: 16600, 116509, Cartier Santos Green. |
|
13 May 2024, 01:20 AM | #106 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Real Name: Scott
Location: UK
Watch: ^^^ for now
Posts: 5,723
|
Quote:
It's not fine print. And it absolutely would stand up in law in my country. Go on then. If you are so certain (and don't understand the meaning of the word "guarantees") prove to us all that the +/- 2spd only applies to a specific set of lab conditions.
__________________
Past: 6239 (yes, I know...), 16610, 16600, 116515, 116613LN, 126600, 126711 CHNR Present: 16600, 116509, Cartier Santos Green. |
|
13 May 2024, 01:21 AM | #107 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Real Name: Scott
Location: UK
Watch: ^^^ for now
Posts: 5,723
|
__________________
Past: 6239 (yes, I know...), 16610, 16600, 116515, 116613LN, 126600, 126711 CHNR Present: 16600, 116509, Cartier Santos Green. |
13 May 2024, 01:25 AM | #108 | |
"TRF" Life Patron
Join Date: Jun 2005
Real Name: Peter
Location: Llanfairpwllgwyng
Watch: ing you.
Posts: 52,570
|
Quote:
__________________
ICom Pro3 All posts are my own opinion and my opinion only. "The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop. Now is the only time you actually own the time, Place no faith in time, for the clock may soon be still for ever." Good Judgement comes from experience,experience comes from Bad Judgement,.Buy quality, cry once; buy cheap, cry again and again. www.mc0yad.club Second in command CEO and left handed watch winder |
|
13 May 2024, 01:43 AM | #109 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Real Name: Scott
Location: UK
Watch: ^^^ for now
Posts: 5,723
|
Quote:
Nah mate. I’m not always right. I’ve just presented the facts as they are available. Rather than running with assumptions Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Past: 6239 (yes, I know...), 16610, 16600, 116515, 116613LN, 126600, 126711 CHNR Present: 16600, 116509, Cartier Santos Green. |
|
13 May 2024, 01:46 AM | #110 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Real Name: Scott
Location: UK
Watch: ^^^ for now
Posts: 5,723
|
Quote:
We know. No one is suing Rolex. No one will get compensation. You’re just being silly now Peter. Consumers will (and are) getting regulation under warranty however. Those that care enough to ask for it Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Past: 6239 (yes, I know...), 16610, 16600, 116515, 116613LN, 126600, 126711 CHNR Present: 16600, 116509, Cartier Santos Green. |
|
13 May 2024, 02:02 AM | #111 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Brian (TBone)
Location: canada
Watch: es make me smile
Posts: 74,924
|
Quote:
In all honesty, Rolex painted themselves into a corner with this advertised spec. I’d hazard a guess that the vast majority of owners don’t have a clue if their watch isn’t keeping time with +2/-2 seconds a day. I certainly don’t. That said, to those that care enough to check, then it would appear as though the new Rolex 32xx movements aren’t the way to go or at the very least they are a big gamble, one which I personally wouldn’t be willing to take based on the data thread |
|
13 May 2024, 02:20 AM | #112 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2019
Real Name: Mark
Location: Southern England
Watch: DJ41 SubC SMPCcoax
Posts: 1,513
|
New Sub 126040 - 3230 losing time
Quote:
This certainly isn’t the first time that this has been discussed on here: https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=706110 to name but one. I think that if I have this right, COSC has an average daily rate of plus 6 to minus 4 tested over a number of positions, at a range of temperatures and so on. Devil is correct in that I/ Peter cannot prove that “superlative” is not an absolute guarantee of within 2 seconds of zero, all the time, with full range of mainspring wind and at any point within 5 years of purchase. However, in the real world these will be tested on machine, after casing, and with a range positions and other conditions and averaged. I’d bet my house on it but at the end of the day, it doesn’t really matter if the OP’s watch is genuinely playing up then take it in. However, I advised watch it for a while and see about different testing positions, give it a full wind etc is all sensible advice. No need to jump the gun… I cannot prove this is how it is done when Rolex are testing “superlative”but common sense would dictate that in any manufacturing process quality control would mean a range of tests, an average is taken and we move on. I do now agree with him that anyone has the right to take a watch in if it’s even a tiny fraction of a second outside this range but as I’ve said before I do not think that in a lot of cases any actual work would get done once they’ve put it on one of their timing machines and made a judgement. But just because it is a very small margin outside of this in every day conditions we don’t know about this individual case. The OP asked a question, I and others chipped in with our advice. My advice is no less relevant than Devil’s. He argues well but in the whole time I have been in to this hobby that is my understanding. It would actually be very unreasonable for any one of us to expect a watch to be plus minus two for 5 years. It doesn’t mean it can’t and doesn’t happen but it’s a marvel that in the vast majority of cases they run to well within basic COSC standards that whole time. Some of the people reading this thread with their popcorn out will agree with him, some with Padi and some couldn’t give a damn either way. One of the other posters is right - this is becoming extremely boorish which I regret and was never my intention. I will reiterate what I meant yesterday: you have argued your point very well from a legal point of view. But you don’t know either how Rolex come to the superlative standard unless you are keeping your cards very close to your chest. I don’t care one jot about the legalities of it - I’m interested in watchmaking and horology in general, not value, not marketing, not legal speak, not people wanting to massage their egos by catching well meaning posters out with legalities or bamboozling some others with legal jargon and carefully pasted statements from the Rolex website. That’s why I’m here. I recently took a break from the forum because it had become stale with no availability, lots of boring no availability posts, loads of should I ask my AD x or y, loads of flexing incomings. What I’d really like to see is a Rolex service centre technician or similar come on here and give us the truth because I think both sides of the argument raise some very interesting technical questions - exactly the kind we are interested in answering/hearing. I think most of us who have been around a while, including you like discussing the technical side of the hobby much more than all the other value, availability nonsense. Long may that continue. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
13 May 2024, 02:32 AM | #113 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 4,176
|
Quote:
I am not a technical expert, but I can think critically. Until someone can tell me exactly what the problem with the 32xx movement is, it's all just anecdote. Maybe it's the physician in me, but diagnose the problem. If there's an issue, I'd be the first to send all of my pieces with this movement back to Rolex for the fix. The problem is, no one can. Do I see a trend wherein my Omega watches tend to keep tighter time than my Rolex pieces? Yes. This hasn't changed from when I started collecting seriously in 2008. I have 32xx movements from the introduction of the Datejust 41 which I purchased in 2017 all the way through a 126613LB I purchased two months ago. This also includes a 124060 and 126710BLRO. Not a single piece has a single issue and certainly the older models should have shown problems by now based on the reports of some people. I say all of this to say not that other people's experiences aren't valid or worthy of correction under warranty. But to take those experiences and characterize them as an endemic issue just doesn't pass the same whiff test that the countless others whose references run perfect. My opinion, and purely my opinion, is that if you want to hold Rolex's feet to the fire on this issue; be by guest. You won't win, other that possibly getting your movement regulated. Which, by the way, there are an equal number of anecdotes of this occuring and people getting back watches that continue to run out of spec in a completely different fashion. |
|
13 May 2024, 02:35 AM | #114 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 4,176
|
Quote:
I do not have a single watch in my collection from numerous brands and ages that runs +2/-2 over several weeks of testing if worn "normally" (however we want to define that). These include watches that if you leave them on the timegrapher will run with +/-0 results. If that's Rolex screwing up with their own marketing making this a guarantee that people will cling to with unrealistic expectations then that IS on them. Thinking critically and with experience, I can easily see that to expect this is unrealistic. |
|
13 May 2024, 02:58 AM | #115 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 4,176
|
Quote:
What's tiring with these threads is the certainty with which people think their anecdote is fact, including my own. If people want to take it up with Rolex that their advertising doesn't hold up in real world use; be my guest. If you've been at his hobby for long enough, wear your watches normally, and think critically its very easy to see that regardless of what Rolex claims their watches can do, almost no brand can properly accomplish on a long enough timeline with normal wear and variation. |
|
13 May 2024, 02:59 AM | #116 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2019
Real Name: Mark
Location: Southern England
Watch: DJ41 SubC SMPCcoax
Posts: 1,513
|
Quote:
I couldn’t agree more Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
13 May 2024, 03:17 AM | #117 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 4,176
|
|
13 May 2024, 03:25 AM | #118 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Real Name: Michelle
Location: Canada/Florida
Watch: WG Breguet Typexx
Posts: 2,785
|
Quote:
|
|
13 May 2024, 04:10 AM | #119 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2019
Real Name: Mark
Location: Southern England
Watch: DJ41 SubC SMPCcoax
Posts: 1,513
|
|
13 May 2024, 05:47 AM | #120 |
2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 X2 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: GA
Posts: 4,572
|
No doubt. When you factor in the number of owners that have bought a Rolex as a special occasion watch to be worn maybe 4 times a year, those that never even bother to set the time, those that have no idea it’s even a mechanical timepiece, those that actually never wear theirs, those that simply do not care, etc. The big thread represents, imho, a very small subset of owners. But not knowing about a thing doesn’t make the thing nonexistent.
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.