The 3235 Movement and The Fix (3 years out)

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by DramaTurtle

My 2010 16570 with 3186 keeps perfect time and has never been opened. These seem to be big shoes for the 32xx movements to fill.

True enough.
They are indeed big shoes to fill and I hope that one day the 32xx movements are held in equally high regard.
30xx, 31xx, 4130 and 9001 are great
Not entirely perfect, but still the sort of thing a manufacturer can hang their hat on

[georgekart]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Interesting, I encourage to do systematic tests and document data taken with your 3135 caliber. When did you buy this watch?

If you have no timegrapher but are anyhow interested technically, you could get the "Watch Tuner Timegrapher App". A bit tricky to use, but it works to get an idea about rates, amplitudes, and beat errors.

You can see that "the audience" is split here

My DJ41 was acquired in August 2019. I have just set the time and we'll see what happens in 2 days time. This app doesn't exist on Android so I found some other apps with the same functionality. I do have a backup iPhone so I might install that app on there. We'll see.

[alphadweller]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Interesting, I encourage to do systematic tests and document data taken with your 3235 caliber. When did you buy this watch?

If you have no timegrapher but are anyhow interested technically, you could get the "Watch Tuner Timegrapher App". A bit tricky to use, but it works to get an idea about rates, amplitudes, and beat errors.

You can see that "the audience" is split here

Any decent timegrapher you might recommend?

My SD43 went progressively from - 0.6 s/d to - 6 s/d on average in a span of 11 months (I do a full wind and a change position every 24h and this is my latest reading: -7 CU, -8 CD, -4 HU, -6 HD).

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by alphadweller

Any decent timegrapher you might recommend?

My SD43 went progressively from - 0.6 s/d to - 6 s/d on average in a span of 11 months (I do a full wind and a change position every 24h and this is my latest reading: -7 CU, -8 CD, -4 HU, -6 HD).

If you search in Google you will find several, depends on your budget.
Witschi (Switzerland), as used by Rolex, is probably the best, but very expensive.

[georgekart]

Originally Posted by Dirt

I'm not following you.
But it seems as though you're looking for a problem.
I urge you to simply keep the watch fully wound and wear it whilst checking the timekeeping. Do this after allowing it to run down and completely stop

I did this, but it runs fine. Let's see how it does when not fully wound. Maybe I have an issue where I can't take a watch off for a couple days and put it back without re-setting time. Would make it work wrong (and defeat the purpose of power reserve).

[TheVTCGuy]

I tried an experiment with my Sub41. It runs exactly 1.33 seconds slow per day, has since I purchased it December 10; I wear it pretty much 24/7. I reset it to the international clock time, left it face up on my nightstand for 24 hours; it was +1 second. So, at least so far, I am very happy with the accuracy. I will be checking in over the next few months.

[MRPWRPATX21]

It would seem that with hundreds of thousands of 32xx movements sold each year the past few years, there should be tens or hundreds of thousands of these stories by now if the movement was really faulty from a complete design perspective? Please excuse my ignorance if I missed those...

[sheldonsmith]

There’s plenty of discussion on this issue at https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=728169

Perhaps the moderator can merge the threads.

Originally Posted by sevykor

This “3 year out” thread was started with an intention to show that the issue with the 3235, while similar in subject matter to the “2 year out” thread, occurred three times. I feel it is important to make note of the fact that slowing in timekeeping often begins between the 9th and 11th month post purchase or COA service. For the first 9 months, the 3235 was very precise with barely any variance observed (very impressive to say the least). However, as I have learned, it was not an indicator as to the long-term reliability of the movement.

Oh, belay my last then. I did not realize the intent of a 3-year thread.

~ Sheldon

[Strad]

I found a very interesting article on the 3135 vs. 3235. If this is common knowledge and has been discussed, I apologize.

https://quillandpad.com/2019/11/19/w...ich-is-better/

So we have 90% new components. One of the noted problems with this movement was/is "seconds wheel pivot is dry on the dial side... Causing extra friction and wear which lowers amplitude and causes timekeeping issues." - Bas

Is this just an issue with the pivot not being lubricated? No, according to Bas there are other issues.

Is this is the first time that Rolex has used a longer mainspring in a barrel with a thinner wall? Doesn't the amplitude come from the mainspring in conjunction with other newly designed components?

Let's assume that this is a real problem and not just something that is being experienced by some very observant watch aficionados. Let's also assume that they know about the problem. Maybe adjusting the interrelationships among the 90% new parts isn't that easy. Maybe it's taking a long time because they haven't figured out the best way to solve the problem.

This type of thing happens in manufacturing a lot.

[Annan]

Originally Posted by Strad

I found a very interesting article on the 3135 vs. 3235. If this is common knowledge and has been discussed, I apologize.

https://quillandpad.com/2019/11/19/w...ich-is-better/

So we have 90% new components. One of the noted problems with this movement was/is "seconds wheel pivot is dry on the dial side... Causing extra friction and wear which lowers amplitude and causes timekeeping issues." - Bas

Is this just an issue with the pivot not being lubricated? No, according to Bas there are other issues.

Is this is the first time that Rolex has used a longer mainspring in a barrel with a thinner wall? Doesn't the amplitude come from the mainspring in conjunction with other newly designed components?

Let's assume that this is a real problem and not just something that is being experienced by some very observant watch aficionados. Let's also assume that they know about the problem. Maybe adjusting the interrelationships among the 90% new parts isn't that easy. Maybe it's taking a long time because they haven't figured out the best way to solve the problem.

This type of thing happens in manufacturing a lot.

Yes, according to Bas (whose opinion I trust and value) this is more than a lubrication issue. He and some watchmaker colleagues all feel there is a minor design issue that causes excess wear/friction on the pivot/long axle. If I understand correctly this is an area that should not normally require lubrication to begin with. However, lubrication does have an effect and provides a temporary fix while it temporarily counteracts the friction.

[goodolejr]

Originally Posted by Annan

Yes, according to Bas (whose opinion I trust and value) this is more than a lubrication issue. He and some watchmaker colleagues all feel there is a minor design issue that causes excess wear/friction on the pivot/long axle. If I understand correctly this is an area that should not normally require lubrication to begin with. However, lubrication does have an effect and provides a temporary fix while it temporarily counteracts the friction.

This is pin / sticky worthy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Annan]

Originally Posted by goodolejr

This is pin / sticky worthy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Please be aware I am not a watchmaker, have no special technical insight and certainly do not speak for Bas. I'm just stating my understanding based on information shared by Bas in past threads on TRF. Please do your own search. Regardless, I stand by what I say based upon personal experience with two 3235 movements. This makes ultimate sense to me and explains a great deal about the "issue".

[EEpro]

Originally Posted by MRPWRPATX21

It would seem that with hundreds of thousands of 32xx movements sold each year the past few years, there should be tens or hundreds of thousands of these stories by now if the movement was really faulty from a complete design perspective? Please excuse my ignorance if I missed those...

You have to multiply that by probability of detection. If my wife's watch were losing 7-15 seconds per day neither of us would notice because we don't care to check. I suspect 90%+ of Rolex buyers fall into the luxury jewelry / don't care category.

[doramas]

Long live the old 3135.
I wouldn't trade a 3135 for a 3235, no way.

[saxo3]

Everybody interested in data is invited to join here too:
https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=786299

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by doramas

I wouldn't trade a 3135 for a 3235, no way.

Not at this stage anyway.
Even though other movements have had some rough starts, they were addressed in a timely manner.
This business with the 32xx movement has some cause for concern for the consumer.
After all it currently doesn't seem to meet the bulk of the basic requirements or guarantees of a Rolex movement, as laid out by Rolex in their very own marketing material

Perhaps Rolex will eventually sort it out but the nature of the problem is indeed perplexing.
To use the 31xx as a yardstick which was in production for around 30 years.
This "new" movement is now potentially 1/5 th of it's way through it's life cycle with no clear sign of being resolved to an acceptable standard

Hopeful we remain

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by EEpro

You have to multiply that by probability of detection. If my wife's watch were losing 7-15 seconds per day neither of us would notice because we don't care to check. I suspect 90%+ of Rolex buyers fall into the luxury jewelry / don't care category.

Yes, evidently there is that factor.

With all these people out there discovering mechanical watches through this renaisance after the near decimation by the quartz crisis.
There are those who are perplexed at why the hands turn in the opposite direction to how "they should" when setting the time on their Rolex. Is it normal?
My date doesn't change right on Midnight. What's wrong with my watch?
My date changes at Midday. What's wrong with my watch?
How can I tell if my watch is fully wound up?
How many turns of the crown are required to fully wind my watch?
How do I synch the time on my watch to the reference time?
How do I check the accuracy of my watch? What app?
How do I synch the seconds hand to the minute hand so that they line up on the minute marks?
Why doesn't my crown line up when I screw it in?
How tight do I have to screw the crown down?
How do I adjust the clasp so it fits my wrist better?
My brand new watch stops after a few days of wearing it.
Why is it so? It was fine when I took delivery of it at the dealer
There are others, but it's a prime example of the demographic.

With this as a backdrop, it leads us to somewhere else
With the rather adhoc poll that's currently running on the matter.
How many people even "know" or care what movement they have in their watch without taking the time or caring about it without taking the time to look it up?
I posit, that there are plenty for whom it is not an issue what movement their watch has.
After all it's a Rowlex, and it's the latest, which must naturally be "the very best" and they possibly wouldn't even bother or think to check the timekeeping up front or periodically.
If their watch was running poorly they simply wouldn't know

[Jack T]

There are a number of very reliable, very durable, tried and true movements supplied by third party manufacturers, and I have a couple of such watches. This can undermine the panache of an in house movement, and if it is as extensive as suggested, tarnish Rolex' reputation of tank like reliability.
Fortunately I can sit this one out for a while, my stable is for the moment (and my wallet is empty!!)

[peterskinner]

Originally Posted by Annan

Yes, according to Bas (whose opinion I trust and value) this is more than a lubrication issue. He and some watchmaker colleagues all feel there is a minor design issue that causes excess wear/friction on the pivot/long axle. If I understand correctly this is an area that should not normally require lubrication to begin with. However, lubrication does have an effect and provides a temporary fix while it temporarily counteracts the friction.

And you think that years after the launch, Rolex wouldn’t have fixed such an issue? Are they supposed to be asleep or incompetent?

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Jack T

There are a number of very reliable, very durable, tried and true movements supplied by third party manufacturers, and I have a couple of such watches. This can undermine the panache of an in house movement, and if it is as extensive as suggested, tarnish Rolex' reputation of tank like reliability.
Fortunately I can sit this one out for a while, my stable is for the moment (and my wallet is empty!!)

That'll do it

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by peterskinner

Are they supposed to be asleep or incompetent?

As it currently stands, I imagine neither.

But not that far back, they may have been caught having a little Nanna nap when another manufacturer started to perfect their strategy in the race to the top

[Annan]

Originally Posted by peterskinner

And you think that years after the launch, Rolex wouldn’t have fixed such an issue? Are they supposed to be asleep or incompetent?

That's a question you need to ask Rolex. I have personal experience with two DJ4s so have my own opinion.

[yoniman]

Originally Posted by doramas

Long live the old 3135.

I wouldn't trade a 3135 for a 3235, no way.

Yes!

It's all about health, happiness & family. The rest are just necessary inconveniences we have to deal with.

[Tridor]

I am very happy to have a 3055 and two 3135s. I never thought that the 32xx series was ready for prime time, and have avoided it purposely. I hope that Rolex discovers a permanent fix instead of insisting that a problem doesn't exist. Unfortunately, I doubt that will happen.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Tridor

I am very happy to have a 3055 and two 3135s. I never thought that the 32xx series was ready for prime time, and have avoided it purposely. I hope that Rolex discovers a permanent fix instead of insisting that a problem doesn't exist. Unfortunately, I doubt that will happen.

This
One question: why did you never think that the 32xx series was ready for prime time?

[Macnavara]

Originally Posted by Dirt

True enough.
They are indeed big shoes to fill and I hope that one day the 32xx movements are held in equally high regard.
30xx, 31xx, 4130 and 9001 are great
Not entirely perfect, but still the sort of thing a manufacturer can hang their hat on

My 116500ln was loosing 8 secs a-day so it not just newer movements with issues...been back twice in as many months.....ive got a few of the newer movements and have started to worry a little about the future.
So far my 126710 blro is the most accurate watch ive ever owned but i dont wear it very often so who knows

[Mrngrz46]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Sorry to say, but the problem of all these 32xx movement threads is that not enough facts and timegrapher data are shared.
This topic is interesting and should be discussed in a tech forum, well separated from places where people only reply speculations or don't care.
Understanding and analyzing neasurement data would be also good, for example the difference between accuracy and precision.

No need to make it so complicated. There is no point discuss the difference between accuracy and precision. We are not doing PhD or whatever. Despite that the difference you learn at middle school...but this is another story.

Is enough to check if a watch respect the cosc certificate. While maybe not everyone has a dato graph at home, for sure everyone after 1 week can easily check how many minutes the watch is off.

People for decades wear 31xx movement and never an issue.
Now “someone” notice 32xx issue.

The real interesting factor is only the statistics to understand if is a real lemon.

[Nikrnic]

So far so good with mine. I thought this problem was only with the early ones. I bought my DJ41 new from my AD on 9/2018 and haven't noticed any problems. I don't care for the backwards stem direction while setting the time like on Tudors but other than that I love the watch.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Mrngrz46

No need to make it so complicated. There is no point discuss the difference between accuracy and precision. We are not doing PhD or whatever. Despite that the difference you learn at middle school...but this is another story.

Is enough to check if a watch respect the cosc certificate. While maybe not everyone has a dato graph at home, for sure everyone after 1 week can easily check how many minutes the watch is off.

People for decades wear 31xx movement and never an issue.
Now “someone” notice 32xx issue.

The real interesting factor is only the statistics to understand if is a real lemon.

Excellent approach; the Vogel-Strauss method has always been good.

[WalterE]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Excellent approach; the Vogel-Strauss method has always been good.