The 3235 Movement and The Fix (2 years out)

[Davidt]

Anyway, my take on this is that it's a new movement and they often have teething problems. Ancouole of points:

1. I agree it's far from ideal that this issue is affecting a significant number of watches and it clearly is a real issue as detailed by Bas.
2. Despite what didferent people are claiming, we do not know the scale or reach of this issue. Rolex are about as secretive as it's gets and they won't ever publicly acknowledge this or indeed how widespread it is.
3. However, it's important to keep this in perspective. Most new movements have teething problems. The Coaxial from Omega that has been lauded as overtaking Rolex in several posts in this and other threads had major issues onnit release. It went though 3 (or was it 4?) versions initially as Omega tried for force the technology into what was essentially an ETA, then they finally redesigned it almost from the ground up. Guess what, it still had issues with premature wear to the barrels and worn jewels.
The fact is new movements go through revisions. The 5xx from Omega, one of the most robust and reliable automatic movements from the 50's and 60's is still getting revisions now. I'm sure the 32xx will be fine.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by DocOc

He may not be the nicest fellow in the world, but then again, neither am I. Not sure he said anything that justified ignoring him. But that’s just my opinion.

Thank you.
But I accept people get cancelled in a heartbeat in this modern world for all sorts of reasons.
Some valid some not.

In ways there's no such thing as right or wrong in this world, only public opinion

The crazy thing is that I agree with him. Up to a point.
And I have more in common with his views than I do your own.
Clearly he has been triggered and for that i am sorry. Up to a point.
He has an emotional attachment to elements of this discussion.
That is illogical

[sheldonsmith]

Originally Posted by Dirt

<snip>

The only two common things that come to mind for the older movements were a suseptability to being magnetized if one were unlucky. But it was very easily rectified by non-invasive measures once diagnosed.
The other was for the Rotor bearing to run dry and wear away at the post. But this was an operator problem in that their watch was usually not serviced in a timely manner.

<snip>

FWIW, there was the 3186/3187 hour hand spring that would break if the 12-hour hand was spun too rapidly/forcefully. Rolex addressed by directing Rolex watchmakers to replace the part with a redesigned heavier spring at the service interval (or at spring breakage).

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Davidt

Anyway, my take on this is that it's a new movement and they often have teething problems. Ancouole of points:

1. I agree it's far from ideal that this issue is affecting a significant number of watches and it clearly is a real issue as detailed by Bas.
2. Despite what didferent people are claiming, we do not know the scale or reach of this issue. Rolex are about as secretive as it's gets and they won't ever publicly acknowledge this or indeed how widespread it is.
3. However, it's important to keep this in perspective. Most new movements have teething problems. The Coaxial from Omega that has been lauded as overtaking Rolex in several posts in this and other threads had major issues onnit release. It went though 3 (or was it 4?) versions initially as Omega tried for force the technology into what was essentially an ETA, then they finally redesigned it almost from the ground up. Guess what, it still had issues with premature wear to the barrels and worn jewels.
The fact is new movements go through revisions. The 5xx from Omega, one of the most robust and reliable automatic movements from the 50's and 60's is still getting revisions now. I'm sure the 32xx will be fine.

Forever we remain hopeful.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by sheldonsmith

FWIW, there was the 3186/3187 hour hand spring that would break if the 12-hour hand was spun too rapidly/forcefully. Rolex addressed by directing Rolex watchmakers to replace the part with a redesigned heavier spring at the service interval (or at spring breakage).

Thankyou.
I wasn't prepared to go into it originally.
A problem which was very quickly resolved once identified

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

I am enjoying this thread much more now.

Goodness me.
Fascinating. What an extra ordinary attitude.
It appears though i have been well and truly cancelled.
And after the personal attack/slight upon my good name and all.
What's wrong with Dirt?

Oh well, I still value Old Mate's opinion regardless and won't ever reciprocate

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

After speaking with the watchmaker my perspective on this issue changed quite a bit. In reality, the most earth-shaking news would be if the 3235 did not have any known issues, as that would essentially make it something completely unique in the horological world (or even the broader mechanical world). Many have suggested these issues prove the superiority of the 3235 over the 3135, but as I stated that movement had and still has known issues. He also cited certain vintage Omegas which are still receiving part updates to address issues. Of course, if your beloved, and expensive, timepiece is running quite poorly none of these rationalizations will make it sting any less. And timing accuracy is a key part of NOT feeling like we are just buying ourselves expensive jewelry. There is great pride in owning a finely tuned machine that also looks great. If you have reason to doubt the mechanical soundness this surely degrades the relationship with the watch.

Agreed 100%
Well put

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by DocOc

He may not be the nicest fellow in the world, but then again, neither am I. Not sure he said anything that justified ignoring him. But that’s just my opinion.

And you’re entitled to it.

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by FTX I

Sheldon (minus4plus6) said here a few times he had trouble with his 126710BLRO and had to send to RSC three times if I'm not mistaken.

I just did a search, I don’t see any threads with this much fervor or complaints about the 3285. I really need Bas to weigh in on this but I am wondering if they could have the same issue(?). Is it the same design? And if so, why aren’t we hearing (multiple) complaints about that movement(?).

[Jack T]

Originally Posted by alphadweller

Agreed, I have no doubt Rolex will fix this once for all.

I have an Omega Planet Ocean, bought in 2005. This is one of the first bi-level coaxial movements, caliber 2500C. Never came across a single problem with it and I wore the watch daily 7 years straight. The only thing was after 11 years, it went from +2 s/d to - 3 s/d, still within COSC. I took it for an overhaul (not that I had to) and it came back super accurate again. They changed a bunch of parts (which they gave me back) including the escape wheel, so I guess it did need a service.

Coincidentally, I have the same PO with the 2500D movement, purchased in 2010, still runs near perfect, fit and finish are like new. I wear it a few days a month. Asked my AD if I should have it serviced, he said not unless it’s showing signs. It’s a great watch.

[fmc000]

Originally Posted by DocOc

Have you conducted a google search on this accuracy issue involving the 3235 movement? I have.

You know what I find?

This forum. Nothing else. Nowhere else on the web do I find complaints about the movement’s accuracy.

Look better. Hint: watchuseek.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

I just did a search, I don’t see any threads with this much fervor or complaints about the 3285. I really need Bas to weigh in on this but I am wondering if they could have the same issue(?). Is it the same design? And if so, why aren’t we hearing (multiple) complaints about that movement(?).

Hi,
The 3285 is also a very bad lemon!
Since you "really need Bas" you probably only believe him, hence I will not try to convince you with measurement data. You would be very surprised.
Cheers

[TswaneNguni]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Hi,
The 3285 is also a very bad lemon!
Since you "really need Bas" you probably only believe him, hence I will not try to convince you with measurement data. You would be very surprised.
Cheers

Lets hear it on the 3285 .......

The plot thickens .

[DocOc]

My DSSD 126660 is running at -1 sec/day.

I wore it most of the day and leave it dial-up on my dresser overnight.

Checked it using an iPhone app that is essentially a perfectly accurate stopwatch (ie it gets its time off of some nuclear clock). The error, be it gaining or losing time, comes from your ability to tap the button on the app exactly when the watch’s second hand reaches twelve. I think I accurate.

I’d be interested to check it with a timegrapher.

Regardless, it’s plenty accurate.

[TswaneNguni]

Originally Posted by DocOc

My DSSD 126660 is running at -1 sec/day.

I wore it most of the day and leave it dial-up on my dresser overnight.

Checked it using an iPhone app that is essentially a perfectly accurate stopwatch (ie it gets its time off of some nuclear clock). The error, be it gaining or losing time, comes from your ability to tap the button on the app exactly when the watch’s second hand reaches twelve. I think I accurate.

I’d be interested to check it with a timegrapher.

Regardless, it’s plenty accurate.

Try it dial down overnight ,you may just get it to zero .Worth a try

[Swiss Mad!]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

I just did a search, I don’t see any threads with this much fervor or complaints about the 3285. I really need Bas to weigh in on this but I am wondering if they could have the same issue(?). Is it the same design? And if so, why aren’t we hearing (multiple) complaints about that movement(?).

See my earlier post #126 regarding a recent issue I had with my GMT CHNR.

Not related to issues regarding time keeping, but an issue with the 3285 movement nonetheless.

Thanks


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[thorm]

I see in this thread that some claim it is very well documented on these forums that there is a problem, typically resting on one watchmaker's opinion. But I don't find that many threads about it. Anyone care to link me to some threads so that I can read about it, preferably with this "Bas" guy explaining. I saw 1 thread made by him, posted in this thread, but that's it.

And in that thread he explained that the problem is fixable, that it is "the first series of 32×× movements don't have lubricant at the seconds wheel pivot on the dial side, but will be fixed with a service" he also added that it is no need to worry about the 32-movement, it is not a "russian roulette" - so in which thread does he state that it is a design flaw of the movement? Has he changed his mind in later threads?

One question posed by some in this thread made some impression on me tho. If there is a problem with this movement that is due to a design flaw, and if Rolex "clearly knows about it", then why did they launch watches recently with this movement, and highlighting the movement too? Sounds strange to me.

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Hi,
The 3285 is also a very bad lemon!
Since you "really need Bas" you probably only believe him, hence I will not try to convince you with measurement data. You would be very surprised.
Cheers

Originally Posted by TswaneNguni

Lets hear it on the 3285 .......

The plot thickens .

Yes, by all means, present your evidence that the 3285 is a bad lemon, I’m interested in hearing it.

[Annan]

Originally Posted by thorm

I see in this thread that some claim it is very well documented on these forums that there is a problem, typically resting on one watchmaker's opinion. But I don't find that many threads about it. Anyone care to link me to some threads so that I can read about it, preferably with this "Bas" guy explaining. I saw 1 thread made by him, posted in this thread, but that's it.

And in that thread he explained that the problem is fixable, that it is "the first series of 32×× movements don't have lubricant at the seconds wheel pivot on the dial side, but will be fixed with a service" he also added that it is no need to worry about the 32-movement, it is not a "russian roulette" - so in which thread does he state that it is a design flaw of the movement? Has he changed his mind in later threads?

One question posed by some in this thread made some impression on me tho. If there is a problem with this movement that is due to a design flaw, and if Rolex "clearly knows about it", then why did they launch watches recently with this movement, and highlighting the movement too? Sounds strange to me.

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=682248 Scroll down to comments # 30, 39, 49, 55, 61

[Timrolexnl]

My Sd 43 has been served 2x in the last 3 years because he lost too much time(Under warranty). Like the old timepieces a lot better.

[thorm]

Originally Posted by Annan

Scroll down to comments # 30, 39, 49, 55, 61

Thanks, and everyone in here trust this man to know what he's talking about? I mean I get he's a RSC watchmaker, but many others like him have no clue about this it seems. No disrespect, just asking since I'm new and don't know the users.

What this makes me wonder is whether I am f***ed for just having bought a 32xx? Will rolex fix it in a service when they got an update for the movement?

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by thorm

Will rolex fix it in a service when they got an update for the movement?

Yes, for free during the 5 years warranty.

[thorm]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Yes, for free during the 5 years warranty.

So my movement will be updated too? For sure?

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Annan

Scroll down to comments # 30, 39, 49, 55, 61

Thanks for the link where one finds the following statement



Can somebody upload a photo of this "pivot/long axle" for the 3235 or 3285 and indicate where exactly the wear should be? Thanks in advance

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by thorm

So my movement will be updated too? For sure?

Yes, but they will not call you to come...
I have given a 3235 already 2x to Rolex for repair, for free within the guarantee period. Got it back without any indication what they did, extremely discrete as always...

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by DocOc

My DSSD 126660 is running at -1 sec/day.

I wore it most of the day and leave it dial-up on my dresser overnight.

Checked it using an iPhone app that is essentially a perfectly accurate stopwatch (ie it gets its time off of some nuclear clock). The error, be it gaining or losing time, comes from your ability to tap the button on the app exactly when the watch’s second hand reaches twelve. I think I accurate.

I’d be interested to check it with a timegrapher.

Regardless, it’s plenty accurate.

I'm sure the timegrapher will show your watch is fine if it's -1 at the moment.

It's a super dramatic change when it happens. My leaving the watch dial up over night I had my watch running +0.3 to +0.5. One day i noticed it was running 3 mins behind. Slapped it in the timegrapher and voila sub 200 amplitude and that's when we all thought the lift angle was 55.

No one has answered this but how the hell does rolex get the lift angle calculation wrong for 2-3 years and only just update it to 53? I think there has been a change recently...

[DocOc]

Originally Posted by amanbra

I'm sure the timegrapher will show your watch is fine if it's -1 at the moment.

It's a super dramatic change when it happens. My leaving the watch dial up over night I had my watch running +0.3 to +0.5. One day i noticed it was running 3 mins behind. Slapped it in the timegrapher and voila sub 200 amplitude and that's when we all thought the lift angle was 55.

No one has answered this but how the hell does rolex get the lift angle calculation wrong for 2-3 years and only just update it to 53? I think there has been a change recently...

I hate to sound like a broken record, but I simply refuse to believe that Rolex did anything wrong here. They have one f’n job to do: make wristwatches. They’ve been doing it for more than a hundred years. It’s not the kind of thing I’d expect them to screw up. Know what I mean?

[Mike79]

Guys I had the same problem with my DJ 41. Rolex was slowing down more and more. After second service in RSC ( Yes in 2 years my watch was 2 times in RSC ), I told: THAT IS ENOUGH.
But I have for all of You a gold advice, do exactly like I did. Sell Yours Rolex and buy something different. I did like this and I am very happy.
Never again Rolex.

[alphadweller]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Thanks for the link where one finds the following statement



Can somebody upload a photo of this "pivot/long axle" for the 3235 or 3285 and indicate where exactly the wear should be? Thanks in advance

Here's the second hands pivot wearing itself out.
(photo from Bas) 9ZGG6Ge.jpg

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by thorm

Thanks, and everyone in here trust this man to know what he's talking about? I mean I get he's a RSC watchmaker, but many others like him have no clue about this it seems. No disrespect, just asking since I'm new and don't know the users.

What this makes me wonder is whether I am f***ed for just having bought a 32xx? Will rolex fix it in a service when they got an update for the movement?

Here is another with good info:

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=664616