The 3235 Movement and The Fix (2 years out)

[Mike79]

Hi everyone
I am a new here, I am not flunet in english. So I do apologise for language's mistakes.
I have exactly the same problems with my DJ 41 what Sevykor.
My DJ 41 is already second time in Rolex authorized service, becouse is loosing time ( more then 6s per 24h ).
10 months after I bought it, the watch started to loose time. After two months of observation I took it to Rolex service. The Rolex Service in 15 days fixed the watch. I asked what was the reason od loosing time, they told my: Rolex watches never breaks, we regulate it and is ok. After 9 months it started again....... Today I took it again to my AD and I told them, that I already know, thats cal. 3235 can have problems with accuracy. I asked for a new movement.
I am afraid, that service just regulate watch again and in 9-12 months problem will return.

I am profaundly disappointed. Rolex will never disappoint U......... good joke.
I bought my DJ 41 2 years ago.

[Arcticsub]

Originally Posted by SearChart

Not 'fixed' as of yet. Permanent solution still needs to roll out...

Current procedure is just full service and extra lubrication at the point that wears out prematurely.

Does that include the new 32xx OP's and submariners?

[peterskinner]

Thing is,no-one here has the slightest idea of what percentage of the new movement have genuine ‘problems.’ The forum is a self-selecting sample, with some members extremely ‘picky’. It’s not helped by Rolex giving an exaggerated sense of what owners can reasonably expect.
‘Plus or minus; two seconds is achieved in factory tests, not in extensive tests among real-life users. My own experience is that these watches reach high levels of precision, but not quite what Rolex suggest. Does it matter? Not at all. They remain among the most precise mechanical watches you can buy.

[PavlosE]

Hello to everyone and Happy New Year.

I, too, purchased 2 years ago a dj41 that developed that problem. I took it to the rolex service centre where they changed the pivot wheel, lubricated it and serviced it, under warranty.

I would like to ask whether that means that this mechanism is fixed and it is now as it would be if it did not have any problems in the first place or it will forever be a defective mechanism more prone to wear.

Also Is it true that the more the mechanism stays idle the more the problem intensifies as time goes by?

And my last observation: When my watch was serviced I spoke on the phone with a person responsible at the Rolex service centre. He did not mention anything about this being an established, aknowledged problem. Shouldn't he be sincere and inform the customer of such a major issue? I fould this to be outrageous. I feel misled, ripped-off.
Thank you

[Saint_Tail]

I also following this particular case :D

[Kevin of Larchmont]

Originally Posted by jeorge

I see no advantage at all with this new movement other than longer power reserve which is only good for none daily wearers . I know one thing Rolex cheapen the movement looks wise compared to say the 3135. The finishing just isn't there. I'm sure this was done to save money using less time on finishing the movement. When it comes to accuracy its all about how it's calibrated !

The advantage of the 3235 is that it is vastly more accurate than its predecessor, that is unless and until it isn’t. My DJ fluctuates by about a second a day and has maintained plus or minus zero simply by alternating the case position at rest. It seems that a notable percentage of 3235 movements suffer from this inaccuracy but that percentage appears to be very small and is only notable because it’s Rolex. And because it’s Rolex this anomaly will be addressed. Buy what you want.

[alphadweller]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

. It seems that a notable percentage of 3235 movements suffer from this inaccuracy but that percentage appears to be very small and is only notable because it’s Rolex. And because it’s Rolex this anomaly will be addressed. Buy what you want.

We simply don't know how big that percentage is. All I know is my 2017 SD43 is now at -4 s/d on average, rest positions won't compensate the high negative when worn. My Sub41 is already at -2s/d after three months since I bought it and I suspect it might very well carry on losing time, we'll see.. On the other hand, my YM40 116622 with the 3135 has-been ticking at +1.5 s/d since 2015.

What pi**** me off is my local RSC deny the problem. They say "there is absolutely nothing wrong with the 3235, not even with the very first batch. It only needs to be regulated, that's all". If that's the case, then why has my SD43 gone from 0 s/d to -4 s/d in its third year, on average? It's actually -6 s/d when I wear it and it's getting worse every month. Why are people reporting sudden losses in accuracy? A regulation won't fix that. I find the lack of transparency very annoying and I'm starting to distrust the brand. Yes, I never thought I'd say that about Rolex. I'll have to take it to the RSC to get it fixed under warranty, despite their lies.

[cjohns]

Just had my 41 fixed ,, it was the absence of a holding chemical that is used trough out the movement but was not applied on a certain part before oiling that allowed the oil to run away thus creating the drag. Mine has been running perfectly. it seems this will fix the problem going forward.The holding agent is called something like Epilane.

[EEpro]

Originally Posted by cjohns

Just had my 41 fixed ,, it was the absence of a holding chemical that is used trough out the movement but was not applied on a certain part before oiling that allowed the oil to run away thus creating the drag. Mine has been running perfectly. it seems this will fix the problem going forward.The holding agent is called something like Epilane.

Finally! Now this makes a whole lot of sense. Thanks for sharing

[Mystro]

Originally Posted by cjohns

Just had my 41 fixed ,, it was the absence of a holding chemical that is used trough out the movement but was not applied on a certain part before oiling that allowed the oil to run away thus creating the drag. Mine has been running perfectly. it seems this will fix the problem going forward.The holding agent is called something like Epilane.

How did you get this amount of service info??

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by JSolution

Honestly I wouldn’t even notice if I was losing ten seconds day it’s close enough for me.

I’m right there with you brother

I can see why it’s important to some, but to me because I rotate every day or two, I’d never notice

[alphadweller]

Originally Posted by cjohns

Just had my 41 fixed ,, it was the absence of a holding chemical that is used trough out the movement but was not applied on a certain part before oiling that allowed the oil to run away thus creating the drag. Mine has been running perfectly. it seems this will fix the problem going forward.The holding agent is called something like Epilane.

Very interesting, thanks for sharing. Great news if it's a permanent fix indeed.

[Jack T]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

The advantage of the 3235 is that it is vastly more accurate than its predecessor, that is unless and until it isn’t. My DJ fluctuates by about a second a day and has maintained plus or minus zero simply by alternating the case position at rest. It seems that a notable percentage of 3235 movements suffer from this inaccuracy but that percentage appears to be very small and is only notable because it’s Rolex. And because it’s Rolex this anomaly will be addressed. Buy what you want.

True, we don’t know the percentage of movements that have problems, but in my years on this site I’ve never seen this level of problems with any movement.
Precision is less of a concern for me than durability, and from what I’ve read, the new 32xx has design features that call in to question long term durability and replacement costs.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by alphadweller

What pi**** me off is my local RSC deny the problem. They say "there is absolutely nothing wrong with the 3235, not even with the very first batch. It only needs to be regulated, that's all".

Either they don't know, or they don't care, or they lie, or any combination of it.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by SearChart

Not 'fixed' as of yet. Permanent solution still needs to roll out...

That expert info has to worry a lot!

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

The advantage of the 3235 is that it is vastly more accurate than its predecessor, that is unless and until it isn’t. My DJ fluctuates by about a second a day and has maintained plus or minus zero simply by alternating the case position at rest. It seems that a notable percentage of 3235 movements suffer from this inaccuracy but that percentage appears to be very small and is only notable because it’s Rolex. And because it’s Rolex this anomaly will be addressed. Buy what you want.

Just for clarity.
The later 31xx movements are officially held to the exact same accuracy standard. This coincided with the introduction of the 5 year warranty as per the chronometer tag change.

I currently have two 31xx movements, with each purchased either side(years apart) of the change and they both have maintained the exact same accuracy they had when new.
I can say that I have had a number of other watches in the distant past with 31xx movements which displayed as close to perfect accuracy as one could ever imagine, and they did it day in day out for years on end.

Your ascertion that the new 32xx movements 'are vastly more accurate" is patently false.
A movement will only run as well as it is regulated.
All these modern Rolex Chronometer grade movements are all equally capable with some care and attention paid to regulation.
The 32xx movements have an extremely large question mark hanging over them as it currently stands.
The evidence is clear

Koolaid can make one see things with less clarity

[CedCraig]

Originally Posted by cjohns

Just had my 41 fixed ,, it was the absence of a holding chemical that is used trough out the movement but was not applied on a certain part before oiling that allowed the oil to run away thus creating the drag. Mine has been running perfectly. it seems this will fix the problem going forward.The holding agent is called something like Epilane.

Would love to hear from the watchmakers on the forum, since my understanding is that modern watch lubrication doesn‘t work that way. AFAIK, there is no lubricating oil sloshing around in modern mechanical watches. Rather modern lubricants are stable when applied and degrade in place over time.

[Mystro]

Originally Posted by Dirt

Just for clarity.
The later 31xx movements are officially held to the exact same accuracy standard. This coincided with the introduction of the 5 year warranty as per the chronometer tag change.

I currently have two 31xx movements, with each purchased either side(years apart) of the change and they both have maintained the exact same accuracy they had when new.
I can say that I have had a number of other watches in the distant past with 31xx movements which displayed as close to perfect accuracy as one could ever imagine, and they did it day in day out for years on end.

Your ascertion that the new 32xx movements 'are vastly more accurate" is patently false.
A movement will only run as well as it is regulated.
All these modern Rolex Chronometer grade movements are all equally capable with some care and attention paid to regulation.
The 32xx movements have an extremely large question mark hanging over them as it currently stands.
The evidence is clear

Koolaid can make one see things with less clarity

This is absolutely true. Its the time and attention when cased up to its regulation is the difference Rolex is really doing between the "31" and "32" series of movements. The +2/-2 standard is more of a commitment Rolex is stating with its final regulation.

[waterman1]

I had to send both my SD43 and DSSD in for service in 2019 for the loss of time issue. Both had gotten to be greater than 40 second loss per 24 hrs. My SD43 is running perfect still since that service. But the DSSD is now slow by -45s/24hrs. On phone with RSC yesterday. Sending back again. I asked if they see this issue in the 3235 movement after discussing how this is second occurrence on same watch as well as with the sd43 but as I expected no acknowledgment of an issue. It is interesting to hear about this “holding agent” epilane. I’m very curious if I get the same information from RSC. Thanks for letting us know. Hopefully this will be the final fix!

[Annan]

Originally Posted by CedCraig

Would love to hear from the watchmakers on the forum, since my understanding is that modern watch lubrication doesn‘t work that way. AFAIK, there is no lubricating oil sloshing around in modern mechanical watches. Rather modern lubricants are stable when applied and degrade in place over time.

I am not a watchmaker but one of our TRF members who is a CW21 recently posted that epilame and/or lubrication is not a permanent fix. In his opinion and that of his colleagues it is a problem with the architecture of the movement resulting in excessive wear of the pivot/long axle that ultimately causes time loss. To date Rolex has only instructed watchmakers to add lubrication but once again, it's only temporary. He is unsure if the latest references with 32XX movements have the same issue because none have come to him yet for service. Hope I have correctly restated what he shared.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Annan

I am not a watchmaker but one of our TRF members who is a CW21 recently posted that epilame and/or lubrication is not a permanent fix. In his opinion and that of his colleagues it is a problem with the architecture of the movement resulting in excessive wear of the pivot/long axle that ultimately causes time loss. To date Rolex has only instructed watchmakers to add lubrication but once again, it's only temporary. He is unsure if the latest references with 32XX movements have the same issue because none have come to him yet for service. Hope I have correctly restated what he shared.

What is the name of the CW21 TRF member? Bas? All what you write fits with what I hear since a rather long time. Therefore, I'm curious to hear about 32xx problems from recently bought watches, i.e. 2020/21. Key is to measure the amplitudes!

[Annan]

Originally Posted by saxo3

What is the name of the CW21 TRF member? Bas? All what you write fits with what I hear since a rather long time.

Yes, Bas. I certainly do not intend to speak for him and hope he does not mind.

[henrylee]

The 32xx movmt from my CHNR seems to be my least accurate Rolex

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Annan

Yes, Bas. I certainly do not intend to speak for him and hope he does not mind.

Thanks. Any discussion about movement specifications, and deviations from what one believes Rolex "guarantees", should understand and take into account the difference between accuracy and precision!!!

[FTX I]

I wonder if the 3230 has the same issues because I've only read about problems with 3235 and 3285 so far.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by FTX I

I wonder if the 3230 has the same issues because I've only read about problems with 3235 and 3285 so far.

Indeed, a very interesting point for the new (2020) caliber.
About 6 (six) years have passed since the introduction of the 32xx movement series at Baselworld 2015, which first saw the 3255.

[FTX I]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Indeed, a very interesting point for the new (2020) caliber.

I've also wondered if the GMT complication or even a date complication could be part of the problem, but I have no idea.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by FTX I

I wonder if the 3230 has the same issues because I've only read about problems with 3235 and 3285 so far.

You own a 3230? If so, best you can do is to measure its amplitudes, which can reduce quickly to 200 degrees and less.

[FTX I]

Originally Posted by saxo3

You own a 3230? If so, best you can do is to measure its amplitudes, which can reduce quickly to 200 degrees and less.

No and that's why I'm interested because I'm considering a 124060.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by FTX I

No and that's why I'm interested because I'm considering a 124060.

Very nice reference and you have 5 years warranty Cheers!