32xx movement problem poll and data thread

[saxo3]

Thanks a lot for your information. I confirm, your observation is not 32xx specific.

Gaining and loosing time depends on many parameters, including watch rest position over night.

You can follow timekeeping easily with the Watch Tracker app. If you need an example or further help then let me know.

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Thanks a lot for your information. I confirm, your observation is not 32xx specific.

Gaining and loosing time depends on many parameters, including watch rest position over night.

You can follow timekeeping easily with the Watch Tracker app. If you need an example or further help then let me know.

I have a super sophisticated watch tracker: www.time.gov plus a little slip of paper

What I found interesting is how much position while wearing seems to matter. I know the effect of various resting positions, but had never thought about this aspect.

It also meant that despite a more depleted PR (compared to most days) the time gain was greater.

As I start to alternate watches more, it'll be fascinating to see how the two compare over a longer period.

Side note: I love the seemingly thicker, more robust crown tubes, but man are they hard to pull out at exactly the right second to stop the seconds hand at 12:00

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by dannyp

What I found interesting is how much position while wearing seems to matter. I know the effect of various resting positions, but had never thought about this aspect.

Yes, accuracy can depend a lot on wearing pattern, which seems to be your case too.

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Yes, accuracy can depend a lot on wearing pattern, which seems to be your case too.

Yes. My main surprise, I suppose, was that I’d have expected less wearing to result in time loss, but I suppose that’s not how it works.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by dannyp

Yes. My main surprise, I suppose, was that I’d have expected less wearing to result in time loss, but I suppose that’s not how it works.

The keyword is power reserve. Your 3230 has about 72 hours.

[CharlesN]

Originally Posted by dannyp

Yes. My main surprise, I suppose, was that I’d have expected less wearing to result in time loss, but I suppose that’s not how it works.

Have a look at Post 1675.

Its quite interesting to see how long your watch will carry on being quite accurate.

[shipitfresh]

My DJ41 (1.5 yo) daily watch runs pretty accurate. Nightly, it's on my nightstand. Per the Rolex instructions, when it's a few seconds slow, I rest it face up. If it's a few seconds fast I put it on it's side, crown down. Seems to work very well.

Happy camper

[CharlesN]

Originally Posted by shipitfresh

My DJ41 (1.5 yo) daily watch runs pretty accurate. Nightly, it's on my nightstand. Per the Rolex instructions, when it's a few seconds slow, I rest it face up. If it's a few seconds fast I put it on it's side, crown down. Seems to work very well.

Happy camper

Thats it You got the method working just correctly.

I do the same basically

[doboy007]

Just found this thread and since I recently got my 124060, I'll chime in. My watch lost less than 1 sec after 6 days. It was actually 0 loss for the first 5 days, checked daily, and noticed 1s loss as my reserve went down.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by doboy007

Just found this thread and since I recently got my 124060, I'll chime in. My watch lost less than 1 sec after 6 days. It was actually 0 loss for the first 5 days, checked daily, and noticed 1s loss as my reserve went down.

Congratulations.

[NIHO]

Just got a 126610LV and wore it for 24h including sleep (my routine). It gained 1sec. So I am happy, will see how it goes as it breaks in. My 126600 also keeps +1s/day, it was serviced 11 months ago for low amplitude issues and poor timekeeping. My 126600 amplitude is now 290 in flat position.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by NIHO

Just got a 126610LV and wore it for 24h including sleep (my routine). It gained 1sec. So I am happy, will see how it goes as it breaks in. My 126600 also keeps +1s/day, it was serviced 11 months ago for low amplitude issues and poor timekeeping. My 126600 amplitude is now 290 in flat position.

Congrats for the 126610LV, a beautiful watch which I also considered. How long did it take for your SD to develop problems? You measure amplitudes and rates with a TG?

[CaptT]

Been a while, and a lot to follow here, but thanks to those providing and analyzing the data. I'm curious what are the findings (if any)?

[HiBoost]

I got a DJ41 (ref 126334) for my anniversary last week so after a week of wearing it I decided to get some baseline numbers for the new piece and also to directly compare it to my troublesome Sub41 (ref 126613). Both watches were fully wound until I could hear the spring slipping in the barrel. Timegrapher is a Weishi 1000 set to 53 degrees, 12 second period. For each position, watches were allowed to settle for 5 minutes before taking a reading.

Sub41 was purchased new (still in Rolex coffin) Dec 30, 2020
DJ41 was purchased new (still in Rolex coffin) Sept 16, 2021

In this first graph we see amplitude versus run time (in hours) - blue is the DJ41 in two positions (dial up, crown down) and orange is the Sub41 in the same two positions.

amp-compare.png

Clearly the DJ41 is solidly beating the Sub41 across the entire power reserve in both positions.

I've known the Sub41 has had issues since I got it, so here is a look at its crown down amplitude in January as compared to now. It's hard to say that it has gotten any better or worse overall, but clearly it's low then and now. The Rolex spec says amplitude should not drop below 200 degrees within the first 24 hours. We can see it drops below that threshold at around 14-15 hours.

subvssub.png

So we know that something internal is causing extra drag in the train resulting in the lower amplitudes. What is perhaps more interesting is the timekeeping. I synched both watches to an atomic clock after winding. After 48 hours of testing, both watches were within 1 second of the atomic time. At hour 60 the DJ was a total of 2 seconds slow and the Sub was a total of 4 seconds slow. This is with the watches sitting in the dial up position between tests (i.e. for the majority of the time) so this represents best case timekeeping. When looking at the crown down timing you can really see the DJ41 and Sub41 diverge:

spdcomparison.png

This DJ41 is really showing the promise of this movement. It's basically perfect. And in truth, if you keep the Sub wound, it'll appear near "perfect" too. That is definitely the intriguing part of this to me. I can actually see how my Sub may have passed in-house timing tests at the factory. But it also seems like there must not be any rigorous amplitude checking as part of this QC process or it should have been caught given that it has been doing this since new.

In terms of power reserve, the Sub stopped at 70 hours almost to the minute. The DJ made it to 73 hours and 44 minutes. I do not have any amplitude or seconds/day numbers for the final couple of hours as the amplitudes on both watches were too low for the machine to get valid readings.

I plan to continue monitoring a couple times a year and will report any noteworthy changes. Hopefully the DJ41 can keep up its superstar performance indefinitely. And, when the Sub41 finally dies hopefully it can be refreshed at RSC to "full Datejust" performance haha.

[amanbra]

Really interesting stuff hiboost. Sad to see a sub have issues though. I picked one up recently assuming it was fixed now.

Something super interesting to report. My exp one started to run a tad slower to -1.5 a day. I put it on to the timegrapher and the amplitude sometimes hits 300! Also it’s faster dial down than dial up but with a lower amplitude. All very weird at the moment I’ll keep an eye on it.

My sub is 285 ish and about +2 per day so all good at the moment.

Really hope they’re fine. Sick of all these issues.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by amanbra

Really interesting stuff hiboost. Sad to see a sub have issues though. I picked one up recently assuming it was fixed now.

Something super interesting to report. My exp one started to run a tad slower to -1.5 a day. I put it on to the timegrapher and the amplitude sometimes hits 300! Also it’s faster dial down than dial up but with a lower amplitude. All very weird at the moment I’ll keep an eye on it.

My sub is 285 ish and about +2 per day so all good at the moment.

Really hope they’re fine. Sick of all these issues.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And I take it you are using 53 degrees for the lift angle? 300 is definitely up there for 32xx, at least from the sample I've seen. Just to sanity check that reading, when you are seeing 300 I'm assuming that's in a horizontal position. If so, when you switch to a vertical at that same moment do you see 260-270 or what? I ask because there were times where I was really low on power reserve and the timegrapher basically started reporting nonsense amplitudes, sometimes very high. So just to ensure that's a real number I'd compare it to another position at the same time.

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

And I take it you are using 53 degrees for the lift angle? 300 is definitely up there for 32xx, at least from the sample I've seen. Just to sanity check that reading, when you are seeing 300 I'm assuming that's in a horizontal position. If so, when you switch to a vertical at that same moment do you see 260-270 or what? I ask because there were times where I was really low on power reserve and the timegrapher basically started reporting nonsense amplitudes, sometimes very high. So just to ensure that's a real number I'd compare it to another position at the same time.

Yep 53 lift angle and yes around 270 for crown up full PR after manually winding to top it off.

I’m hoping that’s the reason why it’s running a tad slow vs the amp issue. It started off it’s life closer to 0s per day.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SearChart]

Originally Posted by amanbra

Yep 53 lift angle and yes around 270 for crown up full PR after manually winding to top it off.

I’m hoping that’s the reason why it’s running a tad slow vs the amp issue. It started off it’s life closer to 0s per day.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

270 degrees, fully wound in any vertical position on the 32×× is very good.

[CharlesN]

I have, and so has another gentleman who occasionally frequents this forum, measured quite a large number of 3235 movements.

Many of them have been documented earlier in this thread.

270 for a VERTICAL amplitude measurement is so far unseen by either of us.

Horizontal values of Amplitude almost always exceed 270 when fully would and often get close to the 300. Very rarely do they exceed the 300 mark.

I have found that almost every time a watch rund faster Dial DOWN than Dial UP.

Again this has been shown many times previously in this thread.

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by CharlesN

I have, and so has another gentleman who occasionally frequents this forum, measured quite a large number of 3235 movements.

Many of them have been documented earlier in this thread.

270 for a VERTICAL amplitude measurement is so far unseen by either of us.

Horizontal values of Amplitude almost always exceed 270 when fully would and often get close to the 300. Very rarely do they exceed the 300 mark.

I have found that almost every time a watch rund faster Dial DOWN than Dial UP.

Again this has been shown many times previously in this thread.

Charles I have 3 3235s and 2 3230, this is the first example I have seen like this.

Doesn't bother me if you don't believe me, but for me I was a bit worried when i noticed a chance in it's timing after the first few months and when I chucked it on the grapher I was a bit shocked to see the results.

All 5 of these watches run faster dial down so my results there agree with your observations.

[CharlesN]

Originally Posted by amanbra

Charles I have 3 3235s and 2 3230, this is the first example I have seen like this.

Doesn't bother me if you don't believe me

How wonderfully polite !!!!!

I did NOT say I don’t believe you !

I did say that we have now measured quite a high number of 3235 movements and we have not seen what you have seen in relation to such a high amplitude.

Of course it can be so …….. I own some watches with various 32xx movements and none have even measured 300 in a horizontal plane. But I know of one watch that has measured consistently at just over an amplitude of 300.

There will always be some anomalies in the movements produced.

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by CharlesN

How wonderfully polite !!!!!

I did NOT say I don’t believe you !

I did say that we have now measured quite a high number of 3235 movements and we have not seen what you have seen in relation to such a high amplitude.

Of course it can be so …….. I own some watches with various 32xx movements and none have even measured 300 in a horizontal plane. But I know of one watch that has measured consistently at just over an amplitude of 300.

There will always be some anomalies in the movements produced.

I misread the tone of your msg, apologies. If i get time on the weekend, I'll full wind it up and take a photo on the time grapher.

For me I really hope this is an indication that Rolex have addressed the issue.

[Billfish]

Where are the guys that work for Rolex not commenting?

[amanbra]

Originally Posted by Billfish

Where are the guys that work for Rolex not commenting?

Not sure they'll ever comment, just like Rolex themselves won't ever publicly acknowledge this. They will fix it though I think, that is their track record.

[JoseR]

Originally Posted by Billfish

Where are the guys that work for Rolex not commenting?

Bas has already given his expertise answer. It's some where in this long thread...

[Andad]

Originally Posted by Billfish

Where are the guys that work for Rolex not commenting?

Last comment was 5 posts before your one Scott.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by amanbra

Not sure they'll ever comment, just like Rolex themselves won't ever publicly acknowledge this. They will fix it though I think, that is their track record.

See post number 1968.
It's to be taken as conclusive

[amanbra]

Here it is everyone have a great day




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[amanbra]

All my other 32xx are 240-250 vert except for my problem one which is not even 200 vert fully wound.

Wish it wasn’t running slow though…

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by amanbra

Here it is everyone have a great day




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

An obvious photoshop (kidding). It certainly is curious to me to see a specimen that has a much higher amplitude than mine. If every watch I ever owned performed like my new DJ41 I'd be ecstatic. At full wind it does 271 horizontal and 227 crown down. My Sub is doing 235 and 208, respectively. Yours is seemingly on steroids.

Bas said your numbers are "very good" but I would really love to hear some more thoughts on how your watch achieves this. The low amplitude issue has been described as an internal source of friction dragging down the train efficiency. That all makes sense. So what would we conclude with yours? Looser tolerances? A stronger mainspring? IF, and that's a big if, Rolex has finally made a real fix for this issue, could we be seeing it here? In other words, a whole new range of amplitudes becoming "the norm". Again, I would love, hell I'd pay, to have some actual watchmakers comment on this haha.