ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
23 October 2021, 01:06 AM | #31 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Real Name: The Mystro ;)
Location: Central Pa.
Posts: 14,693
|
1/8th of a second for a mechanical chronograph is outstanding. What would anyone be timing with a wrist watch chronograph that requires a greater sub division of a second? Practical application speaking, the issue when going with a higher beat rate is amplitude. The requirement of a stronger power reserve which takes up case real estate. Even the Omega cal. 9900 has a 28,800bpm and uses a dual barrel mainspring which drives home that their coaxial escapement works best at that industry standard. Rolex from a philosophical standpoint will not constantly redesign their movements like other companies that needs to like Omega. In fact the watches Omega keeps a tried and true outdated movement in are the most successful for them. Zenith as a company has to continue to develop their chronograph as that is their niche to stay alive. It’s a completely different strategy Rolex has adopted. Rolex steadfast philosophy from design to movement is why their watches are so desirable decades after their incremental changes.
__________________
|
23 October 2021, 01:06 AM | #32 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: N/A
Posts: 386
|
4130
It is one of the most accurate and reliable movements that I have and IMO one of the main reasons to own a Daytona. |
23 October 2021, 01:16 AM | #33 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: FL
Watch: OP41 Silver
Posts: 1,731
|
Chronographs, specifically the Daytona, are meant for timing auto racing. The results of racing are displayed in either 100th or greater of a second amounts. The name comes from the Daytona auto races from Florida.
The Daytona movement currently is like playing pool with 8/10th scale balls or playing football on an 80 yard field. It’s cute and fun I’m sure. But it’s not really accurate or true. It’s sort of just pretending to be something else. In the Daytona’s case. It’s very expensive and difficult to make a correct movement and their customers didn’t really care. So that’s what they did. And they did very well making that decision and their customers still don’t care at all. They’re happy playing “football” on their 80 yard field.
__________________
OP41 Silver, BLNR Jubilee, 70th Anniversary Sub |
23 October 2021, 03:59 AM | #34 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2019
Real Name: Mark
Location: Southern England
Watch: DJ41 SubC SMPCcoax
Posts: 1,446
|
Quote:
Can’t argue with any of this from this man yet again. Move on, lads. Nothing else to see here. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
23 October 2021, 04:02 AM | #35 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2019
Real Name: Mark
Location: Southern England
Watch: DJ41 SubC SMPCcoax
Posts: 1,446
|
In my opinion we won’t see a huge increase in time keeping or power reserve but any improvements will be incremental on materials science relating to wear, stability under changes in temperature and lubricants.
Let’s face it, the internal combustion engine doesn’t have much more to give and mechanical Timekeeping is much further along the line from that. However, I don’t see mechanical movements as quite in the last throes of life like petrol and diesel. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
23 October 2021, 04:48 AM | #36 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: FL
Watch: OP41 Silver
Posts: 1,731
|
I don’t think they have to do a ton to update the movement. Just a high beat rate to measure 10th seconds, all the 32 series upgrades, a 70 hour power reserve including chronograph use not unused rating, and maybe thin it down 1mm. Sounds easy enough but that’s actually a huge challenge. Zenith and Rolex have a history with their chronograph movements so it’ll be interesting to see if Rolex can compete going forward or if they’re willing to rely on design and demand alone. History suggests at some point they will try and keep up with the Jones’
__________________
OP41 Silver, BLNR Jubilee, 70th Anniversary Sub |
23 October 2021, 06:55 AM | #37 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Brisbane
Watch: DSSD
Posts: 7,810
|
Quote:
But you missed out on identifying the Achiles heel of the older movements which may or may not be an issue unless the movement cops an unlucky knock |
|
23 October 2021, 07:08 AM | #38 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2020
Location: United Kingdom
Watch: Rollie
Posts: 679
|
31XX for the smooth winding, quietness, lack of rotor wobble and rotating the crown forwards to set the time forwards.
|
23 October 2021, 09:33 AM | #39 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2021
Location: MD/NC
Watch: 114060
Posts: 2,591
|
3130/3135 on the basis of robustness and proven longevity.
5-10 years from now, the 3230/3235 might hold that spot. |
23 October 2021, 09:38 AM | #40 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: Usa
Posts: 17
|
4130 all way, service wise and functionality
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
24 October 2021, 02:55 AM | #41 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2021
Location: Toronto
Posts: 15
|
Quote:
|
|
24 October 2021, 03:00 AM | #42 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Real Name: Chris
Location: .
Watch: Daytonas/Subs/GMTs
Posts: 12,608
|
21 years experience as a daily wearer ...
3135 and 4130 |
24 October 2021, 05:02 AM | #43 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 51
|
In terms of overall timekeeping precision, the 2236 may ultimately be the “best” Rolex movement due to the Syloxi (silicon) hairspring. However, I have yet to see any official comparison to confirm this is true. The power reserve is also less than the 31xx and 32xx series movement due to its size.
In terms of automatic chronograph movements across all brands, the 4130 is often touted as the “best” due to its thickness, reliability, durability, power reserve, overall precision etc. It is a very hard movement to beat. Some also hold the viewpoint that the 4130 maintains better precision than the 31xx and 32xx series movements using the standard Parachrom hairspring. I have yet to see any official comparison, but this may have been performed in the past. It would be interesting to gauge others people’s opinions/findings on this. |
25 October 2021, 04:00 AM | #44 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Real Name: Steve.
Location: UK
Posts: 6,061
|
Great input everyone.
Very interesting and enlightening. Thank you. |
25 October 2021, 02:35 PM | #45 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: MN
Watch: OP36 Blue 3-6-9
Posts: 2,192
|
Quote:
Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk |
|
25 October 2021, 08:12 PM | #46 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: May 2015
Real Name: Mike
Location: Pacific Northwest
Watch: 116610LV 16710 SD
Posts: 10,649
|
3135 and 4130 chrono..
|
25 October 2021, 09:25 PM | #47 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: UK
Posts: 2,761
|
Despite not being a huge Daytona fan, I must also follow the majority of other posters on this thread and say that the 4130 is probably the best movement Rolex have made if we're talking about all round function, stability, durability, power reserve, etc.
I must say I don't agree with the poster earlier in this thread who said they believe that the 4130 is due an upgrade and somehow needs a higher beat rate and a longer power reserve. 72 hours is already in-line with the latest 32xx series, and to be honest, 48 hours is more than adequate on an automatic watch anyway. Increasing PR for the sake of it comes with its own technical issues and trade-offs, and IMO there's just no need for it on the 4130; it'd just be change for change's sake. Additionally, higher beat rates tend to mean faster component wear and therefore more regular service intervals, and shorter power reserves due to the increased demand for power. To overcome the PR issue you need either longer mainsprings and/or additional barrels to provide a decent power reserve. What you make up for in terms of accuracy (which is VERY little on a modern, well regulated watch) is often traded off against reduced durability. Think running a Ferrari compared to running an Audi. If durability is the aim (which is always Rolex's goal), then I'd take a well regulated 28,800 over a 36,000 vph movement every time. As a close second I'd say the 3135 (and derivatives) are also superb workhorse movements. They are highly capable, durable, precise, accurate (if regulated properly) and silent. And they've stood the test of time, which is probably the greatest accolade. While I freely admit to having had issues with my only 3235 movement (which has currently put me off it), I'm absolutely convinced the 32xx series will also prove to be highly durable and accurate in the future - well, it's already capable of being highly accurate as mine was before its problems manifested themselves. At the moment though I think it's still just too new to take the crown from the 31xx series. And in answer to the question regarding the Breitling B01, I can say without hesitation that the B01 is an excellent chronograph movement. (I know quite a bit about them as I've been a moderator of a Breitling forum for the last 14 years). The main technical differences are that the B01 uses a flat hairspring, a balance cock, and an index adjusted balance, whereas the 4130 uses a Breguet overcoil, full balance bridge, and a free sprung balance. The 4130 uses less parts and is also very slightly smaller than the B01, but then the B01 has a date mechanism to fit in. Both have identical beat rates, both are column wheel chronographs with a vertical clutch, plus they both have comparable performance and power reserves. The B01 has also proved to be very reliable. |
26 October 2021, 12:03 AM | #48 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2018
Real Name: Mark
Location: Europe
Watch: SD43 | LVc | SkyD
Posts: 1,374
|
3135 is hard to beat.
|
26 October 2021, 02:54 AM | #49 |
2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Aug 2020
Real Name: Stan Cooper
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Watch: GMT-Master II
Posts: 2,707
|
My vote is for the 9001 with its 24 hour second time zone sub-dial and Saros annual calendar complications.
Sky-Dweller 9001 Movement
__________________
♛16710 GMT-Master II, ♛1915 Rolex WW1 Trench Watch, Zelos Thresher 500m GMT Meteorite, Zelos Swordfish 40 200m Ti Blood Moon Meteorite, Hamilton Pilot Chronograph, Ball Roadmaster Pilot GMT COSC Chronometer, Zelos Mako 300M True GMT Meteorite It's weird being the same age as old people. - Stan |
27 October 2021, 04:55 AM | #50 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Rep. Dom.
Watch: Sub,Dj4,dd,daytona
Posts: 185
|
3135
|
27 October 2021, 06:09 AM | #51 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: USA
Watch: All Rolex
Posts: 6,976
|
I like the 4130 as a modern chronograph movement. I like the 3135 as something that is extremely tried and true to what a sports watch movement should be. So 4130 I would place as "best", while 3135 as most "influential".
|
27 October 2021, 06:24 AM | #52 |
2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 818
|
For me it's a tie between 4130 and 9001. I love them both!
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.