Hot Water: A Fix for Slow 32xx Movements?

[saxo3]

Migration of lubricants and epilames has been discussed as a possibility to explain the 32xx low amplitude issue. But … I can't see that a rather high temperature would reverse such migration effect, i.e., why, after migration, lubricants would move back to their required locations? The contrary could happen with too high temperature, lubricants migrate all over the caliber?

But who knows, a small fraction of lubicrants might migrate back to completely dry caliber locations yielding to a temporary improvement. For this to happen many properties would play a role, including temperature and duration, caliber geometry, physical prooerties of the lubricants and many more. Tribology is a very complex physics topic.

[mrmahdi]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Migration of lubricants and epilames has been discussed as a possibility to explain the 32xx low amplitude issue. But … I can't see that a rather high temperature would reverse such migration effect, i.e., why, after migration, lubricants would move back to their required locations? The contrary could happen with too high temperature, lubricants migrate all over the caliber?

But who knows, a small fraction of lubicrants might migrate back to completely dry caliber locations yielding to a temporary improvement. For this to happen many properties would play a role, including temperature and duration, caliber geometry, physical prooerties of the lubricants and many more. Tribology is a very complex physics topic.

While I’m not advocating this “hot water” approach to dealing with a slow 32xxx movement, I do wonder if the apparent “fix” will be long term or short term.

And why are 32xx movements plagued with this issue?

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by mrmahdi

While I’m not advocating this “hot water” approach to dealing with a slow 32xxx movement …

I understood this.

Originally Posted by mrmahdi

…I do wonder if the apparent “fix” will be long term or short term.

A 32xx can run very accurately and with -2/+2 sec/day (precision) but already or, in your case, still have the low amplitude issue! Measure the amplitudes in all horizontal and vertical positions with a timegrapher. That's the only way you can check it yourself. It would be nice to report the results in the long 32xx thread.

[mrmahdi]

Originally Posted by saxo3

I understood this.

A 32xx can run very accurately and with -2/+2 sec/day (precision) but already or, in your case, still have the low amplitude issue! Measure the amplitudes in all horizontal and vertical positions with a timegrapher. That's the only way you can check it yourself. It would be nice to report the results in the long 32xx thread.

Since I don’t have a time grapher, I might visit a watchmaker to see if he can run my watch on one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by mrmahdi

Since I don’t have a time grapher, I might visit a watchmaker to see if he can run my watch on one.

Buy a Weishi 1900 model for about 200 USD?

Measurement should be done after full winding (t = 0) and 24 hours later, without moving the watch in between.

[mrmahdi]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Buy a Weishi 1900 model for about 200 USD?

Measurement should be done after full winding (t = 0) and 24 hours later, without moving the watch in between.

Should the lift angle between around 53?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by mrmahdi

Should the lift angle between around 53?

The 32xx lift angle is 53 degrees. Join the long thread and I will guide you through the rather simple measurement procedure … What you did is interesting to me, also how long this kind of temporary fix holds.

[Jackie Daytona]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Migration of lubricants and epilames has been discussed as a possibility to explain the 32xx low amplitude issue. But … I can't see that a rather high temperature would reverse such migration effect, i.e., why, after migration, lubricants would move back to their required locations? The contrary could happen with too high temperature, lubricants migrate all over the caliber?

But who knows, a small fraction of lubicrants might migrate back to completely dry caliber locations yielding to a temporary improvement. For this to happen many properties would play a role, including temperature and duration, caliber geometry, physical prooerties of the lubricants and many more. Tribology is a very complex physics topic.

To your point, my Datejust 41 just came back from service and this is exactly what they cited, the migration of lubricants.

They claimed that I had banged the crown into something very hard and that is the reason it occurred. They cited the lubricants being out of place as evidence of me banging into something. I doubt that actually occurred, however there was no damage to the crown noted by either myself or the AD before we sent it. Additionally, if the watch is so delicate that they can cite that particularly it makes me a bit curious.

But a full service for $40. I’ll take it I guess….

[Pepperjack]

Originally Posted by Jackie Daytona

To your point, my Datejust 41 just came back from service and this is exactly what they cited, the migration of lubricants.

They claimed that I had banged the crown into something very hard and that is the reason it occurred. They cited the lubricants being out of place as evidence of me banging into something. I doubt that actually occurred, however there was no damage to the crown noted by either myself or the AD before we sent it. Additionally, if the watch is so delicate that they can cite that particularly it makes me a bit curious.

But a full service for $40. I’ll take it I guess….

What was the $40 for, if you don't mind my asking?

[Jackie Daytona]

Originally Posted by Pepperjack

What was the $40 for, if you don't mind my asking?

No worries at all.

I believe they stated to replace the crown tube. The receipt was kinda vague even honestly. I’ll look again in a moment. Essentially they said they would service for free as long as I paid for whatever with the crown was mysteriously damaged.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Jackie Daytona

…They cited the lubricants being out of place as evidence of me banging into something...

[mrmahdi]

Originally Posted by Jackie Daytona

To your point, my Datejust 41 just came back from service and this is exactly what they cited, the migration of lubricants.

They claimed that I had banged the crown into something very hard and that is the reason it occurred. They cited the lubricants being out of place as evidence of me banging into something. I doubt that actually occurred, however there was no damage to the crown noted by either myself or the AD before we sent it. Additionally, if the watch is so delicate that they can cite that particularly it makes me a bit curious.

But a full service for $40. I’ll take it I guess….

Is your watch being serviced by Rolex or by an independent watchmaker?

[Jackie Daytona]

Originally Posted by Pepperjack

What was the $40 for, if you don't mind my asking?

Unfortunately, my AD sort of shorthanded the receipt. It just states sent to RSC for service. I can’t recall completely the details my SA said unfortunately.

Originally Posted by mrmahdi

Is your watch being serviced by Rolex or by an independent watchmaker?

It went to RSC.