What is going on with 32xx Rolex movements

[kieselguhr]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

I'm not tacitly admitting anything - of course nobody really knows. I was just pointing out that 1,400+ is not a "small dataset" for a poll.

No it’s not. Life changing medications go on the market with much smaller sample sizes…

[Calatrava r]

Originally Posted by Daniel23456

I am very much traumatized taking my watch to RSC. They do not look after the watch to the standards that I’d be comfortable with so it is not an option for me as I might end up being more frustrated with scratches I didn’t cause or a hair in the dial or a messed up caseback.

I find it inexcusable having to go to an RSC even under warranty, to fix issues like these.

If you are having issues, I would send the watch to Rolex. You may have high standards, but can you open your watch and fix it.

[Scholar]

What I don't understand about those who think it's some kind of fan hate conspiracy against Rolex, what exactly would the fans have to gain here? It reminds me of when people here kept insisting the batch of Cyclops with no magnification was intended as such. (They seemed to go quiet once Rolex replaced those crystals and sorted out the issue.)

Rolex built its reputation on rock-solid reliability, even where the movements were less fancy than those of competitors (in its own class and of course more finicky and refined movements, too). It was pretty much the only in-house that went toe-to-toe with ETA in that regard.

It's not at all odd that fans of the maker would be concerned that the company has compromised in this area in favour of fancy features. A good example of the same phenomenon from another storied and beloved maker is Mercedes-Benz.

They had assumed the popularity of the gadgetry in the 90s SL-class was driving its sales, so they elected to double down on gadgets and compromise on fundamentals. (Here the comparison might be to the power reserve of new Omegas, or other features from competitors.)

It caused a decade of Mercedes models with severe reliability issues, even on the S-Class, that you would not see even on an econo-car. The ship would not really be righted until about 2010.

[Kevin of Larchmont]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

I'm not tacitly admitting anything - of course nobody really knows. I was just pointing out that 1,400+ is not a "small dataset" for a poll.

As long as we’re throwing unverifiable numbers around is it safe to say that there are probably a million 32XX watches in circulation? And much of the reading I’ve done on the tech forum thread has suggested that it was the early adopters of the 32XX movements who tend to be the most active and vocal about the issue on that thread and were the ones hit the hardest by the issue. So 1400 responses out of a theoretical million watches isn’t a meaningful data set and since the ratio of early versus late adopters and their watches can’t be corrected for in the poll data that makes the numbers even fuzzier.

Listen, I respect and value your input here on the forum and am grateful for all that I have learned from your posts but you chose your own words and chose to qualify twice your support of the poll data which suggests that you yourself are not even convinced of its veracity.

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

As long as we’re throwing unverifiable numbers around is it safe to say that there are probably a million 32XX watches in circulation? And much of the reading I’ve done on the tech forum thread has suggested that it was the early adopters of the 32XX movements who tend to be the most active and vocal about the issue on that thread. So 1400 responses out of a theoretical million watches isn’t a meaningful data set and since the ratio of early versus late adopters and their watches can’t be corrected for in the poll data that makes the numbers even fuzzier.

Listen, I respect and value your input here on the forum and am grateful for all that I have learned from your posts but you chose your own words and chose to qualify twice your support of the poll data which suggests that you yourself are not even convinced of its veracity.

I'm not convinced of its veracity and never said I am. I just said 1,400 respondents not a small dataset. My opinion of that poll is that it's interesting and shouldn't be written-off as worthless. I have no idea if it is 5% or 95% accurate in terms of the actual situation.

[enjoythemusic]

Originally Posted by Scholar

It caused a decade of Mercedes models with severe reliability issues, even on the S-Class, that you would not see even on an econo-car. The ship would not really be righted until about 2010.

Imho a very small yet vocal few.... and Rolex has taken care of it. Wish Mercedes had Rolex reliability. And just wait until you hear the costs to fix the Mercedes. A guy on YouTube recently got a used Mercedes Maybach... massive very expensive problems.

------
------

But haters should hold on to their concern if fhey want. Don't give up hope. Have faith, as one day, maybe 10 years from now, it will indeed need servicing.

[East of Eden]

Originally Posted by kieselguhr

Agreed.

Certain personalities should just stick to Atomic quartz, or Apple Watches.

Or avoid the 32xx movement

[East of Eden]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

As long as we’re throwing unverifiable numbers around is it safe to say that there are probably a million 32XX watches in circulation? And much of the reading I’ve done on the tech forum thread has suggested that it was the early adopters of the 32XX movements who tend to be the most active and vocal about the issue on that thread and were the ones hit the hardest by the issue.

Someone on this thread reported an issue with a 2022 32xx movement.

So 1400 responses out of a theoretical million watches isn’t a meaningful data set and since the ratio of early versus late adopters and their watches can’t be corrected for in the poll data that makes the numbers even fuzzier.

It will do until a larger poll is done. How big would it have to be acceptable to you? I suspect just a little bit bigger.

The OP has every right to be disgusted with the five figure lemons he bought

[East of Eden]

Originally Posted by hartsy

Reporting in that my 32XX movement has been incredibly consistent and impressive. 5 months of wear and only about 3 seconds fast.

Very few of these movements went bad that quickly, let us know in three years.

[Kevin of Larchmont]

Originally Posted by East of Eden

It will do until a larger poll is done. How big would it have to be acceptable to you? I suspect just a little bit bigger.

It has nothing to do with what is acceptable to me and everything to do with what is objectively statistically meaningful.

[East of Eden]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

It has nothing to do with what is acceptable to me and everything to do with what is objectively statistically meaningful.

See post #61

[enjoythemusic]

Originally Posted by East of Eden

See post #61

Comparing Rolex to Big Pharma? Rolex hasn't murdered people with their products.

(Insert dramatic music) Wait, or have they? (cresendo music to big ending)

And that's when this thread jumped the shark.

[East of Eden]

Originally Posted by enjoythemusic

Comparing Rolex to Big Pharma? Rolex hasn't murdered people with their products

Correct, it is a trivial matter compared to a new drug, so why do you need a larger sample size than they do?

[enjoythemusic]

Mods should properly move this thread to the existing Watch Tech forum thread. Any new threads on this should go there imho.

Mods....... your move.

[Kevin of Larchmont]

Originally Posted by East of Eden

See post #61

I saw it, so what. The pharmaceutical companies actually know the numbers of their test groups while the poll takers and the fortune tellers who try to divine arguments from the poll sample data can’t do a meaningful comparison because nobody knows how many 32XX watches there actually are. Fuzzy numbers, hearsay and holding the exception up as the rule, I do admire your willingness to stretch.

[Easy E]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

It has nothing to do with what is acceptable to me and everything to do with what is objectively statistically meaningful.

Unfortunately, we will never have that.

[East of Eden]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

I saw it, so what. The pharmaceutical companies actually know the numbers of their test groups while the poll takers and the fortune tellers who try to divine arguments from the poll sample data can’t do a meaningful comparison because nobody knows how many 32XX watches there actually are. Fuzzy numbers, hearsay and holding the exception up as the rule, I do admire your willingness to stretch.

Have some more Kool Aid

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Daniel23456

Wow, dude, chill. I obviously did not mean to “mock” or make fun of people with actual trauma. Being disgusted by it is all yours.

Ditto

For the record, you don't have to justify anything to anyone. Especially as it's obvious you are using our own words that we can understand quite well what you mean.
Besides, who is some faceless person that's possibly not suitably qualified and sitting down in front of you to judge sufficiently whether you are or aren't actually traumatised to some degree.
For some, the struggle is real.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by enjoythemusic

Mods should properly move this thread to the existing Watch Tech forum thread. Any new threads on this should go there imho.

Mods....... your move.

Yeah, bury it again and hope it all goes away.

But you know that the cream rises to the top

[the dark knight]

Threads like this confirm to me that Rolex has ZERO incentive to actually fix this problem. Whether it's the 32xx or any other issue people have with Rolex, there's always a vocal contingent of users that will belittle the owner with problems and defend Rolex to the death. And this is on what is basically THE enthusiast Rolex forum on the internet, where people are more attuned to their watches and whatever problems they may be having.

Out in the real world, most owners are oblivious to any issues their watch may be having. Most aren't even wearing it to tell time, they just wear it as jewelry. Maybe one day they notice it's running 1 minute slow per week, so they take it into the AD or a local jeweler and someone just tells them mechanical watches can be inaccurate, just reset the watch once a week and you are fine. And they believe it and just keep wearing it as such.

Meanwhile there is not a single person whether on this forum or not, irregardless of how they feel about the 32xx, that would turn down a steel Daytona or Pepsi if offered to them whether to wear or flip.

Considering all that, what incentive does Rolex have to fix the movement? Why spend $$$ and time trying to figure it out when they are probably already in the planning stages for the 33xx?

What's going to happen is nothing, Rolex will eventually move on to the 33xx which hopefully is more reliable, and 32xx owners will end up having to send their watches in for service every 3-5 years.

[Kevin of Larchmont]

Originally Posted by Easy E

Unfortunately, we will never have that.

Absolutely, I agree.

[hartsy]

All I want to know... If my watch shows issues will Rolex fix it?

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by enjoythemusic

Comparing Rolex to Big Pharma? Rolex hasn't murdered people with their products.

(Insert dramatic music) Wait, or have they? (cresendo music to big ending)

And that's when this thread jumped the shark.

Murder is a very strong word.
Why don't you throw committing genocide into the mix with ru486 coming to mind?
Deformed may very well apply though thinking about Thalidomide

[Easy E]

Originally Posted by hartsy

All I want to know... If my watch shows issues will Rolex fix it?

They will

[Jim_K]

Originally Posted by BooZiggy

As a therapist who works with people who have experienced actual trauma, I am very much disgusted by your use of this word to describe scratches on a watch.

oh good lord. Lighten up francis.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

As long as we’re throwing unverifiable numbers around is it safe to say that there are probably a million 32XX watches in circulation? And much of the reading I’ve done on the tech forum thread has suggested that it was the early adopters of the 32XX movements who tend to be the most active and vocal about the issue on that thread and were the ones hit the hardest by the issue. So 1400 responses out of a theoretical million watches isn’t a meaningful data set and since the ratio of early versus late adopters and their watches can’t be corrected for in the poll data that makes the numbers even fuzzier.

Listen, I respect and value your input here on the forum and am grateful for all that I have learned from your posts but you chose your own words and chose to qualify twice your support of the poll data which suggests that you yourself are not even convinced of its veracity.

Way more than a million 32xx movements in circulation, but they are over represented in terms of appearances at RSCs for ongoing timekeeping issues and in polls to that effect.
In comparison to the even greater numbers of 31xx movements that Rolex built a solid reputation on, the relevant number would be smaller.

I wonder what the perception of the movements would be if Rolex hadn't got ahead of themselves and gone for trumpeting the in-house and exclusive +2/-2 tolerance and 5 year warranty with 10 year service intervals to try and out do Omega
If Rolex were playing poker, they would've done their ass with a bluff like that.
It's a bit like bringing a knife to a gunfight in comparison. Even if it had the Rolex logo and name on the handle of the knife.

The sad part is that some people got caught and will continue to do so.
Also that all 6 digit Rolex watches are unfairly tarnished by the bad rep of what may lurk within, when not all 6 digit watches have a 32xx movement with some of the best of them also have 31xx movements and have done so since 2001.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Jim_K

oh good lord. Lighten up francis.

Big BOO has been triggered and on the way to being traumatised.
It's only a matter of time and degrees of mental decline.

[springer]

Originally Posted by BooZiggy

As a therapist who works with people who have experienced actual trauma, I am very much disgusted by your use of this word to describe scratches on a watch.

Your forum troll post is traumatizing me. Chill.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by kieselguhr

No it’s not. Life changing medications go on the market with much smaller sample sizes…

True enough.
And sometimes there is some really great medicine that happens along the way, which simply and arguably gets better and better.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by springer

Your forum troll post is traumatizing me. Chill.

And a first post as well.