32xx movement problem poll and data thread

[Smobews]

The Explorer II purchased June 2021 just got back from service after amplitude loss and drastic loss of time

Submariner purchased April 2022 is about to go in for amplitude loss and losing time.

SD43 purchased July of 2020 is running strong and accurate.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Smobews

The Explorer II purchased June 2021 just got back from service after amplitude loss and drastic loss of time

Thank you for rejoining this thread. As of today, we can learn one thing from your three watches: how does the 3285 caliber (Explorer II) come back from RSC service?
Amplitudes and rates (all 5 positions) measured (with your Weishi 1900) after full winding and 24 hours would be interesting to me.

[Smobews]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Thank you for rejoining this thread. As of today, we can learn one thing from your three watches: how does the 3285 caliber (Explorer II) come back from RSC service?
Amplitudes and rates (all 5 positions) measured (with your Weishi 1900) after full winding and 24 hours would be interesting to me.

here are results (Avg 3 is DU, CD, 6U)

[saxo3]

Thanks, your position naming is bit confusing:

Dial up = DU (ok)
Down = ?
6 up = 6U (ok)
Dial Down = DD (ok)
Up =?
Why avg 3 is DU?

[Smobews]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Thanks, your position naming is bit confusing:

Dial up = DU (ok)
Down = ?
6 up = 6U (ok)
Dial Down = DD (ok)
Up =?
Why avg 3 is DU?

Down is crown down
Up is crown up

I look at avg 3 (DU, CD, 6U) because it closely represents performance on the wrist.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by SwissSteph

Hello everyone,

To follow up on “saxo3”'s suggestions on this forum, I remeasured my two watches and here are the results. Is my third series of measurements.

My two watches were not stopped at all, but I made 40 turns for winding. For each position, the measurement lasted 5 minutes before noting the result.

The data for the “Sea Dweller” are really not so good...

Thanks for your opinions and happy new year.

The movement isochronism is another way to check the 32xx caliber performance.

One needs timegrapher data along the power reserve, the more the better, for a reliable analysis (linear fit to determine the slope 'm').

I plotted and fitted the data of your Explorer II (3285) and compared it with your Sea-Dweller (3235), both watches bought in 2024.

Your 3285 watch has a very good isochronism.
The 3235 watch is not good as anyone can see.

[SwissSteph]

Hello ‘Saxo3’,

Thank you for this graph (I can't make the same one, I'm terrible at using a spreadsheet).

My ‘SD’ is, in my personal opinion, horrible. I am really very disappointed with this purchase, the brand and these major problems that Rolex seems to ignore despite all the information you can find on the WWW.

My ‘SD’ is now stopped, I'm waiting for April to make a new series of measurements, and would be impatient to have your opinion (thank you again for your support and your analyses on my data).

See you in a few months

[BMWMotoRider]

Originally Posted by SwissSteph

Hello ‘Saxo3’,

Thank you for this graph (I can't make the same one, I'm terrible at using a spreadsheet).

My ‘SD’ is, in my personal opinion, horrible. I am really very disappointed with this purchase, the brand and these major problems that Rolex seems to ignore despite all the information you can find on the WWW.

My ‘SD’ is now stopped, I'm waiting for April to make a new series of measurements, and would be impatient to have your opinion (thank you again for your support and your analyses on my data).

See you in a few months

I share your same feelings. My SeaDweller 43 is an enormous disappointment too. Terrible experiences with trying to buy it a few years ago to the terrible performance (20 seconds or so slow per day). I bought a watch assuming it would be in the stated accuracy for many years and not need to be sent in for service for about 10 years. Rolex will not disclose any information about the problem with the 3200 series movement nor are the standing behind problem movements beyond the 5 year warranty.

I have not sent mine for service as of yet but plan on buying a timeograph before doing so in order to document the current performance of my watch both before and after service.

All that being said, I feel like there are more SeaDweller watches that have had reported problems compared to other models. I can't imagine there is a technical difference that would be causing this but I do wonder if more people are wearing their SeaDweller watches more than other models.

Good luck with getting your's sorted out. Hopefully Rolex will have a permanent fix soon.

[CaptT]

Originally Posted by BMWMotoRider

All that being said, I feel like there are more SeaDweller watches that have had reported problems compared to other models.

Feel the same way, based anecdotally.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by BMWMotoRider

I share your same feelings. My SeaDweller 43 is an enormous disappointment too.

All that being said, I feel like there are more SeaDweller watches that have had reported problems compared to other models. I can't imagine there is a technical difference that would be causing this but I do wonder if more people are wearing their SeaDweller watches more than other models.

Originally Posted by CaptT

Feel the same way, based anecdotally.

It is not the watch model that counts, but the caliber.

My summary of bought (10/2023 - 01/2025), measured, and presented watches in this thread, gives a different picture, see list below.

3285 calibers have more reported amplitude problems compared to the 3235 calibers, which are inside the Sea-Dwellers and other models.

But the quantity of measured calibers is very low, i.e., statistically irrelevant, but better than a "feeling"?

Of course, there are significant technical differences between the 3230, 3235 and 3285, read #5238.

[kieselguhr]

Just received my 126710 with 3285 movement back from RSC for warranty work. I don’t have a timegrapher. I simply noticed the watch was almost 5 minutes slow at the end of a weekly rotation. The watchmaker at the AD told me that it was losing at least 30 seconds daily. Almost made it to 5 years without issues!

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by kieselguhr

I simply noticed the watch was almost 5 minutes slow at the end of a weekly rotation. The watchmaker at the AD told me that it was losing at least 30 seconds daily.

5 min/week = 43 s/d is close to what the AD told you.

Originally Posted by kieselguhr

Almost made it to 5 years without issues!

No. I think that this movement did not make it close to 5 years without issues, because the 3285 caliber was sick long before that (some years), but you either did not notice it, or you noticed but did not bring the watch to RSC for repair.

Originally Posted by kieselguhr

I don’t have a timegrapher.

Anyway, it is interesting to measure your 3285 caliber now, after RSC repair, with a timegrapher.

[Smobews]

I do a yearly timegrapher on my watches to assess their health. I ran the tests on my two year old sub and had spectacular results. All of the rates and amplitudes were solid, but lower than the year before. I ran it down to a stop to check on power reserve. 72 hours.

Here is the weird part; after the watch ran down to a full stop, I wound it up fully, wore it for a couple of hours and decided to do a recheck for fun. I made sure it was fully wound and did timegrapher again. Amplitude dial up went from 262 from prior test down to 225, and barely 200 on vertical positions. After 24 hours, vertical amplitudes were in the 180s.

The watch is now at RSC getting warranty work done.

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Smobews

Here is the weird part; after the watch ran down to a full stop, I wound it up fully, wore it for a couple of hours and decided to do a recheck for fun. I made sure it was fully wound and did timegrapher again. Amplitude dial up went from 262 from prior test down to 225, and barely 200 on vertical positions. After 24 hours, vertical amplitudes were in the 180s.

The watch is now at RSC getting warranty work done.

Interesting, not heard anything like that for a 32xx. Submariner reference number and date of purchase?

[Smobews]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Interesting, not heard anything like that for a 32xx. Submariner reference number and date of purchase?

April 2022

124060

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Smobews

April 2022

124060

It is hard to believe that a 3230 could suddenly collapse as you described.

[kieselguhr]

Originally Posted by saxo3

5 min/week = 43 s/d is close to what the AD told you.

No. I think that this movement did not make it close to 5 years without issues, because the 3285 caliber was sick long before that (some years), but you either did not notice it, or you noticed but did not bring the watch to RSC for repair.

Anyway, it is interesting to measure your 3285 caliber now, after RSC repair, with a timegrapher.

I could agree with the 3285 being predestined to succumb to failure.

But you are wrong about it having failed long before as I do annually check the watch as part of an ongoing long term review and it was definitely not losing 43 s/d the year before. It was an abrupt and recent change.

Regardless, it failed. I’m reporting it on this thread.

If I happen to find a time grapher on offer up I may pick one up

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by kieselguhr

I do annually check the watch and it was definitely not losing 43 s/d the year before. It was an abrupt and recent change.

Thanks for your reply! Interesting.
How (without a timegrapher) and when (date) did you check the last time and what was the result?
I can't understand why and how a 32xx movement can show abrupt or very quick changes; first in amplitudes (sudden drop below 200 degrees) followed by negative rates like -30 to -40 s/d.

[kieselguhr]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Thanks for your reply! Interesting.
How (without a timegrapher) and when (date) did you check the last time?

Rudimentary method via comparing daily to atomic clock and measuring deviation

Purchased 6/2020: -0.5 s/d ( -3s on day 7)
1/2021: -0.5 s/d (-3s on day 7)
11/2022: -0.3s/d (-2s on day 7)
7/2023: -1s/d (-7s on day 7)
5/2024: -8s/d (-52s on day 7)
11/2024: -5 minutes before day 7. At this point I brought it to my AD for the watchmaker to inspect. His exact words were it was indeed losing time but he would not adjust it himself because it was inconsistent value and recommendation was to send back to RSC for warranty work. My guess is he was referring to the amplitude you measure on the timegrapher.

[SwissSteph]

Originally Posted by Smobews

I do a yearly timegrapher on my watches to assess their health. I ran the tests on my two year old sub and had spectacular results. All of the rates and amplitudes were solid, but lower than the year before. I ran it down to a stop to check on power reserve. 72 hours.

Here is the weird part; after the watch ran down to a full stop, I wound it up fully, wore it for a couple of hours and decided to do a recheck for fun. I made sure it was fully wound and did timegrapher again. Amplitude dial up went from 262 from prior test down to 225, and barely 200 on vertical positions. After 24 hours, vertical amplitudes were in the 180s.

The watch is now at RSC getting warranty work done.

Your test is very interesting, and I'm going to do the same thing in April, so with a three-month ‘rest’ (watch stopped). I can't wait to discover the new values

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by kieselguhr

But you are wrong about it having failed long before as I do annually check the watch as part of an ongoing long term review and it was definitely not losing 43 s/d the year before.

It was an abrupt and recent change.

No, you will find my explanation below.

Originally Posted by kieselguhr

Rudimentary method via comparing daily to atomic clock and measuring deviation
Purchased 6/2020: -0.5 s/d ( -3s on day 7)
1/2021: -0.5 s/d (-3s on day 7)
11/2022: -0.3s/d (-2s on day 7)
7/2023: -1s/d (-7s on day 7)
5/2024: -8s/d (-52s on day 7)
11/2024: -5 minutes before day 7.

Not rudimentary, but very useful data, as opposed to contributions without it.

I took the time to copy your numbers and produced a graph (at the bottom of this post) that says more than 1000 words.

Your measurement data are displayed as a function of time (months after purchase date):
Red dots: rates, in seconds/day (left y-axis)
Blue dots: Loss on day 7, in seconds (right y-axis)

-I see that the 3285 caliber in your GMT (126710) was quite good within the first 3 years after purchase (0 - 37 months: green area on the graph)

-The 3285 started to degrade between 3 and 4 years (37 - 47 months: orange area on the graph)

-This degradation became much more pronounced after 4 years (47 – 53 months: red area on the graph)

Therefore, I condlude that the issues of your 3285 has declared some time between year 3 and year 4 of your ownership. During the last year, the performance has decreased dramatically.

Originally Posted by kieselguhr

But you are wrong about it having failed long before as I do annually check the watch as part of an ongoing long term review and it was definitely not losing 43 s/d the year before. It was an abrupt and recent change.

I think it is safe to repeat my conclusion that your watch started to fail long before the end of the 5 year warranty period.

I have reached this conclusion by using only your data and presenting it in a simple graph.

So your 3285 movement did not change abruptly, i.e., within hours, days, or a few weeks.