32xx movement problem poll and data thread

[saxo3]

Source: https://revolutionwatch.com/rolex-fi...al-escapement/

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Dirt

The 33xx will put things right with the mothership.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by saxo3

There you go again.
Sending out those negative waves.

Let's face it.
Rolex has to do something given the current circumstances they find themselves in.
Not that most people really care about these things.

Until something changes, our house shall remain a 32xx movement free zone.

[Goatrope]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Source: https://revolutionwatch.com/rolex-fi...al-escapement/

Thanks for posting this!

Very interesting question posed within the article:

" Why pursue an alternative when the Chronergy escapement is already one of the most efficient and robust designs in industrial watchmaking, if not watchmaking?

The answer likely lies in its fundamental advantages. While Chronergy refines the lever escapement with optimised geometry and materials, it does not fundamentally change the way energy is transmitted. It enhances efficiency by improving impulse timing and reducing losses, but its issue is age-old – the need for lubrication on its impulse surfaces."

That's one possible answer. Is it more likely Rolex have hit a wall in fixing the issue we discuss here?

Full disclosure - non-32xx household by choice.

[Easy E]

Originally Posted by saxo3

Source: https://revolutionwatch.com/rolex-fi...al-escapement/

"It is an intriguing development given the brand’s proven success with the Chronergy, which has yielded some of the most precise movements in the world" ....but not very accurate

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by Easy E

"It is an intriguing development given the brand’s proven success with the Chronergy, which has yielded some of the most precise movements in the world" ....but not very accurate

100 points. You found the key sentence in this article. Here is the another one:

"The Chronergy escapement was a prime example: a deeply researched, finely optimised evolution of the Swiss lever escapement, designed as a new standard across its entire production."

[mato123]

I wouldn't hold my breath. Filing for a patent means nothing. As stated in the article:

"Rolex has filed countless patents over the years, including detent and constant force escapements, many of which never materialise in production..."

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by mato123

I wouldn't hold my breath. Filing for a patent means nothing.

100 % agreed. Wondering who has written the Rolex propaganda parts in this article, seems clear, though.