Yikes, sounds like you have deep contacts on this... That's really not ideal if they're still not sure why the issue is there... I'm sitting on the side of the fence that Rolex will do the right thing for the owners at the point they do find a solution... This as the makings of a disaster for them..Ah, okay thanks for clarifying. I assume then that someone told you that this was acceptable amplitude? A watchmaker who left Rolex due to the hours they were asking him to work had talked about them lowering the minimum amplitude specs in order to allow more repaired watches out the door, provided that the accuracy was still there, so I guess I'm not surprised to hear this in a way.
Amplitude is a funny thing when related to accuracy, and the level of isochronism obviously comes into play. If you have positional variation in the vertical positions, there's an amplitude where they will flip - the fast become slow and the slow become fast. There's actually a sort of sweet spot for amplitude, which for most movements is around 220 degrees, where poise errors basically disappear.
In any case, at some point you realize as a new watch buyer, you are a beta tester. This is no different...and my contacts have said that right now there isn't a handy solution that they can just implement, so they are essentially limping along while they try to figure something out. The fact that they are now using this movement more widely has exposed issues that were not apparent when it was in more limited use. It's ugly...