Leaderboard

Hope that helps . The tinkers on those forums are better at this parts i think. Come back with other watches in the future.

Thanks for the reply rogart63 Sent from my p4 using Tapatalk

Welcome Usluyan [emoji106]

Glad to be of help! J

The bezel is the metal ring that sits on top of the watchcase and holds the crystal. In your picture it is the portion outlined in yellow. The red line is where you should fit a razor or some suitably thin and sturdy object to pry the bezel/crystal away from the case. It should lift fairly easily, and it will be a quick matter to get it off once it does.

You appear to have completely missed the point of this experiment, which as @mikepilk quite clearly stated, was to see if a lip of moved metal could be seen to form in the filed groove due to the buffing process. Any lip did not have to fill the groove to be a proof of metal moving rather than being removed, it simply had to be there. As the excellent macrophotography shows quite beyond doubt no visible lip was formed. It is fair to conclude that in this specific instance the evidence strongly suggests that the process removed material rather than reshaped it. However, rather than proclaim that this was the last word on the subject Mike, in accordance with what has become established as "The Scientific Method" invited others to repeat the experiment, perhaps using different equipment, to see if a different result could be achieved. The experiment was a perfectly valid test of the hypothesis, a hypothesis which in this instance was found to be lacking. Regarding the terminology it would seem that "buffing" and "polishing" can be used either way round within the world of watchmaking and silver/goldsmithing. As your Esslinger link demonstrates one usage so another Jewelers supplier does the other; "Polishing: This process removes surface material, improving the surface and preparing it for buffing. This is generally a coarse operation involving sandpaper and/or coarse polishing compounds. Buffing: This process makes the surface smooth producing a high luster and mirror finish if desired. This is done with the use of buffing wheels and buffing compounds. Buffing can be divided into two steps; cut buffing and color buffing." https://www.pjtool.com/buffing-polishing-terms/ Even Tag Heuer describes " Polishing and a final hand buffing make the metal and the surface smooth." https://www.tagheuer.com/en/watch-finishings/polished-watches Suggesting that buffing is a process that follows polishing. As I stated in my post at the top of this thread; This remains true and no amount of context specific Googling has come up with a definitive definition. At no point in this thread or in @bojan1990's thread " Problems with polishing a watch case" have I implied or made a "blanket statement that "buffing ruins edges"." in fact what I did say was; and; completely contrary to your impression. I did state that machine buffing incurred a high risk of things going wrong due to the speed at which the process takes place, especially in unskilled hands. I stand by that statement. If you want an example of a blanket statement that clearly demonstrates someones pre-concepts and intolerance of anothers techniques, try " Never use abrasive paper on a watch case, is very bad for a (self appointed) watchmaker to suggest that.", and "As mentioned already I have left this discussion, it's not my duty to educate. Feel free to sandpaper your or your friend' s watches, just.don't don't expect to be told that is right by anyone that does it the correct way." both of which can be found here; https://www.watchrepairtalk.com/topic/7395-problems-with-polishing-a-watch-case/ If the video, from which all of the images I used were taken, was an example of buffing being done incorrectly, why was it posted as an example of "correct" procedure? Why would anyone do that? If the ding is only 0.1mm deep then only 0.1mm of material needs to be removed to lose it. This can be as easily and accurately achieved using wet/dry silicon carbide paper (also works for masonry) as it can using a buffing wheel, just as overdoing can be as easily done with a buffing wheel as with "sand paper", as perfectly demonstrated by the video. http://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.php?216809-Lapping-machine-case-example-pics-on-page-3/page2 http://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.php?323843-My-go-on-watch-case-lapping http://microarcwelding.com/services/ http://www.laserweldingservices.co.uk/ There are many more, the internet is a wonderful tool.... At no point has anyone said that you can't, and I don't envisage anyone holding their breath to go blue in the face waiting for you to fail. Buffing is clearly a skill that you have mastered and that is a good thing as it keeps a skill set alive. However, I do not believe that it is the only correct way to refinish or repair a damaged watch case, there are other equally effective and valid techniques that can be applied. The title of this thread is " Buffing; Myth or Fact?", the ? indicates that it is a question as it was an attempt to encourage discussion about the relative merrits of the technique and to try and flush out some evidence for the claim that buffing moves the metal about, or at least a metallurgically sensible explanation for how such a mechanism works. So far neither evidence nor explanation has been forthcoming. So far........

Ishima, I don't think Measuretwice is in doubt about the final outcome. It is clearly working for you. What he does doubt (as do I) is that you are "moving" stainless steel surfaces at low melting points. As a jewellery designer that works with silver and gold, I can move that metal with various compounds. With stainless however, I NEED to take down that metal to remove scratches or weld heavy dings and holes and refinish. I really need to see this technique in action to believe it. Can you upload a video on YouTube and send a link? I'm always curious about finishing so you've got my attention. [emoji16] Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

The metal isn't going to flow at 700C, not stainless anyway. The metal will move if its in either a molten state where they flow as a liquid, or it receives enough force (plastic deformation). Even red hot on the anvil, it doesn't flow without a substantial force. imo the explanation for the discrepancy is that it would be difficult distinguish between how between material miraculously moved material to fill in scratch or just material formed around the scratch being removed by buffing such that things are now at the same level. Somebody says the metal is moving and others accept it. That buffing works and there is no scratch is not evidence that material has been moved. If what you say is as clear as the clear blue sky, can you take a piece of material and make it measurably thicker in a spot by buffing? (heat expansion not included) If so, I'll be quiet