• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Endeavor last won the day on September 16

Endeavor had the most liked content!

About Endeavor

  • Rank
    WRT Addict

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

7,588 profile views
  1. Thanks a lot Stuart for your elaborated answer ! All is written clearly in understandable language. Also importantly, no abbreviations are used, so everybody can understand. If you can teach and articulate this well, means that you understood the topic at hand and yes; all of it makes sense. When I joint my previous profession (retired engineer now), the working culture "didn't appreciate" too many questions and one of the "standard" answers was " You don't know !??" (most likely hiding their own "unknown"). Obviously, in the beginning, you didn't want to look stupid, so one was careful with posting questions. Later and now I played / play as dumb as possible, ask as many questions as possible and learned / learn as much as possible. Every day is indeed a schooldays and a treat ! Thanks a lot I'll go ahead and order the GR5617DBH and perhaps it's exactly the right spring? If not, there are ways around and improvising becomes the key. I always love the latter !
  2. Just to elaborate a bit on my last "slippery ice" question; If, as StuartBaker104 suggest, the wings of the GR5617DBH don't match up with the holes in the barrel, the wings could be clipped off and one would rely on the hook-end as being a sufficient anchor point. I get that and have no problems with his suggestion if that's what it takes. Now I like to make the ice even more slippery and perhaps this question is only hypothetically; For me it seems that the end of a spring with Normal Bridle, as with the spring I took out, seemingly fits also nice tight & snug behind the hook inside the DHB barrel. If in the old days this practice was "accepted" and would indeed supply a sufficient anchor point for the spring, could one then, if circumstances dictate, make a choice out of springs with a "Normal Bridle"? Wouldn't this open up a whole host of new possibilities (different lengths, thicknesses etc)? Please don't shoot me down in flames, I'm just testing the waters here !
  3. Not hampered by any knowledge and for my own education, I would like to ask the following questions; The full "CousinsUK" specifications of the GR5643 spring are: Height x thickness(strength) x Length x Barrel diameter: 1.90 x 0.19 x 480 x 15 None-Automatic. From what I read on the David Boettcher website; the longer the spring, the more "linear" the "power-supply". But also, in this case my barrel ID is 14.4mm, there seems to be a kind of optimum "fill" (space occupied by the spring) inside the barrel. "Un-coiling" the old spring which was fitted, I measured about 440mm (the last 10-15mm are a guesstimate since the last part of the spring is hard to un-coil) My questions are: - Even though a longer spring (GR5643: 480mm and meant for a 15mm barrel vs GR5617: 440mm for a 14.5mm barrel) may be beneficial, would the barrel not get "over-filled" with the GR5643 which is not only longer but also slightly thicker (0.19mm vs 0.18mm)? - CousinsUK presents a nice drawing of the different spring ends; "Normal Bridle, DB, DBH, T & TR". The GR5643 Cousins has on offer is described as "Non-Automatic" ...... which they don't describe what that is ? Is that a "Normal Bridle", like the old spring I found in the watch? - Now I'm getting on "slippery ice": The old spring fitted had, as I understand, a Normal Bridle, and the end-lip seems to engage nice firmly behind the DBH hook inside the barrel. I know, not as meant to be, but would a "Normal Bridle" spring not function just as well in a DBH barrel?
  4. I've no problem installing this spring manually. This barrel is humongous compared to for example a 7-3/4''' ETA2540 barrel. Having no winder leaves one with not many other options If the spring slides in, I'm lucky. If not, no problem ........ thanks for pointing out the possible hurdle.
  5. @StuartBaker104: I've been punching numbers in the "half-area" calculator. The arbor OD is 4.84mm and took an arbitrary 7 turns; the results were 0.16 thickness and 496mm long ...... but I trust your judgement better Yes, I measured the old spring with a micrometer and it was 0.19mm thick. But as written in the David Boettcher article; "repairers sometimes used whatever they had on hand that would fit", so I don't know how much value we should attache to the old-spring thickness? @jdm: Could you please elaborate on your remark? Do I need to measure differently?
  6. @StuartBaker104: Thanks again for your valuable contribution ! I fitted the spring again. The top of the spring seems to be flush with the bottom of the lid-recess inside the barrel. The lid itself has indeed a recess inside, allowing for a slightly higher spring. The old-spring fitted has a height of 1.85mm, so I may get away with the minimum spring-height in the range you indicated, the 1.9mm. A 2.5mm high spring is for sure out of the equation. With the spring mounted, and the barrel-lid pressed flush with the top of the barrel, the arbor (US ?, arbour = UK ?) turns freely and the spring winds / unwinds smoothly. The inside of the barrel measures ID = 14.4mm. The flush OD of the barrel = 15.5mm. I was wrong with my first internal height measurement inside the barrel. From the inside bottom of the barrel to the top edge = 2.36mm (measured with 0.02mm accuracy calipers to the best of my abilities) and the overall external height of the barrel is 2.6mm. The thickness of the lid seems to fluctuate a bit, depending on where the measurements are taken, between 0.32 - 0.38mm. Lets assume on, to be on the save side 0.4mm. This would suggest that the internal height would allow 2.36mm - 0.4mm is indeed a 1.9mm high spring. I'm not familiar with the mentioned David Boetcher’s calculator, so I may need some guidance there ....... Whether the watch has run correctly in the past is hard to find out, the owner has passed away and another mystery is why the sub-dial seconds hand is missing .... Hope to hear you thoughts ..... Regards: Roland.
  7. @StuartBaker104: I think you pointed out the first Gremlin ! Very well spotted indeed !! Sometimes one makes small observations which are stored somewhere in the back of your head. These observations are small and do not necessarily raise a red flag (for many different reasons; lack of experience is one of them). These observations are like small puzzle-blocks floating around in the grey (empty in my case ) mass. Some of these observations were; - the watch ran only 7 hrs on a full wound. - Before stripping the watch, I lifted the barrel-click and found hardly any residual power in the main-spring. - Later I found the minute-wheel floating in thick oil, making me to assume that the combination of dirt, dried out and thick oil caused the watch to stop prematurely ........ coming to a grinding hold so to speak. Obviously, if that would have been the case, there should have been some residual power in the spring left. I therefor jumped to the next "conclusion" that the spring must be "tired" after all those years. And to be honest, it never crossed my mind that a wrong spring could have been fitted ! The stamp in the main-plate say clearly 18SPB. Inside the spring-barrel sits a little hook, similar to the hook as on the arbor. Looking at JohnR725 pictures above, the hook seems suitable for a DBH spring. Also the barrel, as well as the barrel-lid do have slots to accommodate the DBH spring-"wings". The old spring removed has a "standard" end, found in many hand-wound wrist watches. So indeed, the spring mounted was the wrong type !! Again, very well spotted !! From as far as I can measure, the inside of the spring barrel has a depth of 2.04mm, that's from the bottom of the barrel to the barrels edge. There is on the top of the barrel, on the inside, a small recess of about 0.4mm where to barrel-lid fits in. The thickness of the barrel lid is about 0.32mm. This means that if & when the lid sits flush with the top of the spring-barrel, the maximum spring height can be 2.04 - 0.32 = 1.72mm. The spring which I removed has a height of 1.84mm. This means that the lid couldn't have been flush with the barrel ....... a point I didn't observe. Looking at scans of the GR book; am I reading correctly, under column 3, that the height of a 18SPB spring is 2.50 mm? If the original spring is indeed 2.50mm high, then something more is going on ........ If more information is required, please let me know what and I will try to provide ..... Hope to hear ....... Best regards: Roland
  8. @JohnR725: Thank you for your help . Reading your article; measuring a main-spring seems to be a science on its own ! . Perhaps I may have found something in Italy ....... the seller claims it's a "Ressort Muelle" aftermarket spring allegedly fitting the Omega 18SPB. If it doesn't, I will post some more pictures of the old spring and we go through the "motions" of trying to determine what I need to order .....
  9. Progress While waiting for some help, I couldn't help myself to start "poking-around" and lo and behold, it "fell apart" Some parts no oil, some parts with dried out oil and some parts were swimming in it; The main-spring seems tired, any idea's where to get a new ? I've never ordered a new spring for a pocket watch of this age ... What measurements to take? Also still stands which oils to be used for a pocket watch ....... about the same as for a wrist-watch ? Hope to hear .....
  10. Dear All; Last night on a party a gold-plated Omega pocket was "thrown" into my lap; allegedly a none-runner. It has its sub-dial seconds-hand missing, chain seems to be the original. Before going to bed around midnight, I wound the watch, it ticket and ran until this morning 07:00, after which it stopped. The balance makes a few ticks after shaking, but stops again. So, it's a "runner" Clearly dirt in the movement, behind the glass, on the dial etc. What else do I know / found out so far about this watch; On bidfun-db ( http://www.ranfft.de/cgi-bin/bidfun-db.cgi?10&ranfft&&2ustu&1095006620) I found a similar looking watch, same movement, same case, different dial & hands, allegedly 1924 era and an enamel dial. The 18SPB movement seems (seemingly) pretty straight forwards and looking at case marks / movement-screws-heads; not very often "messed" with. The case numbers do match-up and the gold-plating ware on case & chain seem to match up as well. The sub-dial seconds-hand pivot seems still standing, so why the hand is missing ?? Before getting my screwdrivers and spanners out, I'm trying to get some information such as; - Even though the movement seems pretty straight forwards, an exploded view and lubrication scheme; including types of oil used for these pocket watches? - How do the hands come off (straight pull?) and special precaution taken with regards to an enamel dial? - Where to order a new main-spring (if advisable?) and where to find sub-dial seconds-hand (eBay / CousinsUK / .......)? Any info about Pivot diameters ? - Pulling / disassembling the crown / winding stem? A little screw seems to hold the winding stem, but unlike with a wrist-watch, this crown has the additional push button to open the front-cover. - Any do's / don'ts / watch-out for's / tips & tricks ..... ? My intention is to strip, clean & restore this heirloom watch, making pictures of the journey for a forum "walk-through". Any help / info is highly appreciated Thanks; Roland.
  11. Advice on which movement to start with

    I didn't expect that ! Not a Vostok 2209 at all .......... I would mind to get my hands on such a watch, I haven't been so lucky so far ! And indeed, with all respect, not for starters. Keep it safe until you feel confident, a nice movement: congratulations !
  12. Advice on which movement to start with

    The Wostok's are easy to work on. Depending in the movement, parts are cheap. I would assume that your watch has a Wostok 2209 movement. With a bit of luck you will find 6x or 10x scrap 2209 movements on eBay for around $15. If you find some scrap movements, you have plenty parts to give it a try and learn...... just my 2-cents
  13. Yes, JDM, that is what I meant, the Chinese / Japanese will be very happy to supply them with Asian parts
  14. Another point from the article, and of course things are open for different interpretations; but according to the information by 2020 the Swatch Group will no longer be obliged to sell mechanical movements to other Swiss watch companies. It is then assumed that those other companies will produce their own parts & blanks. This may be the case, but it could also mean the end of smaller / medium Swiss watch companies ...... unless they joint the Swatch-group or the seek help from another sources. By seeking help, most likely from outside Switzerland, their watches can't be called "Swiss-made" anymore; reducing the diversity of "Swiss-made" watches. One could also question whether these small companies are able to have a decent market-share, facing higher Swiss labor cost and have to compete against the "big-eastern-boys" It would be very strange that if the Chinese / Japanese won't welcome these smaller companies, or perhaps their product, with open arms. The end result will be (again) less jobs in the west, more jobs & work for the Chinese / Japanese ..... And so the story continues ........
  15. @dadistic Thank you for your feedback