Jump to content

RyMoeller

Member
  • Content Count

    437
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

RyMoeller last won the day on January 5

RyMoeller had the most liked content!

About RyMoeller

  • Rank
    WRT Addict

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    California
  • Interests
    Watchmaking (naturally), Aviation, Formula One, and Family

Recent Profile Visitors

18,621 profile views
  1. Perhaps it's the tension ring which is fitted inside the crystal. If that's the case the replacement crystal would come with a new ring.
  2. Well, Rolex used KIF back in the day and the Omega Speedmaster I just finished up had the same KIF shock protector so the mid to higher end brands trusted them. Are some systems better than others? I got the impression the performance between the differing options was pretty much the same. I'll admit some shock springs elicit more cussing during service than others though.
  3. What a hack- the dial is polished as is the case, but the movement- not even a modicum of effort was put into polishing it. Pass.
  4. Yeah, I'm not really sure what even got me started on the path; I guess I just like seeing the different solutions each manufacturer had for the same problems. It's a hobby though so time is on my side. I have an affinity for Venus movements (which the 7730 is derived from) but the 861 is considered by some as the best manual wind chronograph out there. I'm not aware of any weaknesses in the movement. Also, if you don't have one already, it's a good excuse to get an Omega Speedmaster. Hamilton has some great 7730 chronographs too.
  5. Thanks- I'm sure one will show up in time. ;o) Yes, the movements are in-house column wheel chronographs; you might know I'm trying to work my way through all of the manual chronographs of the golden age! They're quite nice though- they do look better in person but feel better than any other watch I've had thus far. Movado made some keepers back in the day.
  6. Here's a couple of Movado Subsea Chronographs from the 1950's that are just about twins. The one on the right (#1) has had a bit of a hard life compared to the one on the left. Gone are the Kris hands from the minute and hour registers. The original crown is missing too and it appears that the pendant tube was modified to make the new crown fit (see bottom pic). It's a terrible shame as this is a Taubert/Borgel case and of high quality craftsmanship. The outer end of the pendant tube has been lost (perhaps filed off) and the cork gasket is long gone. The Subsea on the right (#2) is in better shape with the original Kris hands, crown, and a movement that appears to have been serviced recently. The lead caseback gasket is gone and replaced with a rubber one and the larger hands are clearly wrong- why have luminous paint on the dial if the hands have none? The trick here will be to bring both watches back to Movado factory specifications. I doubt I can locate the Kris hands but if anyone knows where I can find a proper Borgel style crown and is willing to share the info that would be greatly appreciated! I picked up an old Mido Multifort which has a similar crown but it would be a shame to steal parts from it as it's otherwise complete. I've dug through my vintage hand drawer and think I might have the proper hour and minute hands needed for #2. I wonder if there are there any thoughts on how I could go about fixing the pendant tube on #1? The backup plan will be to just leave it as it is- the watch is vintage and replacing the cork gaskets in the pusher tubes to a level that will ensure reliable water resistance is probably not possible (I don't have the tools and I don't believe replacement cork gaskets can be found). I do love to do restorations though... Any thoughts/suggestions are appreciated. Thanks!
  7. Ah okay- I second look at the diagram shows the holding ring securing the pusher. As you've probably guessed - I haven't fiddled with a 6139... yet.
  8. Ebay is great for a laugh sometimes. I imagine this is what the seller will be thinking in about ten days time, "Hmmm... 'Skeleton' didn't work. I guess I'll try relisting it as 'Steam Punk'"
  9. I find it interesting that the drawing doesn't show the C clip that secures the pusher in the tube. If you can drive the remains of the pusher out, you might be able to reuse the tube by driving it back into the case with a bit of Loctite or JB Weld.
  10. Well the replacement fourth wheel finally arrived so I was able to compare it against the fourth wheel that was in the movement. Now I know the wheel I purchased is correct for the 1045 movement because it was still in it's original package (Omega Part #1045-1243) but to the naked eye (well, with the help of a loupe) both wheels looked exactly alike. This caused me a bit of concern since I was pretty darn sure the fourth wheel was the problem area. Counting gear teeth under the microscope the old wheel came in at 83 teeth and the new wheel at 84! Now we're getting somewhere! So I swapped out the wheels, reassembled the movement and let it run for a day- it's now just a minute fast per day and I should be able to regulate that out. Looking at the wheel to pinion tooth ratio I came up with the following- which obviously isn't correct so maybe someone can check my math! The movement beats at 28,800 bph. That's 8 beats per second. The escape wheel has 20 teeth on the wheel and 7 on the pinion. The correct fourth wheel has 84 teeth. If I figure there are 480 beats per minute (8 x 60 = 480), then divide that by the twenty teeth of the escape wheel (480/20 = 24), multiply the quotient by the number of teeth on the escape wheel pinion (24 x 7 = 168), and lastly divide that by the number of teeth on the fourth wheel (168/84 = 2) I end up with two revolutions of the fourth wheel for every 480 beats; clearly this isn't correct. The correct answer should be one revolution of the fourth wheel for every 480 beats. Somewhere I goofed up. If I run the same calculation using the old fourth wheel (83 teeth) I end up with 2.024096 revolutions per minute- which is clearly faster. At any rate the problem has been solved and the watch is finished. Thanks again for the input everyone.
  11. Cool. A collectible piece too. And I love the sound those pin pallets make when they're running properly. Looking forward to following the progress here.
  12. That Seamaster is a classic vintage counterfeit- of European origin I would guess as I've heard these watches were pawned off on tourists back in the day. There's a bit of history in that watch there and I think it's interesting because of it; regardless I'm surprised the market (I'm assuming eBay) allowed the sale to proceed. Like many on this forum, I've seen more than my fair share of counterfeit pieces. Supposedly they damage the brand which they are posing as, although I'm dubious of this. The data on counterfeits seems to be a bit one sided- the assumption being that they devalue the brand name and compromise sales. Everyone I've seen whose had a counterfeit watch would never spend the money needed for the real McCoy. At the same time they unwittingly became brand ambassadors when the watch was on their wrist. I've fixed a few of these counterfeits and doing so just whets my appetite for the real thing. This is just my personal experience though and obviously should be taken with a grain of salt. I do know that when I finally do get my Tudor Submariner or Rolex GMT I'll never tell anyone it's anything other than a fake- I wouldn't want them thinking I'm wearing $6K+ on my wrist! Back to the Seamaster though- whoever bought it obviously overpaid by a about 146 pounds.
  13. Thanks for the responses. It's nice to see a consensus as it gives me confidence with what to do next. I noted also the dirty read on the timegrapher as @clockboy pointed out and will see if I can clean that up a bit. Apologies for not responding earlier- my wife's Mini Cooper blew up and the repair has kept me quite busy and away from the desk!
  14. This one is a real mystery so I thought I'd toss it up here in case someone else has come across this problem. I've reassembled the Speedmaster which was lacking parts (see my earlier inquiry) and have it up and running again. It's a long story, but amazingly, after missing a bundle of parts and being terribly neglected it's ticking away happily and the chronograph works a treat- but there is one BIG problem. The watch runs about two seconds per minute fast. That adds up pretty quickly. The timegrapher trace isn't too clean but it is consistent and it shows the watch running much better than that (note the image only shows about fifteen seconds of testing on the timegrapher- rest assured, I've had it on there a lot longer than that and have pretty much the same results in all positions) So why does the timegrapher show the watch running less than a minute off per day but the real world results are so much different? Well there are a few possible problem areas. The escapement may be the problem but the pallet and balance (complete) are NOS replacements from Omega. The escape wheel may be an issue- perhaps it's "slipping" and the pallet isn't locking consitantly. I haven't seen this on the timegrapher though nor have I seen it while watching the escapement under the microscope. Still, there are some obvious issues in the movement. Whoever disassembled it before I got it made a real mess of things. For example the Delrin wheel on the coupling clutch was vandalized terribly by a wayward screwdriver. It took quite a while to get the gear teeth back in order (the "before" picture is below). I secured a NOS replacement just in case the movement didn't accept the repaired coupling clutch. Despite this damage, I don't think the coupling clutch is the problem. The fourth wheel is positioned between the coupling clutch and the escape wheel. It's regulated by the escape wheel and the running seconds hand is attached to the fourth wheel. When I time how long it takes for the running seconds hand to make a full revolution using the stopwatch built into my iPhone, I come up with 58.02 seconds (give or take a few tenths). I'm thinking the problem lies with the fourth wheel. The Lemania 5012 chronograph movement (Tissot 2920) runs at a slower 21600 BPM. The replacement of the fourth wheel in this movement (a Lemania 5100, 28800 BPM derivative) with one manufactured for the 5012 movement would result in the watch running fast. It's questionable whether the gear teeth would mesh properly though. Right now it's just a guess. I may need to tear the movement back down to check the gear ratios for each of the wheels in the train to confirm they're the right wheels for the movement but before I do that I was hoping someone might have solved a mystery such as this before and have some good advice to offer! Thanks in advance for the comments as they are always helpful! Here's a few pics of the watch as it came together- just because posts with pictures are always more interesting. Before service begins... Why you should periodically replace your spring bars- Omega gaskets self destruct (turn into tar) if they aren't replaced for forty years... This movement is plastic fantastic but I love it. Other than not keeping time at all, it's the easiest chronograph movement I've worked on. Look at all those scratches- previous watchmaker's tool of choice- screwdriver or machete? It is a pretty beast though.
×
×
  • Create New...