Jump to content

CaptCalvin

Advanced Member
  • Content Count

    293
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

CaptCalvin last won the day on July 25

CaptCalvin had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

131 Excellent

About CaptCalvin

  • Rank
    WRT Addict

Recent Profile Visitors

572 profile views
  1. I would prefer the 1 second slow. For me it's not about how long it takes to set a watch, but the frequency at which you have to set it. If say your tolerance is 1 minute if it's 1 second slow you're resetting it about once every month. 3 seconds fast you're setting it about once every 2 weeks. I also like to get the minute hand to hit minute markers dead on center when second hand hits zero, and pulling the crown out more often than not throws off the sync, so I always set it by hacking it at the top of minute anyway.
  2. That knob is in fact what you would use to regulate. It turns rollers that tightly pinch the hairspring. Turn it one way the rollers dispense hairspring, turn it the other way they retract. I think the drawbacks of such a system is obvious.
  3. I've never worked on one of these myself, but hearing from people who have they have nothing but complaints. It's called "incastar regulator" if you want to do more research. From what I can work out in my head as well as anecdotes from other watchmakers, the challenge is keeping the hairspring from going out of round whilst you regulate it. Think you'll have better luck if you put the hairspring into round, not touch the regulator, and manipulate the inertia of the balance itself with the balance screws with say a pin vice. All I can say is good luck with this one.
  4. There is no jewel in center pipe. But that pipe is supposed to be counterbored at the bottom and the collar on the seconds/fourth/center wheel pivot is supposed to rest against that when you go to put it in. Looking at the picture of the dial side this end looks pretty busted so the pivot got nothing to stop against.
  5. This movement generates 2 kinds of noises. The first one would be the rotor bearing when it's free spinning in the non-winding direction. DO NOT use D5 on the ball bearing. It will kill your self-wind efficiency. Use a tiny bit of 9010. The other noise would be the ratcheting noise when self-wind is doing its thing. The click in this movement is engaging with the reverser wheel and not the ratchet wheel and also generates quite a bit of noise. To dampen this noise you'd have to grease the ratchet teeth on the bottom half of the reverser wheel. Access is restricted by the balance cock so you wo
  6. @VWatchie Totally forgot I had taken pictures. Here they are if you're interested. Can see it's a different movement from the one you mentioned. It's marked MT5402. And here's a microscope shot of the threadlock fragments on the jewel. A miracle none of it landed in the lubrication.
  7. Not sure what the caliber number was, heard that Tudor has a movement made specifically for 58, but looked very similar to the pics and yes had the same type of balance setup. Screws were crosshead/Philip's style and as you can see very difficult to access in-situ with the tools I have. I either have to take the movement out of the case or take out the balance, non of which I was comfortable with doing to a brand new watch unless I had the whole afternoon. To be fair rates in all positions were within specification. He just wanted to see if I can't make it even more accurate. If the
  8. It was bought new from AD. He wanted me to do some regulation on it. Attempt was aborted when we realized the design restricted easy access to timing screws and the job cannot be done in the hour or so he was willing to part with the watch. Luckily none of the chunks landed in the jewel cup and were pick up carefully without disturbing the lubrication.
  9. Thread lock may be acceptable industry practice. Was taking the rotor off of a Tudor Blackbay 58. Screw was was not budging until something gave and it unscrewed the rest of the way without resistance. I looked down the screw hole with a microscope and found a whole bunch of translucent semi-circular chunks of residue had fallen bellow onto the fourth wheel jewel. This isn't the first case I've seen either.
  10. Are you certain? I don't think I'd ever seen a Tudor 2824 with the "bog standard" fine regulator. Every one I'd ever seen come with the type in this pic:
  11. That's not a reliable way of telling the difference. The most reliable way is to look at the shape of the spokes on the balance wheel, provided it's genuine. Top grades have an hourglass shape to them. Lower grades have straight taper. Chinese clones might also use the hourglass shape but to my knowledge no Chinese clones have yet attempted a snailing finish on the outer perimeter of the movement like ETA does. So if the picture is actually of the item sold I'm fairly confident it's a genuine TOP grade balance complete.
  12. These are no where near as popular as 2824 so trying to find a top version of these is going to be nigh impossible. If anything you can always try dropping in a 2824 top grade balance complete. Found one here: https://www.ebay.com/itm/Breitling-Balance-Wheel-Complete-Bridge-Calibre-ETA-2824-2/233580878367?hash=item3662815a1f:g:Ae0AAOSwHwVeenhN
  13. Well one advantage using a 2836 over 2824 even for date only is the instantaneous day/date jump the 2836 has. The 2824 has the date start tilting slightly for about 10 minutes before the jump. Some would say semi-instantaneous. But the 2836 flips both day and date Rolex style: absolute-instantaneous. Simultaneously. You blink you miss. It's pretty neat. 20200828_124839[1].mp4
  14. Well if it actually is a Tudor movement then it would indeed be superior to Mido. But this one isn't. Tudor would've equipped their 2824s with triovis fine adjust regulators. This one lacks such modification. As far as I'm concerned it's just an off the shelf top grade 2824.
×
×
  • Create New...