Jump to content

K&D No.128 Improved Mainspring Winder Set


Tmuir

Recommended Posts

I need to buy or make a mainspring winder to be able to insert the T end mainsprings into my Waltham aircraft clocks.

The inside barrel diameter is around 19mm, so too big for my pocket watch mainspring winders.

Doing a bit of Googling it appears the K&D No128 mainspring winder's largest 'cup' has an outside diameter of around 17mm.

Can anyone confirm this as I think that should be close enough to work, although I would prefer it to be 17.5 to 18mm, but I'm pretty confident 17mm would do.

I just don't want to buy a set if I've got the dimensions wrong.

Or if anyone else has a recommendation for another mainspring winder I'm open to suggestions.

The mainspring height are approx 5.3mm, so the winder needs to be able to fit a mainspring of that size.

Waltham aircraft clocks are size 22s movements

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know that everyone and every text says to never wind in by hand but every watchmaker has done it out of necessity at some point. If the spring is not too tall in regards to barrel diameter it really can be done without distorting it.

Think of a typical clock barrel, might be 20mm tall and 35mm diameter. Pretty close height to diameter ratio. Taking the spring out requires a winder- as does putting it in. A typical watch barrel might be a depth (spring height) of 1.3mm with a diameter of 10 or 11mm. We take the spring out without a winder without damaging it. It can go back in too, winderless. But you do have to "wind"it. On a t-end spring get your t in the slot, and wrap around 180 degrees, in, wrap 180 degrees, in, untill you're in. As long as the height to diameter ratio isn't to small the risk is low- with a bit of practice. I used to demonstrate this to students and show that the spring remains flat after multiple in-and-outs. They got it too after a few tries.

If course winder is always best but really with t-ends (or worse- seperate t pieces) handwinding is ok if done with care.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Watchweasol, I have an Olli Baker mainspring winder but that is for clocks that you wind by putting a key on the mainspring barrel arbor, as is the Webster SPring winder. The aircraft clocks are more like over sized pocket watches, so this type of mainspring winder won't work. Basically I am looking for a pocketwatch mainspring winder that is for larger barrels with an inside diameter of just under 19mm. ALso the mainspring is a T end, so no hole in the outer end of the spring for the hook.

I have NOS alloy mainsprings to fit and I did try to wind one in by hand, but the chip in the paster on the wall on the other side of the room and a ruined rare mainspring tells me I am not going to try that again and risk ruining another spring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...
On 11/12/2018 at 6:51 PM, nickelsilver said:

I know that everyone and every text says to never wind in by hand but every watchmaker has done it out of necessity at some point. If the spring is not too tall in regards to barrel diameter it really can be done without distorting it.

Think of a typical clock barrel, might be 20mm tall and 35mm diameter. Pretty close height to diameter ratio. Taking the spring out requires a winder- as does putting it in. A typical watch barrel might be a depth (spring height) of 1.3mm with a diameter of 10 or 11mm. We take the spring out without a winder without damaging it. It can go back in too, winderless. But you do have to "wind"it. On a t-end spring get your t in the slot, and wrap around 180 degrees, in, wrap 180 degrees, in, untill you're in. As long as the height to diameter ratio isn't to small the risk is low- with a bit of practice. I used to demonstrate this to students and show that the spring remains flat after multiple in-and-outs. They got it too after a few tries.

If course winder is always best but really with t-ends (or worse- seperate t pieces) handwinding is ok if done with care.

Hi Nickel. Hand winding is something I nearly always do. Did you mean a winder is always best especially  with t ends or handwinding is OK but really only for t ends ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • That's very interesting information. I haven't tried to see if my bombé jewel holes have olive holes but I think I should be able to tell on the larger jewels at least. See if I get a chance to have a look later today. This little story was very comforting to read for a "bungler" like myself. That success isn't a given even for a pro. Thanks for sharing!
    • I forgot that I said I would do that. Will take some tomorrow and post them up post haste.
    • I've seen some really nice early 20th century pieces where all the jewels, including center wheel, were convex. Definitely to reduce friction. It can be quite hard to tell if a jewel has olive holes, especially on small sizes, but that again reduces friction- as well as accommodates small misalignments better. Why they aren't used more often? I imagine it was found that at a certain point in the train the actual advantage became negligible, and the added cost on high production movements is why it's not seen on those, just higher-end pieces.   I did an experiment on a little 5x7"' AS 1012 a few years back. These things run OK sometimes, but often are absolute dogs. And AS made gajillions of them. I had a NOS novelty watch in for a service, ran OK flat, massive drop in amplitude vertical. Made like 3 staffs for it trying different pivot sizes, no change. Tried high quality (not Seitz) convex/olive jewels, no change- the original were flat, but could have been olive hole. Same for the pallet fork, then escape wheel, no change. Probably had 20 hours in the watch, new staff and new hole jewels through the escape wheel, no difference in running. Just a dog of a movement. But if I were making a watch I would use them, just because.
    • When Nicklesilver mentioned the use of them on non coned pivots on older high end watches closer to the escapement.  That suggested to me  probably fourth wheels and possibly third wheels. The square shoulder rotatating on the much smaller surface area of a dome as opposed to a flat jewel surface. I'm curious as to why they are not used predominantly?
    • That's what I thought, but as I said, it makes sense. See if any of our pros will have something to add.
×
×
  • Create New...