Jump to content
  • 0
bsoderling

Favre-leuba pallet fork end stone spring

Question

Picked up a dirt cheap sea-chief on the local auction site that expectedly turned out fake(ish) with a repainted dial.

 

Movement appeared to the untrained eye decent even though grimy and oxidized, so decided an attempt to service.

 

The pallet fork has end stones with tiny horseshoe shaped springs to hold in place and I obviously managed to break one in two when attempting to re-fit.

 

Havent seen that type before and wonder if anyone can guide in the right direction for spares?

 

And if there’s any best practise out there for mounting these nightmarish things, I’m all ears.

 

The movement is stamped 107 under the balance and there’s a serial no as well. Haven’t been able to id it from that info and grateful for id-assistance. Is it legit or fake all the way?

 

 

 

81b988477308ffadaf2d151e765db398.jpg3955ef80b55911478c392cdecf099a92.jpg

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

The movement looks OK but I'm not familiar with the 107, but there were two other very similat movements caliber 101 and caliber 112.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Thanks, will check on those.

And then it’s the escapement wheel that has the end stones, not the pallet fork as I mistakenly wrote.

I tried to make a spring from one of the assorted click springs I got from Cousins but that darned thing is really flat and even the thinnest click spring material won’t slip into the grove that holds the spring :-(




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

When I oil these type jewels, I will use my smallest screwdriver blade and insert in the gap indicated in the image and would gently rotate the screwdriver clockwise to pry the tab from under the inserting.
Next gently move the spring down and toward the 7 o’clock direction just enough to allow you to use rodico to lift out the cap jewel. Never attempt to remove the spring entirely.
Resecuring the spring is more of the challenge for me. I will move the spring back up to the position and gently try and reverse the process of how it was released as described above.

61728db77bfcf171875783a416c423a1.jpg

Hope this helps.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

That makes sense! I was actually trying something in that direction but it felt as if the force needed would be too much. Wasn’t thinking about rotating a blade, which obviously offers more control.

Decided to believe that the wide part that you pushed out might be the “hinge” that needed to stay in. Wrong decision obviously.

I assembled the movement without the cap jewel and can’t really see that it has too much effect. Dial up/down doesn’t change much and the rate is easily adjusted.

If it proves hard to get the spring, I might just leave as is. It’s not like the value will drop by any significant amount...:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Can you verify by research the duofix spring number this model takes for me?
Will be 10-2 or 10-3 I believe but, just want you to try and check.

05b0ef238520393e4e85857d5896abe4.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I found this image that shows the intended release process for releasing the retainer clip/spring in order to simply remove the cap jewel for oiling and replacing.  If I find a scrapper watch with this type of spring, I will record a video and post of its installation into the setting.

Screenshot2010-11-23at94506PM.png.9d981109b8f1f6920345e466e60c6f0a.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I may have only inserted a new spring in a setting like this 2 or 3 times.
My method would be to use non-magnetic or demagnetized tweezers. Install one leg of the spring under the setting rim. Now place a small bead of rodico in that area to keep the spring from flying away.  If you grasp the middle of the spring with your tweezers in a low profile in horizontal alignment with the movement, you will further maintain control of the spring.  Use another tweezer or instrument to gently nudge the other spring leg in its place.

See the second post in the forum link below.  He seems to describe a similar method for installing the spring if it is out of the setting.  "Hold the middle of the spring and insert one side and with another instrument and your other hand, gently nudge the other leg of the spring under the setting rim lip."

https://www.thewatchsite.com/34-watchmaking-tinkering/145530-how-do-you-replace-diashock-cap-jewel-spring.html

Edited by GeorgeC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

In this video from VTA you can see a technique to deal with those Diafix, even how to put them back in case they comes out of its place. It doesn't look easy to me though.

Edited by aac58

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Hi guys,

GeorgeC kindly offered to send me a spring all the way from Kentucky to Sweden!

And the video gives a very good insight in the practises needed, not for just getting the cap jewel in/out but also when, as in my case, the spring has come away alltogether.

Thinking back, I believe a major mistake I made was to try to get the spring in with the cap jewel in place. This requires much more force on the one free leg to get it in as the spring also has to bend to fit the top curve of the jewel.

That’s not saying it’s going to be easy or succesful doing it the ”good” way ... :-)

But I will have to give it a try when the spring arrives!

Thanks for all valuable contribution here. I hope there are others out there that can benefit as well.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  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.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I certainly did not want to replace the motor, as this is so very visible, all attempts at maintaining the illusion of originality would fail. A solution to the problem could only be achieved with a safer, replacement speed control, which could work with the original mains voltage motor. Fortunately, these are readily available in the form of a Pulse Width Modulated (PWM), motor speed controller circuit. These will take in the 220V incoming mains supply and provide a variable output of between 50V and the incoming supply voltage. These are well known devices and proven to work with even simple (old) motors. So, a PWM circuit was obtained (at incredibly reasonable cost), and measured up. In an attempt to at least have the "illusion" of originality, I was determined to use the original hole for the rotary speed control, as well as the original Bakelite control knob. With the shaft on the rotary potentiometer too short for this, I had to do some more metal bashing. As can be seen below, I used the old rheostat as a donor, for a short length of it's shaft, which I would mate to the new potentiometer, allowing the Bakelite knob to operate. This was cut to shape and filed to mate with the new potentiometer shaft. This was then soldered together and thus ready for installation. You can see in the photo, the size and technical comparison between the old rheostat and the new PWM controller circuit.  
    • Next up is the motor speed control. I did think long and hard about my original aim of maintaining as much originality as possible. And, there is no doubt that the original speed control rheostat was a) original and b) functional. But - as I was an electronics technician in an earlier life, and also health and safety professional in a more recent life, the safety aspects weighed heavily upon my concience. Logic played it's part as well - with the original rheostat put back into service, albeit with some hand-made guarding to keep out the fingers of the unwary, it would be safe-ish, for me to use, as long as I kept my wits about me. BUT NOT SAFE FOR ANYONE ELSE unaware of what was underneath. Only the knowledge of what lurked underneath would be keeping me safe, but anyone else might not have a second chance. As can be seen from the photo below, all of the wire on the resistors is not only unguarded, but within millimetres of the level of the base. Also, the incoming mains terminals to the rheostat are also dangerously unguarded. With today's knowledge, it is difficult to fathom how this ever could have been considered safe to use.
    • Back to the job in hand. I managed to find the cork I thought I may have had, lurking in a box under the stairs. It was the most part of an A4 sized sheet, so more than enough for my purposes - to sit the jars on whilst they are in the machine. Looking at the metal bases, I really can't be convinced if there ever was any cork or any other material for that matter there. But for me anyway, the idea of the glass jars sitting directly on the metal base just seems wrong and I would prefer some cork there as a cushion. It's about as tidy as it needs to be, given the shape of the metal webbing. I suppose I could have cut-out squares of cork, but then it would leave potential weak, unsupported areas of cork, which would likely need some form of strengthening. Anyway - this application suits me and helps the jars sit a bit more stable in their locations. Whilst I am in the vicinity, so to speak, I have also added an earth lead which will bond the chassis to the incoming mains lead, once fitted. This is visible in these photos.  
    • A little further research and then on with the show... A quick browse through patent databases, shows that one Saul Lanzetter applied for and was awarded a patent for this design of watch cleaning machine in October 1937. A brief narrative is reproduced here: Interestingly, the patent application is entitled "Improvements in apparatus for cleaning watch parts and other small parts of machinery." It may be reading too much onto this title to assume that there may have been a previous patent, pre-dating this one, as this one refers to "improvements". Also of interest, there were 2 patent applications from US companies in 1944 and 1945 which cite the Lanzetter patent, and three from Germany in 1956, 1960 and 1961 (only one of which was actually published), which also cite the Lanzetter patent as a reference. Incidentally - the two US patents refer to machines which look strikingly similar to the National Model VI-C above, and the National No 4. machine in the earlier advert, showing the four jars side by side ( this seems to be referred to as a lab machine, rather than a repair shop machine). Naturally, all patents or applications referred to above are now expired. For me anyway, I think this may clear up which watch cleaning machine may have come first (at least in this machine format anyway): The S. Lanzetter National Electric Watch Cleaning Machine, circa 1937.  
    • Impressive work. The barrel and mainspring look almost new, and the remaining pitting is no worse than some lesser movements left the factory with. I'm looking forward to the next installment.
×
×
  • Create New...