Let's play Choose That Mainspring!

[DoctoralHermit]

I've just dissembled three old Russian 1mchz movements and extracted the mainsprings (see pic below). I'm trying to decide which is the best one.

I believe that #2 and #3 might be original mainsprings from way back in the 1950s. #1 seems to be of a different material, and definitely has a broader shape. Please note that I've left the arbor in #1.

Which do you think is best?

[VWatchie]

As long as there aren't any kinks, I would guess spring #1.

[DoctoralHermit]

4 hours ago, VWatchie said:

As long as there aren't any kinks, I would guess spring #1.

 

That's what I was leaning towards too... is it because it appears to be less tightly coiled?

[AndyHull]

My money is on #1 too.

[nickelsilver]

You'd think no1 is the guy (well, I would too), but in case nobody's noticed watches are weird. Sometimes the most set-a** looking springs trounce a new Nivaflex with all its backcurve fancypantsness. I'd go for no1 but bet the others are darn close in performance if same thickness.

[DoctoralHermit]

Thanks all! #1 will be the one I put in then.

[VWatchie]

 

 

1

 Advanced issues found

▲

 

 

 

7 hours ago, DoctoralHermit said:

 

That's what I was leaning towards too... is it because it appears to be less tightly coiled?

Yes, and good luck! BTW, it would be really nice if you can show us the watch once you're done!

[yankeedog]

Since 2 and 3 are the same, I would tend to think that #1 was an INCORRECT replacement. As you said it is broader in cross section and of a different material .If it does work , I predict the watch will sound like  the hammers of hell.

[DoctoralHermit]

On 7/27/2019 at 2:24 AM, VWatchie said:

Yes, and good luck! BTW, it would be really nice if you can show us the watch once you're done!

Thank you! I will certainly post the completed watch, Mockba 1mchz from the 1950s (I believe), when it's completed!