Jump to content

What do those screws regulate on Rolex 3130 movements?


BennyE

Recommended Posts

I watched Marks videos many times, but I can‘t recall that those screws (picture below) were ever discussed. Looking at them, they would control how high the overall balance bridge sits and therefore would allow to fine-tune the end-shake, or am I missing something else?

556468F6-29FC-4EC5-8E31-757ECFDDE5C1.thumb.jpeg.82fcf1ad4c1df202bbeacae4f7967021.jpeg

Thanks,

Regards,

Benny

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That,s what they are for and I guess its loyalty belongs to Rolex since havn,t seen em  like this on any other brand, only a similar idea , a scerw right on top of the cock jewel to directly  regulates its end shakes, mainly on old watches. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, anilv said:

Better than foil shims or (heaven forbid) gouges on the mainplate!

Anilv

We see a lot of foil shims on Vostok movements (cal. 24xx). It's an extra step when handling the balance cock, but besides that, what is it that makes you oppose them? I often wondered why they are needed. Of course, to regulate end-shake, but besides that. Perhaps lack of precision in manufacturing, no? Note that I'm not looking to dispute you, I'm simply curious and want to learn more. Thanks! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, VWatchie said:

I often wondered why they are needed.

I often wonder about that too. Surely if the manufacturing process was well controlled, then there would be no need for them.

Perhaps their original intention was to allow for thinner and thinner shims at each service, as the pivot ends wear, but that is just speculation on my part.

What I do know is that they represent one more thing for me to ping into a parallel dimension, or simply forget to refit, risking damaging the jewels and pivots in the process, so perhaps they are simply intended as a trap for the uninitiated. :D

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's good shout. I suspect they may have had multiple sources for the balance, and thus the shim was fitted in some cases, to allow them to compensate for the 0.1mm or so difference between shaft lengths.

The shim can be source of problems though as it can act as a pivot point if it is not fitted in entirely the right spot, and this could introduce errors in the balance alignment, and it does introduce the possibility of either forgetting to re-fit it, and screwing the balance down hard on to the jewels, thus damaging the pivot(s) and/or the jewel(s), or fitting it when not needed if a different "compatible" replacement balance is fitted which has a shorter shaft, and then getting in to head scratching mode when the thing rattles around like a pea in a biscuit barrel.

Edited by AndyHull
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, AndyHull said:

That's good shout. I suspect they may have had multiple sources for the balance, and thus the shim was fitted in some cases, to allow them to compensate for the 0.1mm or so difference between shaft lengths.

No need for having multiple sources to suffer parts size variations. Parts are made in batches afterwhich the same machine is reconfigured for another part or another step on the same batch. True in the old times of mechanical stops as well as in CNC of today. An error during reconfig, a larger tool wear there, temperature variations and you may be making parts significantly different. Very old watches were made practically by hand so to fit each part to another. Russians probably had decent machines but onerous production targets, impossible to impose strict tolerances so if the problem was correctable at assembly, so be it. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

WRT shims.

VWatchie..I've always thought that shims were a band-aid solution and a manufacturer should have the capability to reduce the length to spec in-house. Probably as JDM mentioned it could be due to production variance. Better to have it slightly too long than too short?

One thought is that they could have done that (shims) to build some life into the movement.. ie you could re-finish the ends of the pivot sometime in the watches lifetime and at that point doing away with the shim (or use a thinner shim) leaving you with good endshake?

Ah well... unless someone who has worked in a Soviet watch factory shows up we'll probably never know.

Anilv

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Similar Content

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Unfortunately I'm not that lucky. I started on the train side and after I noticed the binding I pulled everything out except the driving wheel to rule everything else out. It still binds. I'm going to double check that the pinion is fully seated on the staff first, then if no joy I'll push the bridge jewel up a fraction of a mm. Fingers crossed!
    • Happy to have helped, great way to start the day with a win! 🥳
    • Thank you for the advise!! It worked. The setting screw was a lock/unlock to remove the rotor. 
    • I have that French tech sheet too, it is a little different than the English one (eg, it doesn't have the auto works diagram). BTW, it looks like you are looking up the case number in the 1979 ABC supplement. The 1974 ABC catalog does have the 3093 case. As you determined it takes the 1222-5 crystal.  When I serviced my President 'A' (which also takes that crystal), I was able to fit a 29.8 crystal from my DPA crystal assortment. Those are, in my opinion, a great deal. The assortment comes with 10 sizes each from 27.8mm to 32.4mm in 0.2 increments. I pretty much use them for any non-armored crystal that takes a high dome crystal. I think they no longer make them but Cousins has still has some in stock but when I bought them they were around $40 for the set and now they are around $100. Still, at 40 cents a crystal it's still a good deal. For the large driving wheel, I remember I once assembled the keyless/motion works first and when I placed the large driving wheel it was interfering with the setting wheel on the dial side as the teeth were not fully meshing and it wouldn't fully seat. If that isn't the issue I got nothing and am looking forward to see how you solve it 🙂
    • Not sure, but just looking at it, it seems like the screw on the right may be a fake? The one on the left may not be a screw in the regular sense at all, rather a 2 position device, I think you need to point the slot towards either of the 2 dots and one will secure and one will open. Like I said this is just my best guess looking at the pictures.
×
×
  • Create New...