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

    • Thank you all for the replies!  Very informative! True enough, the Gamsol took some time to evaporate and does leave a residue. So not all naphtha are created equal!  Need to find alternatives then. i was able to try Hexane recommended by Alex and it seems great.  I wonder what the cons are?
    • Yeah, I saw that in the tech sheet but I don't see how it can be adequately cleaned with the friction pinion still in place. I've accidentally pulled the arbor right out of the wheel once when I used a presto tool to try and remove it. Mark shows how he does it with the Platax tool. Those are a little too pricey for me so I got one of these from Aliexpress and I just push down on the arbor with the end of my brass tweezers. That usually gets it most of the way out and then I just grab the wheel with one hand the and the friction pinion with the other and gently rotate them until it pops off. Probably not the best way but it's seemed to work for me so far.    
    • Thanks, Jon Sounds like a plan. Obviously I'll have the face on so do you think gripping with the holder will create any problems, but I will check in the morning to see how feasible it is but I assume it only needs to be lightly held. As for holding the movement instead of the holder won't be possible in this scenario as one hand will be puling on the stem while the other pushes the spring down. That was my initial concern is how the hell can I do this with only one pair of hands. All the other times I've had to remove the stem hasn't been a problem, apart from the force required to release the stem from the setting lever, but now I need to fit the face and hands its sent me into panic mode. If it had the screw type release things would be a lot simpler but that's life 😀   Another thing I will need to consider is once the dial and hands are fitted and the movement is sitting in the case I will need to turn it over to put the case screws in. I saw a vid on Wristwatch revival where he lightly fitted the crystal and bezel so he could turn it over, is this the only option or is there another method?      
    • Hi Jon, do You think that relation spring torque - amplitude is linear? I would rather guess that the amplitude should be proportional to the square of the torque. I had once idea to check it, but still haven't.
    • I did not. I thought about it, but I had cleaned it in my ultrasonic, and the tech sheet shows lubricating it in place already assembled, so I figured discretion was the better part of valor. Although since I have to depth the jewels anyway, maybe I pull the pinion off to rule it out 100% as part of the problem. Do you know if there's a safe way to do it? I don't want to use a puller because it would push down on the plane of the wheel, and that seems like a Bad Idea. I thought about using a roller table remover, but I don't think I have a hole stake pointy enough to push it down.
×
×
  • Create New...