Jump to content

Another lubrication doubt

jdm

By jdm
in Watch Repairs Help & Advice

 Share

Recommended Posts

jdm Distinguished Member

jdm

Posted
Posted (edited)

Some Seiko -and I guess many others- don't have a jewel for the MS arbor on the main plate.
Seiko recommends thick oil, for which I use HP1300. But one formulated for metal-to-metal could be better? E.g. synthetic 9504 with boron nitride, which costs an arm and leg.
At hand I have 8301 which is base natural with graphite. What do you think?

Datasheet attached.

1906_O21741.pdf

Edited by jdm
RyMoeller Super WRT Addict

RyMoeller

Posted
Posted

Looking at my Moebius Sales Brochure (which appears to date to the mid 70's) 8300 and 8301 have good adherence but poor response to pressure which I imagine means it would be pushed out of the bearing by torque on the arbor.  My (certainly outdated) Moebius document suggests 8030 or 8040 as thick oils for arbors.  Might work...

D5 is typically what I use unless the technical sheet specifically states otherwise, my understanding is that HP1300 is essentially the synthetic replacement of D5.

I don't work on Seikos too often but have viewed almost all of Spencer Klein's videos on them and have noticed worn arbor bearings seem to be a very common problem.  Considering that, I'd say the thicker the oil the better.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
WatchMaker Super WRT Addict

WatchMaker

Posted
Posted

Interesting question @jdm! I also use Synt HP-1300 (9104) oil for the arbor and for general metal-on-metal applications. This is as per recommendations and since it is often mentioned that synthetic 9104 supercedes mineral oil based D-5 and thus, by implication, is superior. 

I've gone onto the Moebius site and compiled the radar charts for key attributes as below. Comparing an oil product with a grease product isn't quite apples-for-apples as the criteria on the charts changes but, if for the sake of this question, we take pressure resistance, wear resistance and friction reduction as the key comparators then the charts are useful.

What stands out for me here is that I wouldn't be recommending 8301! However D-5 matches 9104 for pressure resistance and friction reduction and trumps it for wear resistance! We need to take into account though that, as a synthetic product, 9104 has better ageing qualities than D-5 and remains in situ slightly better. 

The wild card is that fancy 9504 you've found. Why does Moebius recommend 9104 for barrel arbors but doesn't even mention it in the context of 9504? I reckon it could be the viscosity. I always associate a grease having a greater viscosity than an oil but that doesn't seem to be the case - perhaps adding to lubrication confusions! Moebius measure the viscosity in centistokes (cSt) with, at 20 degrees centigrade, D-5 = 1200 and 9104 = 1250 [just for comparison 9010 = 150). 9504 comes in at a pretty fluid 305 although it's in the grease category.

So for me it's still a D-5 vs 9104 situation in a metal-on-metal situation like the arbor hole. Watch serviced regularly? D-5 in theory trumps 9104 for its greater wear resistance (and could thus avoid the situations that @RyMoeller has observed on Seikos) but a more normal situation for most watch owners is to only think about servicing when a watch stops running! Whilst 9104 might not have quite the wear resistance capabilities it doesn't degrade or move so is actually likely to be superior in a lot of cases.

 

 

 

Moebius_Comparison.jpg

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
JohnR725 Distinguished Member

JohnR725

Posted
Posted

One of the minor problems with lubrication requirements are that the tech sheets don't always tell the whole story. So for instance Omega has a separate document just for mainspring barrels so I went to look at what they recommended. Their recommendation is 1300 on the arbor of the barrel. But they also recommend after cleaning that the barrel, arbor and lid all be treated with epilam.

Then at work we use 9501 on the barrel and arbor as I like the idea of using a grease on a high-pressure load. Although I think the 9504 would be better for a lot of applications it is thicker at least from my memory unfortunately at work I can't compare the two because I suspect my boss would have sticker shock on the price the 9504.

 

  • Thanks 1
jdrichard Distinguished Member

jdrichard

Posted
Posted
Interesting question [mention=1542]jdm[/mention]! I also use Synt HP-1300 (9104) oil for the arbor and for general metal-on-metal applications. This is as per recommendations and since it is often mentioned that synthetic 9104 supercedes mineral oil based D-5 and thus, by implication, is superior. 
I've gone onto the Moebius site and compiled the radar charts for key attributes as below. Comparing an oil product with a grease product isn't quite apples-for-apples as the criteria on the charts changes but, if for the sake of this question, we take pressure resistance, wear resistance and friction reduction as the key comparators then the charts are useful.
What stands out for me here is that I wouldn't be recommending 8301! However D-5 matches 9104 for pressure resistance and friction reduction and trumps it for wear resistance! We need to take into account though that, as a synthetic product, 9104 has better ageing qualities than D-5 and remains in situ slightly better. 
The wild card is that fancy 9504 you've found. Why does Moebius recommend 9104 for barrel arbors but doesn't even mention it in the context of 9504? I reckon it could be the viscosity. I always associate a grease having a greater viscosity than an oil but that doesn't seem to be the case - perhaps adding to lubrication confusions! Moebius measure the viscosity in centistokes (cSt) with, at 20 degrees centigrade, D-5 = 1200 and 9104 = 1250 [just for comparison 9010 = 150). 9504 comes in at a pretty fluid 305 although it's in the grease category.
So for me it's still a D-5 vs 9104 situation in a metal-on-metal situation like the arbor hole. Watch serviced regularly? D-5 in theory trumps 9104 for its greater wear resistance (and could thus avoid the situations that [mention=2015]RyMoeller[/mention] has observed on Seikos) but a more normal situation for most watch owners is to only think about servicing when a watch stops running! Whilst 9104 might not have quite the wear resistance capabilities it doesn't degrade or move so is actually likely to be superior in a lot of cases.
 
 
 
Moebius_Comparison.thumb.jpg.9542664728c0a771d09aaae0e516f22a.jpg

Cool chart


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • TimeWerks
      Omega sweep second pinion friction spring - correct tension IS important

      By TimeWerks · Posted

      Thanks for this post MikePilk, I just came across a similar problem with an Omega 1022.  The problem I had was the seconds pinion spring was bent out of shape and did not even engage with the wheel properly, so the seconds hand was not moving at all. (no power loss though :) I removed the automatic module so I could access the spring and work on it. Once I bent it back close to the right shape, I experienced the same problem you reported about power loss.  Many tweaks later, and the seconds hand is moving properly again, with amplitude back to good numbers again. Cheers
    • caseback
      Clock newbie

      By caseback · Posted

      After cleaning up the pivots, I made bushes on the lathe. At this point I've pressed in 6 bushes (3 sets) and the wheels turn smooth. What I can also tell you, is that I'm not looking forward to final assembly. Getting the pivots aligned seems to get exponentially more difficult with each wheel that is added.
    • JohnR725
      Greetings from Whidbey Island.

      By JohnR725 · Posted

      Islands are interesting places to live depending upon their size and other factors. This is a bigger island and it has a bridge to get there at least on one end. It's also big enough that you don't have to go someplace else to get things typically. It can be a problem if you get a job in Seattle though. Yes I've known of people who commuted from the island to Seattle for a job and I don't quite remember how many hours it took but it took a long time. So basically islands are nice if you don't have to leave very often.
    • VWatchie
      What's your thoughts on this Rolex Sea-Dweller, ref. 16600, calibre 3135 project?

      By VWatchie · Posted

      Thanks @JohnR725! Everything you say makes a lot of sense and is encouraging to read.
    • JohnR725
      What's your thoughts on this Rolex Sea-Dweller, ref. 16600, calibre 3135 project?

      By JohnR725 · Posted

      isn't it nice to have a decent case open or when the case doesn't want to be opened? In the case of a Rolex watch that supposed to pass specific water resistant testing you probably do need to tighten the back down. But they shouldn't be tightened so much that they risk stripping the threads out. Then the other problem that comes up is the gaskets can start to disintegrate and then getting the back off can be quite a challenge unless you have a really good tool and perhaps some penetrating oil to loosen things up. Yes really nice case marking. When I was in school we were taught to mark the cases and  the American watch and clockmakers Institute even had a? So if you joined at one time they would give you an identification number. They were explaining or giving an example of if the watches ever found in you have a unique number they can perhaps figure out the history of the watch or identify the body it's attached to for instance not that that probably comes up that often. So you got a unique number and even made a special metal stamp that you can purchase. It wasn't a super big aggressive stamp but still it left a mark in the back of the case. Then I heard from people at work on Rolex watches they were using a felt pen indelible but later on they decided that was bad because apparently the ink could release  chemicals although it seems like once it's dry that shouldn't be an issue. Then of course today was nice is you can keep computer records sealed have to mark anything at all I personally find it's best to leave no reference behind that you were even there. Especially when you have a beautiful watch that has no markings at all and now it has your scribbling all over it not good typically if there is a typical and watch repair?  a lot of minor repairs you don't need to do a complete servicing. But beyond a certain point you're going to have to take apart a lot of stuff you're going to disrupt the lubrication even if it looks perfect right now and yes you might as well just go ahead the service the whole thing. also in a watch like this where a lot of things seem to be going on the complete service would be better then you'll know exactly where you stand versus dealing with unknown mysteries for prior repair.
×
×
  • Create New...