Jump to content

Function???


Buffo

Recommended Posts

G'Day,

I've got two Elgin 16s 292 movements that I am hoping to make one operational watch out of.

I recently manage to get my Hamilton 1906 16s 990 up and running again (broken balance staff and mainspring). I thought after managing this repair (my first attempt at watch repair) that I would have a go at another pocket watch. Two relatively inexpensive Elgin 292 movements seemed like a good place for a rank amateur to start. I'm initiating the repair process by going through the two movements, and checking out which parts will be best for building one, good working watch.

A question on the Elgin 292 movement: In the photo I've attached, what is the exact function of the cam/lever marked with a white X? Should this be spring loaded? Should the case used with this particular pendant set movement have an access point for this cam/lever? My Hamilton 990 had a lever that was used to set the hands, but this cam/lever doesn't seem to serve quite the same function.

Buffo

FNQ,Au

 

292.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

G'Day Vin,

Thanks for the reply.

It now makes sense why it isn't spring loaded and why the cam/lever is locked in position when the movement is installed in the case. On my Hamilton 990 it was necessary to take the load off the movement, push the click up and then physically hold the click up from the gear with a tooth pick while carefully letting the spring down. So this, on the Elgin 292, does the same job as my trusty tooth pick.

Thanks again,

Rob

My Hamilton 16s 990 back in action...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

G'Day Sas,

Thanks for the added bit of info.

Seems like an excellent design feature, especially when one considers the shape of the Elgin click and how difficult it would be to release the mainspring at the click. The circular Elgin click also would appear to be a sturdier design then on my old Hamilton 990.

Rob

EClick.jpg

HamClick.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmmmmmm... I took apart one of the 292 movements last night, but I had to release the mainspring tension by the usual method of relieving the pressure on the gear with the pendant crown,  holding the click out of engagement and slowly releasing the spring pressure. What's the procedure with the Elgin feature we've discussed above? There doesn't seem to be any pressure on the device when the mainspring is wound. Is there a fault in the mechanism? There is plenty of references to the early Elgin 18s movements, but not much on the Elgin 16s with this feature.

Buffo "perplexed"

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I kind of think the same, the surface under the oil is the same as the surface around the oil. Can epilame both repel and attract , that doesn't quite make sense in simple terms, but is it more complicated than that.
    • I agree with @JohnR725. Oil on an epilamed surface is essentially the same as water on a waxed surface. The same physical properties are at work (surface tension vs. adhesion). 
    • I think we all get a lot out of this group, and it has been pivotal in my development by the sharing of knowledge, experience and learning from more seasoned experts such as @JohnR725 and others (you know who you are!) as well as fellow novices. I think that having a backup communication plan in reserve so that if there is a future problem just makes good sense. I don't think anyone is trying to undermine the forum, but if something unthinkable happens, like the Ranfft website for example, then it would be good if those who are willing can still keep in contact. Speaking personally, and I know I risk a charge of heresy, it would be good if Mark could be a little more visible in this forum, and maybe give any insight from time to time on the future/progress of forum and instructional videos etc. even if its just to confirm the status quo. I appreciate he is a busy man with a full time job, but so are most of the rest of us and to post a few lines every now and then shouldn't be too much to ask to reassure the restless villagers. Best outcome for me would be a message saying something along the lines of: "Hi guys, all good, no planned changes... enjoy the forum, will message again next month!" Just my two cents.
    • A nice looking watch !! Did you try 9010, instead of the 9415, on the pallet jewels / escape wheel? And if you did, did you notice a difference?
    • Knocked out another 404 last night...when you are in the zone! This watch was a non-runner which I picked up as part of a lot of 8 watches, so works out to be $3.12 per watch. Before:   And the finished watch, new crown and stem and the crystal was cracked so was replaced. I also replaced the mainspring as the original was the old steel type spiral and very 'set' - all else is original: The Movement was a AS 1686, but in reading around a little the ACCRO watch company were sued for their use of the five point crown on their Jacques Pere range as it resembled Rolex, see below: ACCRO then reverted to just ACCRO on their watches - I have done some sniffing around the internet and haven't seen another example of ACCRO and the crown together on a dial so maybe I have something unusual, or maybe I was looking in the wrong places 🙂.  
×
×
  • Create New...