Jump to content

Omega part identification


buzz12

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

Hoping someone can help with my weird dilemma.

I have found among my watch parts, what appears to be a factory sealed Omega part labelled 563-1530. If I am not mistaken, that part should be a date corrector but it does not look like I would expect. Is it a date corrector? If not, does anyone know what part it is?

DSCF4595.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without searching, it seems exactly that to me. The teeth drives the date ring and one hole must be for the pivot on the plate. Numbers like 1530 here are coded to indicate what part is that. Someone will possibly post the technical sheet here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the input guys. Looking at the data sheet, am I correct in thinking Omega has re-modeled part 1530 at some point? The data sheet shows the part looking like a coil, yet my part looks more like a plate. Maybe one is earlier than the other? Since they are not identical parts would you not have expected them to have a different code number? Picture below is what's shown in the data sheet as 1530. 

1530.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, buzz12 said:

Thanks for the input guys. Looking at the data sheet, am I correct in thinking Omega has re-modeled part 1530 at some point? The data sheet shows the part looking like a coil, yet my part looks more like a plate.

Good point. If you observe the geometry of the holes and tooth you will see they are the same. So why the "coil"? It's protection against breakage when trying to correct date (backward) at the same time it's advancing around mid night. The flexible finger bends and nothing breaks, but isn't so with the other type. Other mov'ts use a springed finger, or it's made of plastic in the date driving wheel (Seiko below). Notwithstanding all that you can still read in the user manual of most watches a warning against correcting time around midnight, better safe than sorry must be the reasoning.

 

Quote

Since they are not identical parts would you not have expected them to have a different code number?

Good point also. The code number can't change, 563-1530 is always, and generically, date corrector for the 563. There is no coded number for "improved date corrector". So how to do when parts change depending on the mov't variations, just use more numbers like there are in the package above, these are  like "manufacturing numbers", and are detailed in some technical document.

Edited by jdm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks JDM… very interesting and helpful. So I am guessing mine is most likely the earlier version 563-1530 that over time has been improved to a coil shape. But since both have the same code (1530) is it safe to assume that if I needed to order a 563-1530 date corrector (without picture or barcode info) it would not matter which version I received? By that I mean, would it fit? Or, is the difference likely to be significant to certain variants of the calibre? – ie one will fit earlier models but not the later models and vica versa?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, buzz12 said:

Or, is the difference likely to be significant to certain variants of the calibre? – ie one will fit earlier models but not the later models and vica versa?

In this case it seems to me it would fit. In general, to know beforehand one should have the full collection of all the technical documents issued. The other, common way is to reason and try. And since a good while it became possible to ask on the Internet :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • OK, welcome in the world of alarm clocks... I guess the 4th wheel is dished because it is from another movement. If it was not dishet, then it would not mesh with the pinion of the escape wheel, am I right? The marks of wear on the 4th wheel pinion doesn't corespond to the 3th wheel table position, at list this is what i see on the picts. Calculating the rate is easy - there is a formula - BR = T2 x T3 x T4 x T5 x 2 /(P3 x P4 x P5) where T2 - T5 are the counts of the teeth of the wheels tables, and P3 - P5 are the counts of the pinion leaves. Vibrating the balance is easy - grasp for the hairspring where it should stay in the regulator with tweasers, let the balance hang on the hairspring while the downside staff tip rests on glass surface. Then make the balance oscillate and use timer to measure the time for let say 50 oscillations, or count the oscillations for let say 30 seconds. You must do the free oscillations test to check the balance staff tips and the cone cup bearings for wear. This kind of staffs wear and need resharpening to restore the normal function of the balance.
    • Glue a nut to the barrel lid, insert a bolt, pull, disolve the glue.  Maybe someone will have a better answer. 
    • The stress is the force (on the spring) x distance. The maximum stress is at the bottom, and decreases up the arm. That's why they always break at the bottom. I used a round file, then something like 2000 grit to finish. I gave the rest of the arm a quick polish - no need for a perfect finish. Just make sure there are no 'notches' left from cutting/filing. The notches act like the perforations in your toilet paper 🤣
    • It's probably a cardinal rule for watch repair to never get distracted while at the bench. Yesterday, after finishing a tricky mainspring winding/barrel insertion (I didn't have a winder and arbor that fit very well) I mentally shifted down a gear once that hurdle was passed. There were other things going on in the room as I put the barrel and cover into the barrel closer and pressed to get that satisfying snap. But when I took it out I realized I never placed the arbor.  When opening a barrel, we are relying on the arbor to transfer a concentrically-distributed force right where it is needed at the internal center of the lid. However, when that isn't present it's difficult to apply pressure or get leverage considering the recessed position of the lid, the small holes in the barrel and the presence of the mainspring coils. It was a beat-up practice movement so I didn't take a lot of time to think it over and I pushed it out using a short right-angle dental probe placed in from the bottom, but that did leave a bit of a scratch and crease in the thin lid. I had also thought about pulling it using a course-threaded screw with a minor thread diameter smaller than the lid hole and a major diameter larger, but that may have done some damage as well.  Thinking about how this might have been handled had it been a more valuable movement, is there a method using watchmaking or other tools that should extract the lid with the least damage? 
    • 🤔 what happens if lubrication is placed directly on top of epilame ? Making a small groove so the lubrication doesn't spread across the component but what if when lubing a little overspills and sits on the epilame .
×
×
  • Create New...