Jump to content

Vacheron Constantin 1003 movement problem


cduke

Recommended Posts

Hello all.

Apologies if I'm hijacking this thread but I wanted to get your collective thoughts on something. I too had a similar situation with my vintage Vacheron with the 1003/3 movement, everything was working fine until one day the crown spun freely and I could neither wind nor change the time. I was surprised as I heard the 1003 was quite a robust movement. Anyway I am way too much of a novice to try to tackle it myself, but also way too broke to bring to to Vacheron for an official servicing, so I brought it to a reputable independent watch repair service.

It took them much, much longer than the original 4 weeks they said it would take, due to difficulty in finding the parts. When they finally called to say it was finished, what I got back was a loose and wiggly crown even when pushed in, and extremely fast and slippery time changing when I turn the crown. These I can probably live with, but what's most concerning I've attached in pictures below: it seems the crown and winding stem have been set too far away from the case, which to me seems like a recipe for accumulating lint and snagging onto sweater cuffs. Bear in mind this is post-repair with the crown fully pressed in, ready to wind.

I've returned it to the watchmaker with these concerns, only to be met with assurance that this is the actual correct position of the crown, and how it was previously was too pushed in, possibly due to a knock to the crown. I have a hard time believing this as a) I don't think Vacheron would have design something so sloppy, and b) all examples of similar models online have the crown fully flushed to the case. I do know that this was a very challenging repair to this watchmaker, so I think he may just be trying to save face.

So my question is this: where to go from here? My watchmaker is convinced there is nothing more he can do and may be out of his depth. Should I try to seek out another to see if they can do something about the wiggle and put the crown where it should be? Should I just try to live with it as is and just be very, very careful and only wear the watch on special occasions (this idea makes me sad). Or should I bite the very expensive bullet and bring it directly to Vacheron for servicing, and brace myself for the $2000+ bill.

I would love to hear your thoughts.

 

IMG_0217.JPG

IMG_0218.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The crown does look a little far out, but it doesn't look terrible. Do you happen to know if the crown is original and if it is either a dust-proof type or a water-proof type? The former type has a sprung washer which is designed to press out from inside the crown against the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, rodabod said:

The crown does look a little far out, but it doesn't look terrible. Do you happen to know if the crown is original and if it is either a dust-proof type or a water-proof type? The former type has a sprung washer which is designed to press out from inside the crown against the case.

As far as I know it's the original unsigned crown, which was typical for this model (1970's tank style). And yes the crown is the sprung washer type, which you can just make out in the pictures, the smooth bit that sticks out from under the fluted crown. That's what makes it worrisome for me, because of the spacing the sprung washer isn't even able to do it's job protecting the movement from dust and lint. Or am I being too paranoid about all this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, that's a dust-proof crown if it has the sprung inner section. It should bear against the case. Surely your watchmaker can appreciate that? The only reason I can think for why it wouldn't fit flush is if it was an incorrect replacement which was unable to be moved any closer. It's not a difficult job to shorten a stem usually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, rodabod said:

Ah, that's a dust-proof crown if it has the sprung inner section. It should bear against the case. Surely your watchmaker can appreciate that? The only reason I can think for why it wouldn't fit flush is if it was an incorrect replacement which was unable to be moved any closer. It's not a difficult job to shorten a stem usually.

That's what I thought as well and when I returned to his shop I was expecting him to make the adjustment, but I think he just had so much difficulty in getting it back to working condition that he's just scared to take it apart again and not getting it to work. 

18 minutes ago, Tudor said:

Shortening the stem is a rudimentary adjustment. I’m no pro, but I think you need a new watchmaker. 

So that's one vote to bring it to another watchmaker. Then again we're just assuming that shortening the stem is an easy task, but we all know the 1003 calibre is anything but rudimentary so maybe it's harder than we think? Can anyone with experience attest that it is in fact a simple enough job?

Edited by avue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The stem gets threaded into a die plate and filed a bit off the end. Back it out, Reassemble and check the fit. Repeat until perfect. 
 

It’s not a five minute job but it’s not a movement overhaul either.  
 

And the watchmaker should have some pride working on a VC movement. I know I would want to do it justice, doing my best possible work. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Tudor said:

The stem gets threaded into a die plate and filed a bit off the end. Back it out, Reassemble and check the fit. Repeat until perfect. 
 

It’s not a five minute job but it’s not a movement overhaul either.  
 

And the watchmaker should have some pride working on a VC movement. I know I would want to do it justice, doing my best possible work. 

 

10 hours ago, rodabod said:

The keyless works look conventional and possibly a modified JLC design. I can't see why it would be such a difficult job unless there are existing issues with the keyless works.

Thank you for the advice mates, so the consensus then is it shouldn't be a difficult proposition to shorten the winding stem, considering there isn't a need for a total overhaul or replacing any parts. 

I don't know how fruitful it would be to argue this with my current watchmaker as he seemed convinced that it's how it should be, so I will be looking for another reputable one, hopefully one with experience on the 1003. Though I'm considering if I should wait until the 1 year warranty from the watchmaker runs out before I find another one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • this is something I've never quite understood about the some of the Swiss companies. In 1957 Omega was using 9010 for the keyless parts with epilam. there's been a slow migration towards using heavier lubrication's but still typically oils and epilam to keep them in place. When it seems like 9504 works so much better.  
    • 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? 
×
×
  • Create New...