Jump to content

My Seiko 7016-8001


Recommended Posts

Well the watch repairer has opened my watch up and taken a couple of phots and sent them to me.

It is a bit of a mess inside as well as a couple of missing C clips. One that is on the main bridge. I wonder where it went?

Anyway, gave them the go ahead to clean it all up, and fix what is needed. Now I just need to see if I can find an original band? I'll be much more careful of it now.

First one is rust. Like I need to tell you guys. Second is a photo of the rotor bearing which is shot as well as an arrow pointing to the missing C clip.

Image.JPG

Unknown.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Got another email from the watchmaker that is servicing my Seiko.

It is keeping pretty good time he said.

When he was going over the case, the start/stop pusher tube into the case has been replaced with something that is not the same as the reset pusher.

Apparently, Seiko never made the tube as a spare part and you had to buy a new case. Seems odd as it would be a separate piece. Why a pusher would not have come with one seems odd. Hey, what do I know?

Anyway, Matt is going to look at making one if he can't get his hands on one. The one on the right of the picture is the dodgy one. The state of the case around it is not lost on me either. Grrr. Looks like it was hammered in from Darwin.

Hopefully, Matt can tidy it up a bit.

1533918274_7016pusher.thumb.jpeg.630384f7511d5c3764872e1d4bc50786.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An idea to consider:

Generic pushers. They are made for Rolex/Tudor and may only require taping the case to insert. 
 

I have seen generic for Omega as well, though not replaced them, and those may be press in rather than thread in. 
 

But the Rolex (and later Omega) have the knurled lock ring; early Omega are plain, which yours would have been. Might be worth looking into for a more solid repair. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Michael1962 said:

Apparently, Seiko never made the tube as a spare part and you had to buy a new case. Seems odd as it would be a separate piece. Why a pusher would not have come with one seems odd. Hey, what do I know?

Lots of parts which are in fact separate are not sold individually. Other examples are  the rotating bezel insert, or the mainspring. The latter fact is guaranteed to give an hissy fit to beginners especially. Normally that happens when special techniques or tools are needed, and chances of damage are significant

In the end it simplifies the maker but increases repair cost, unless the repairman is able and willing to go the extra mile.

The practice is not certainly not unique to Seiko, or for that matter, to the watch industry.

Edited by jdm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I would like some opinions please.

As you all know, I have my watch back and am pretty happy with it. One thing that I did say to them in a letter which accompanied the watch was that the day wheel would 'stall' if you progressed the day wheel via depressing the crown. This still occurs. The only thing I am disappointed with. The day progression occurs completely ok if it occurs by the time advancing after midnight.

Now here is my logic.

As this only occurs when advancing the day wheel via the crown, the issue is with the crown depression to the day wheel. I don't know if the same mechanisms are used for advancing the day wheel via the hands rotation? If a different mechanism is used between the crown and the normal operation AND it only happens in one place (THU to IIII) on the day wheel, the issue has to lie with the day wheel.

Where I run into a logic problem though is that there can't be two different sets of teeth on the day wheel to advance it and since it works properly with normal hands rotation, that points to the mechanism from the CROWN to the day wheel. However if that is the case, why doesn't it happen on other 'manual' advances of the day wheel?

Am I missing something?

Edited by Michael1962
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/2/2020 at 9:15 AM, Michael1962 said:

 I don't know if the same mechanisms are used for advancing the day wheel via the hands rotation?

No. You need to take it apart, at least partially, to understand the calendar works, and find why the defect happens.

The video below by our Host should help you understand what you would be dealing with, being the calendar design the same or almost.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Surely it depends on the clock , I only usually restore torsion clocks and I only use oil on mainspring ( small amount) but on the few so called normal pendulum clocks I have done I have used mainspring grease as there is more reserves of power than there is in a torsion clock so it is not so critical. Dell
    • https://watchguy.co.uk/cgi-bin/files?showfile=Venus/Venus 178.pdf&filename=Venus 178.pdf&dir=Technical Manuals&action=documents   The hour recorder is driven by the barrel and it will only stop if it is held by the hour recorder stop lever 8690. So I would check if this lever (powered by the spring 8691) is really holding the hour recorder in the "chrono off status". I haven't worked on a Venus 178 so far, but on an Omega 861 I chose 9501 grease for the friction spring as it's moving very slow at quite high tension.
    • All I do is use a fine marker (sharpie) to put the service date on the back cover, this way it can be removed with some IPA and does no permanent damage to the watch. I'm in two minds about the whole service marking thing, sometimes it's good/bad to see the markings on the watch case back as you know it's been worked on and vice versa. However, if I took my car in for a service and the mechanic scratched some code into the housing of my engine I wouldn't be too impressed. Hence, I think my sharpie solution is a reasonable compromise.
    • hmmmm.... maybe there is a way to skin that cat 🙀 let me think on it... unless anyone else has any ideas? I left the opening in the side of the base and ring quite large to maybe allow you to grip the crown, but appreciate this may not always be possible, especially for small movements where the crown will not extend past the outer wall of the holder. I noticed this also, but after using the holder for a while I noticed that the ring/holder began to wear into shape (rough edges/bumps worn off) and the size became closer to the desired movement OD. Maybe with some trial and error we could add 0.5 mm (??) to the movement OD to allow for this initial bedding-in?
    • Hi nickelsilver, thanks for the great explanation and the links! I'll take a good look in the article.  Especially this is great news to hear! Looking through forums and youtube videos I was informed to 'fist find a case and then fit a movement for it'. But seems that's not the case for pocket watches at least?  I guess I should be looking to find some 'male square bench keys' for now. I was thinking of winding the mainspring using a screwdriver directly, but I found a thread that you've replied on, saying that it could damage the spring. 
×
×
  • Create New...