Jump to content

Landeron 39 - Running slow


Khan

Recommended Posts

Hi

I recently serviced a chronograph from late 40s/early 50s as it was dry for decades and balance stopped occasionally. But after service, it looses at least 10 min per day. I recognized that the watch stopped when tilted and I solved the issue by polishing the pallet bridge screw.  One watchmaker says it can be a slightly worn staff or wing but the balance runs good by sight, another says that the spiral is too long and the staff is alright. What do you think it is? Let me know if different images required for inspection. All answers appreciated. 

20201019_064520.jpg

20201019_064800.jpg

20201019_071314.jpg

20201018_043939.jpg

20201018_050639.jpg

Edited by Khan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you achieving good amplitude? The video suggests you probably are.

Does it still significantly lose time if left dial-up like it is in your video?

Was the pallet screw fouling the balance previously? Are you absolutely sure that this issue is now corrected?

Have you check the balance end-shake / side-shake?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, amplitude above 270. It keeps the time like 20 percent better when dial up. I also measures the timing while removing pallet bridge screw but still the same. How do I check end and side shake? I know that the balance wing is a bit shaky when checking the vertical movement by tweezer holding edge of balance wing. And when shaking the watch, there is a rattling sound coming from the balance and can stop occasionally by that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a non-antishock jewel setting, so be careful, but you can gently grab the edge of the balance wheel and lift it up and down. Try to see if you can see excessive side shake. If you are not confident doing this then lift the edge of the balance wheel with a fine oiler.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, it's hard to describe in words, but basically it should be able to lift and drop by a small amount (end shake) but when you lift it, it should not tilt much at all (side shake). I'm not sure if there are any videos online demonstrating this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been reading this material:

https://nobswatchmaker.com/blog/simplifying-the-art-of-endshake-in-watchmaking

It doesn't tilt at all when lifting the wheel. But in my opinion, there seem to be too much "tolerance" in end-shake, it lifts more than usual. I guess I need a Horia tool for lowering the upper balance jewel? If so, any alternative to Horia to be used? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a tricky question, because if you are adjusting the positions of the jewels then that assumes that they are currently incorrect. But it's more common to experience a worn or broken staff. It's worth repeating the end-shake test while observing the position of the roller and impulse jewel relative to the lever fork (while the balance is at rest) to see if the parts interface correctly.

As an experiment, you can reduce the end-shake very slightly by placing a thin dial washer behind the balance cock screw hole (on the outside edge of the movement) to tilt the balance cock down ever so slightly. You need to be careful when doing this in case you reduce the end-shake too far and damage the pivots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

0.2mm is way too much shake. 1/10 of that is good.

 

Your pivots appear ok. It looks to me like the hairspring is tilted down opposite the stud and is possibly touching the balance arms when running.

 

What lift angle are you using? Landeron is typically 42. If you have it at 52 you'll have a false high reading, and if the hairspring is touching the arms it would be normal for the amplitude to be low and have a losing rate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nickelsilver said:

0.2mm is way too much shake. 1/10 of that is good.

 

Hi, Perhaps a typo there and 0.02mm was meant, .  I presume you are talking axial staff play, which I reffer to as end shake. How about side shake? I havn't seen a number given for it, I just go by the feel. putting the two end+side shake together, if pivot stays put ie; doesn't jump out of jewel hole as one side of balance rim is lifted, shakes will not stop the oscilator.     

I avoid lifting balance wheel, however gentle, I fear it might knock the rim out of true.

TIA

Regards joe.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's sometimes hard to judge where the hairspring is sitting as the weight of the stud moves the spring. Holding it vertically (or resting the edge of the wheel on rodico) may give you a better idea.

I'm still wondering about when you said that you had to polish the pallet bridge screw. Unless the screw has been swapped, this doesn't sound correct to me. In your most recent video, at the very beginning, the balance rim looks quite close to the balance cock. Are they ever able to come in contact?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the watch running (and not running as well), I would check that the hairspring is always clearing the balance arms as NS suggests and that the rim is always clearing the pallet cock by observing the gaps highlighted in the photo attached. 

E3B9F710-9183-4E9C-A7C3-C8C4D691514D.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/23/2020 at 4:32 AM, Khan said:

 How do I check end and side shake? 

Observe the roller table from the side view as you( gently) raise the balance wheel with a clean oiler or tooth pick, etc, the frèe play on the roller or anywhere else on the staff is your axial free play which we call end shake. 

Side shake is the lateral frèe play on staff, so you ( gently) pull or push on the side of any part of the balance as you keep an eye on the staff in jewel hole, any free side play that you can notice is called  side shake and eats amplitude.

Did you remove the end stone plate on both side to clean and check jewel holes under high magnification? if the hole wears out you get excess side shake.

You can check balance pivots under high magnification for signs of wear or scratches and if thinned and pivot-endstone interface for wear. 

Mere Excess end shake can cause positional variations in the range you are seeing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I removed the hairspring and put it back together to ensure a gap between hairspring the balance arms. This still doesn't work and I believe there is too much end shake. There is a remarkable vertical movement when lifting the balance wheel while installed. 

20201027_121914.jpg

20201027_121921.jpg

20201027_122346.jpg

20201027_122408.jpg

20201027_122427.jpg

20201024_035305.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I have noticed that there are two variants of the balance staff for the Landeron 39, the Shockproof and the Super Shock Resistant.

I don't know the difference between them, do you have the right one in the movement?

 

/Carl

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Yes I have that in my watch list a JUF if cheap enough I will have a go , if nothing else it will be good for spares
    • Less give a damn- more **BLEEP** it! …nice that it is keeping time I’ve done a couple of these (one with your assistance) and there’s a third that needs work on the tension between what drives the hands and the barrel. Did you have any issue with that? …and I saw Ranfft make a small comment in a thread re: pin pallets- a couple drops of Tillwich blu, let it run down the pins. It is good for 20 degrees of amplitude… I’m using this oil as a cheat code on my unmotivated Venus chrono…
    • This is a very sad day for the industry.. For most of us being amateurs the cost of replacing parts for ETA,s etc will be beyond affordability for the customers.   see full statement below   We have now received the decision from Judge Michael Green on whether or not the High Court has jurisdiction to hear our claim against Swatch, and sadly it is not the decision we had hoped for.   As we have pointed out in previous news items (see below),the rules that Judge Green had to apply strictly prevented him from examining in any way how the Swiss Court arrived at its verdict, even if it is blatantly obvious that the verdict is wrong.   As Swatch’s lawyer was summing up in the last few minutes oft he hearing, the Judge twice pinned him asking if it was alright if, as a result of the Swiss verdict, consumers had to pay 50% more for their watch repairs. After some stumbling, their lawyer’s reply was “Yes”, so  I am quite sure that Judge Green left his court fully aware that the Swiss verdict does not reflect the norms of British Competition Law. However, the rules simply do not allow him to take that simple fact into account.   Judge Green noted that our two arguments relating firstly to British Competition Law now being different from that of the EU, and secondly to the contention that the legality of the Authorised Service Networks has not been tested, had both been mentioned in the Swiss verdict. Because they had been mentioned, he felt that to allow us to argue them again would constitute re examining the Swiss case, and could not be allowed.   As to our claim that we were denied our right to be heard because our evidence was not considered, our lawyers had argued that the evidence we provided could not have been looked at because had the Swiss Court done so, it could not have reached the conclusion that it did. In his verdict, Judge Green highlighted general statements in the Swiss verdict that evidence had been looked at, and acknowledged the arguments we made to him, but again he considered that this was re-examining the Swiss verdict, and could not be permitted.   Our case has attracted considerable interest within the Legal community, and within minutes of the decision being made public we were approached for comment by one of the largest subscription news services, Global Competition Review. They asked us two very pertinent questions, and I reproduce them for you below along with our responses, as they neatly summarise the consequences arising from our case.   What are the key takeaways?   Enormous damage has been done to the fundamentals of UK and European Competition Law by the Swiss courts. It has always been the case that the effect on consumers and competition has to be considered in any decision making, but we now have a ruling that states even monopolists can remove wholesale markets from the supply chain without any consumer benefit based justification. Those entities looking to subvert Competition Law and exploit consumers for their own benefit will be looking at this very carefully.   Has the court made the wrong decision? If so, will you appeal?   The issue lies not with the High Court, but rather with cross border jurisdiction treaties that have no requirement in them for foreign jurisdictions applying UK law to take account of the Ratio Legis [a legal term for the fundamental reasoning why the law was written] of that law, and have no remedy within them for UK Courts to overcome decisions that clearly do not.    After eight years of work, and a very considerable sum in legal costs, I can not begin to tell you how disappointed I am at this outcome. For the time being, there is no further route through the British Courts that Cousins can follow. However, I promised that we would fight to the end, and that promise stands.   The UK is no longer part of the Lugano Convention, whose rules Judge Green has applied, and as yet nothing permanent has replaced it. The political tide turned against repair prevention by restricting supply of spare parts some time ago, and our efforts on behalf of the Watch Repair industry have resulted in high level contacts within several Government Departments. You can be sure that we will keep working to overcome this unjust situation that we now all find ourselves in.    I will keep you advised.   Kind regards   Anthony
    • Dell fancy a challenge🤣   https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/285785684626?itmmeta=01HT29WVJY21Q94C73GYHGBTFX&hash=item428a277a92:g:15YAAOSwNRVmBAUz&itmprp=enc%3AAQAJAAAA0DIe4QLQBW66rSyIMiyBuk8GY%2B86pQ%2BQnxGbcNq7egAGe5DIs9YMmiWJIbZtMSxwNJIiJxuojbq523IeUSBQ6pJEIQ0tfz2ChrBR03BksmKINyklg1IK4GAfAcYY9Hta9wVeSZSZN7ZCNAfZTgKs9c4%2BUIUZ3Qjc3QjUXDn2uPRo1FiYOEewMG5A26EXb%2BclBgrqtbOmM6P3bea%2F8ZImOAXNI1HtbmtMk84pIGoM6ISwaM1PKFuADtTFMccS5e3ZjndCbXYXHrW3CecsV0edw3M%3D|tkp%3ABk9SR8q588nQYw Darwin’s theory of evolution has not been proven to be absolutely.  😀 
    • A already know the size movement I have the problem is the dial a had purchased has a dimension 20.6mm wide a want to find a watch case that going to fit the dial perfectly 
×
×
  • Create New...