Watch restoration--a philosophical question

[LittleWatchShop]

Here is the question:

When restoring a watch, should you try to bring it back to its original condition, or simply clean it up, make it run, and perhaps polish or replace the crystal (leaving scratches, dial condition, patina...untouched)?

I know there is no right answer (or wrong answer).

[Nibbler]

For me it depends how messed up it is. If it looks like it lived its last seconds under the tire of an 18 wheeler I will replace the grindy parts. If its more like a natural patina I like using the original parts if they are usable.

[nickelsilver]

The high end vintage watch market is dominated by "untouched" stuff these days. A Rolex from 1980 with a perfect dial is looked at with suspicion, if there are cracks and sun damage the price goes up 5k. In the thousand buck and under range folks still prefer "original with wear" to restored. This is talking case/dial/hands.

 

For antique stuff, talking movement, it's case by case. A 17 jewel Longines pocketwatch, I won't hesitate to bore out a plate or bridge to replace a cracked burished in jewel with a friction jewel (it can be done so it's invisible unless disassembled). If it's a really nice, rare piece, then it's a question of what the client wants. And price. In school we were taught there are 3 levels, repair, restoration, and conservation. A repair might bring back original function, but like above, would be evident on inspection. Restoration you try to bring it as close to original condition as possible. Conservation, you might clean things and remove rust and such without altering it in any way, even if the end result isn't functional- the goal is to keep as much originality as possible.

 

I remember 20 years ago it was normal to buff cases and send dials out as a matter of course. Now if a case gets retouched there are folks who will laser weld dings and refinish to absolute factory original condition, with lapping machines that can reproduce the original crisp lines or the crazy "brushed" finish that was never done with a brush in the first place. Dials likewise are often left with their age showing, hands with manky oxidation around the radium might get a little coat of lacquer on the underside to stabilize them.

[LittleWatchShop]

Good points @nickelsilver.  I have one watch that has already been "hacked" so to speak.  Relume on one hand and in one place on the dial.  At that point, it seems like a complete restore is in order.  Based on what you said, it really is a case-by-case basis judged based on the three levels you describe.  I decided to send my Vulcain dial out for refinishing because it was in really bad shape from bouncing around in a box-o-watches without a crystal to protect it.  Surprised the hands survived!  I am not doing anything to the case other than ultrasonic clean and polishing with a soft cloth (rather...hard wiping).  In fact, I mailed the dial off today.

[AlexanderToerzs]

Dear all,

I think it's all a question of if you are a "restorer" or a "repairer". I met a bloke once here in Germany who had an astonishingly looking "brand new" collapsible bike. He told me it was a RAF paratroopers bike made in 1943. He had restored every part, every screw. Spray painted it British Racing Green. This witness of a bygone time had no doubt been restored to death. The English language has a most appropriate expression when it says that something "is in good repair". I always prefer a well repaired watch, Land Rover or German vineyard tractor to a restored one.

Cheers from Hamburg, Alex

[JohnR725]

2 hours ago, LittleWatchShop said:

When restoring a watch

Your question has too many parameters to properly answer.

If you're dealing with the purists then you can't touch the watch anything you do will be evil and bad you changing the watch. Especially of its valuable.

Then restoring versus servicing is there a difference? For instance if you're a retail location or anywhere customer brings you a pocket watch they expect you to service it or restore it? Maybe they expect both? Often times you will get a note they don't want the case touched they wanted distillate vintage. But do they care what happens inside the part they can't see?

Or if you restoring something vintage what sort of tools should you use? The image comes out of the newest issue of the National Geographic Notice those appear to be vintage tools vintage tools for vintage restoration. I'm pretty sure she regards CNC is devil worshiping. So is it good enough to restore something with monitoring tool are you violating the restoration doing that.

[PastorChris]

This is a topic of discussion with old motorbikes as well, and the opinions vary as widely and in the same ways. 

Personally, I like things to show their age. I prefer the function to be as good a s it can possibly be and would not object to internal parts being replaced if they are worn, but taking as much opportunity to preserve their integrity and originality as is practical. 

Externally I am a bit more or a purist. I don't like tinted lume to make a watch look older. I like the idea stated above of stabilizing old lume to preserve it. I can tolerate a lot of scratches in a crystal as long as it is not cracked and maiatianis its integrity. I would prefer a lightly polished older crystal that is solid to a replacement.

I have seen a lot of really nice work cleaning dials but am less a fan of replacing or re-creating something to look like the original dial.

Im a big fan of the British TV series "The Repair Shop" They seem to wrestle with these same questions on a variety of different sorts of items, including clocks. It is amazing to see their skill and technique brought to bear and the way that they deal with old things the have significant sentimental value to their owners.

[LittleWatchShop]

1 hour ago, AlexanderToerzs said:

I always prefer a well repaired

LOL...love it!

[LittleWatchShop]

1 hour ago, JohnR725 said:

So is it good enough to restore something with monitoring tool are you violating the restoration doing that.

Is this another way of stating Heisenberg's uncertainty principle?  Oh, wait, no...this is Schrodinger's Watch!!!

[LittleWatchShop]

11 minutes ago, PastorChris said:

This is a topic of discussion with old motorbikes as well, and the opinions vary as widely and in the same ways. 

Personally, I like things to show their age. I prefer the function to be as good a s it can possibly be and would not object to internal parts being replaced if they are worn, but taking as much opportunity to preserve their integrity and originality as is practical. 

Externally I am a bit more or a purist. I don't like tinted lume to make a watch look older. I like the idea stated above of stabilizing old lume to preserve it. I can tolerate a lot of scratches in a crystal as long as it is not cracked and maiatianis its integrity. I would prefer a lightly polished older crystal that is solid to a replacement.

I have seen a lot of really nice work cleaning dials but am less a fan of replacing or re-creating something to look like the original dial.

Im a big fan of the British TV series "The Repair Shop" They seem to wrestle with these same questions on a variety of different sorts of items, including clocks. It is amazing to see their skill and technique brought to bear and the way that they deal with old things the have significant sentimental value to their owners.

Wow...good insight.

[LittleWatchShop]

This thread is guiding me with regards to all these watches my dad left behind...but this comes at a time when I am involved in another restoration.  It is not about watches...but it is about time.  I will give the "brief" version of this story.

My uncle bought a 1964 Chevy C10 and drove it until he passed.  My dad got it after that and then around 1980 or so, my dad gave it to me.  I drove until 1989 and then I decided to sell it.  I wanted new shiny things!

Well 20 years later I began to regret having sold it.  So...my brother...who restores vehicles started looking for it.  He was not looking for a similar vehicle...he was looking for MY vehicle.  After years of looking we found it and bought it.  Yup, I had the proof--VIN number.  But in reality...I did not need the VIN.  They guy who bought it never removed the wooden console that set in the floor where my dad put his coffee mug.  Well...there were many other things...like my gun rack (yup...I am a native Texan...we have guns).

Anyway, the guy I sold it to is the guy from whom I bought it back!  He is a musician.  The name of the band: "Stop the Truck."  My truck was featured on his album covers.

Fast forward.  The truck is almost fully restored.  I was able to keep all of the interior (even the steering wheel that has a big chip that I CAUSED).  I refused to replace the old steering wheel with a nice restored one.  Had to replace both doors.  I bought a junker and we took the doors off the junker and put them on my C10. 

The bumper was broken in two places.  We welded it back perfectly and tweaked the marking on the bumper so as to look original (back then, the dealership installed the bumpers with their names stamped on them).

It is beautiful...absolutely stunning (and it has cost me far more than it is worth). 

I think I did the right thing.

[PastorChris]

“I think I did the right thing” 

That’s the bottom line, literally and philosophically. I’m sure you’re uncle would be very pleased.