Jump to content

Shock jewels - part numbers


Bonzer

Recommended Posts

I've been trying to solve a problem on my Longines watch (see thread 'Diagnosing problems from Timegraph results') and last night I removed the upper and lower shock jewels to give them a better clean and oil. I put it all back and my problem is still there (low amplitude - circa 200 degrees). 

However, I discovered later that Longines list the upper and lower shock jewels as two different part numbers (370 and 371) whereas I had stupidly assumed they were the same. My question therefore; if the part numbers are different, does this mean the jewels differ from each other in some way? They certainly looked the same size but maybe I've mixed them up and put them back incorrectly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frequently the cap jewels will be different, with the cap for the balance cock being thicker. In rare cases* the hole jewel and cap are different, usually these will be clearly different in diameter and clear where they go.

 

Always remember the sound a clock makes- tick-tock; thick-top.

 

*Some modern common calibers use different sizes, like the 7750, with a surprisingly small one in the mainplate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bonzer said:

A great way to remember ?

I'll have look and dig out the micrometer if they look too similar to identify. Thanks ?

Haha, yes. In school inevitably some student discovers that if you switch "top" with "cock" it makes perfect logical sense, and gets a laugh. Just don't be muttering it to yourself when you're working on the watch or the missus will give you very strange looks.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I think if you want to play Billy big b.ollocks then you have to have something up your sleeve, anyone that knows how to fight, plays dirty. Lets face it a lot of folk that voted for Brexit just rolled uk their sleeves to say up yours EU hoping for good changes. We have idiots for leaders and probably none of them clever enough to clean the shitty stick they were given. I didnt vote, what will be will be.
    • I voted leave too, my reasoning was the the EU is undemocratic, no elected officials. I don't regret it but I  am sad that both sides acted like petulant toddlers.  Shameful.  I'm not on other forums but if I was and left this site, would you shun me? Of course not, we aren't petulant toddlers.  
    • This is a type of tool that may be suitable to remove the bezel - though note that I'm pretty sure the watch should be face down - not face up, as in some of the photos of these tools on amazon & ebay! If you try one one of those, put the movement screws back in first to avoid accidents. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Removal-Professional-Remover-Watchmaker-Diameter/dp/B09XCH4QVN?source=ps-sl-shoppingads-lpcontext&ref_=fplfs&smid=A296NCMMFVXSDN&th=1  
    • Hi, I’m constantly asking my wife to help me with removing the stem in order to complete casing. To expand, this is not a challenge for me when the setting lever is secured by a screw (older calibers). However when the setting lever is attached to a spring loaded setting lever axel, like on more modern calibers, I simply don’t see how to apply enough pressure on the button to get the stem out short of putting the movement face down with the dial and hands attached, which I’m loath to do in order to avoid damaging the dial/hands? what technique should I be using? thanks  
    • Many thanks for your advice (being borne in mind at present) & offer Dell. When I was given the clock the plastic anchor was loose on the arbour (it had split at the 'hole') &, after repairing this, I have been trying to determine whether the spindle (pin) should be perpendicular when the pallet is sitting on a flat surface; or whether, when installed, its L-R extremes (or alternatively its tick & tock points) should lie at equal angles from the vertical when moved with spring absent. I can get the clock to run but in every such configuration the top block has to be turned anti-clockwise (from above) by quite a bit in order to be 'in beat' & it always runs fast (despite the pendulum being set to as slow as possible). This makes me wonder if there is any particular feature of/fault in a torsion spring clock which determines which turn direction (if any) is necessary to get it 'in beat'; & whether there would be a different set of settings that would get it running nearer to time at somewhere around the mid timing/inertia position which would then allow tweaking of the fast/slow setting.
×
×
  • Create New...