Jump to content

Identify these parts?


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Sjk4x4 said:

that makes sense. Its a good idea, although it seems like it would be difficult to get the height right on the pallet. Thanks for the help 🙂

That's the idea of have a selection of them you had different heights and pivot size. Here is a picture of one I found on the net. 

3135-419__12636.1597219186.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree with OH they are blank pocket watch pallet pivots. I purchased a selection of of pocket watch balance staffs from Cousins a few years ago and it also had some of these. They can be modified on a lathe to fit which I have done.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't know these were available.  I have an old (circa 1854) English Fusee pocket watch which has a broken pivot on the lever.

I broke it myself (horror). I had rebuilt watch and all was fine, then decided I would dis-assemble again to take some pics.  Big mistake, trying to align so many pivots in a full plate is very hard, and the inevitable happened.  I don't have a lathe to make a new one so put it in the 'for later drawer where it remains.

The overall length including both pivots is 4.8mm (0.189 in).  The pivot diam is 0.19mm (0.007 in) and pivot length is 0.64 mm (0.025 in).    I reassembled the watch with the broken pivot so that I knew where all the bits were, so I would need to dis-assemble again to measure staff diam. 

Based on the above info, do any of the members or the OP have one that could be a possible fit ??

 

P5020075.JPG.e5708f0cc7c4eb67a72ffed8d8ea6597.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, canthus said:

I have an old (circa 1854) English Fusee pocket watch

you want to look very carefully at the Arbor and see if it looks like it has threads on one end? The reason why is a lot of the earlier pocket watches did not use friction Arbors but a screw in Arbor.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, JohnR725 said:

you want to look very carefully at the Arbor and see if it looks like it has threads on one end? The reason why is a lot of the earlier pocket watches did not use friction Arbors but a screw in Arbor.

That is right. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, canthus said:

Didn't know these were available.  I have an old (circa 1854) English Fusee pocket watch which has a broken pivot on the lever.

I broke it myself (horror). I had rebuilt watch and all was fine, then decided I would dis-assemble again to take some pics.  Big mistake, trying to align so many pivots in a full plate is very hard, and the inevitable happened.  I don't have a lathe to make a new one so put it in the 'for later drawer where it remains.

The overall length including both pivots is 4.8mm (0.189 in).  The pivot diam is 0.19mm (0.007 in) and pivot length is 0.64 mm (0.025 in).    I reassembled the watch with the broken pivot so that I knew where all the bits were, so I would need to dis-assemble again to measure staff diam. 

Based on the above info, do any of the members or the OP have one that could be a possible fit ??

 

P5020075.JPG.e5708f0cc7c4eb67a72ffed8d8ea6597.JPG

I have checked my stock and I found one the correct length 4.8mm but the diameter of the shaft is 0.98mm. It might fit but without a lathe it will be difficult.
 

AF08550A-FAF0-4BF8-B0C8-A91D92CA9294.thumb.jpeg.ba645b6b2a5f72a7f565ca0120d06452.jpeg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for your comments, I'll remove the lever again as soon as I can (bit busy at the moment) and see if it has screw thread (JohnR725)(don't think so from memory and looking at  my pics) and also measure the shaft diam (clockboy).  I can possibly ream the lever to fit shaft if near size and pivots diam is ok.  I'll post again when I have answers.  Thanks again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, clockboy said:

The fitting of it has to be precise to say the least reaming out the lever is not a good idea. This is another of the measurements that will have to be correct,

 

A85657F9-FE9A-43F1-8E07-D820B314B85E.thumb.jpeg.1aba25ecd042723dbc0d4828951af20b.jpeg1A52CF6A-1C13-4F71-ABAC-D68034014EE9.thumb.jpeg.24a7af607da04d6f155848dc62ff72b4.jpeg

Thanks clockboy,  my thinking was that if the pivot diams are ok, and the length is ok, then it just needs the shaft to be correct size diam.  If that diam is very near the old one, and, as it is likely an interference fit, then if there is sufficient material on the lever then a light reaming might suffice.  I agree a lathe would be better but I am only a retired engineer hobbyist and too long in years to be investing in new expensive tools !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, canthus said:

Thanks clockboy,  my thinking was that if the pivot diams are ok, and the length is ok, then it just needs the shaft to be correct size diam.  If that diam is very near the old one, and, as it is likely an interference fit, then if there is sufficient material on the lever then a light reaming might suffice.  I agree a lathe would be better but I am only a retired engineer hobbyist and too long in years to be investing in new expensive tools !!

The general rule is to modify the lesser component if needed. So if replacing a balance staff, maybe you find that the replacement is too big to fit in the balance, or roller table. You would modify the staff to fit; otherwise down the line when it needs another staff, and the watchmaker got lucky with a proper staff, the reamed out parts no longer fit.

 

Also, with a pallet fork the only convenient way to open the hole is with a cutting broach, which leaves a tapered hole. It should be cylindrical for a proper fit. The interference is very small, like a few microns if a steel fork, maybe 5 microns for a brass one (many are brass but look like steel as they are nickel plated).

 

Anyway replacing pallet arbors is fiddly work and if you've gotten to that point you probably have a lathe, haha.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fully take on board what you are saying about the purity of repair. However will a future watchmaker ever find the 'correct' staff for a 154 year old item ??  Surely any future replacement will require a 'special' part being made anyway, so previous mods to staff or lever will be irrelevant?  Just playing the devils advocate here.  Maybe will have a try or just leave in the drawer. Maybe the only value in the watch is the silver case!

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

    • Hi. Yes I get it , the slot in the end I’d to allow you to screw the button on whilst holding the pusher shaft. To remove the pusher tube you will need a tool such as the one shown by Richard. I think Ali Express the Chinese Amazon has replicas of the Horotec system for a lot less money, how effective they are not having had to use one. But as you said the way to go is complete removal and replacement, bodging it up will  lead to a repeat failure
    • It does look like it seems to be working again I'm getting emails.
    • One of the things that I've been bothered with lately is timekeeping? For instance a 90-year-old pocket watch what so to timekeeping was it supposed to keep? They publish railroad timekeeping but I don't know how well normal non-railroad watches were supposed to keep time. The reason why the question comes up for me is I spend a lot of time at work adjusting watches to keep really really good time  because I have to please my boss where as when the watch was made I have to wonder what kind timekeeping would've been acceptable. After all they typically didn't have timing machines 100 years ago and they were timing and six positions certainly not for the non-railroad grade watch. On the other hand I do get paid by the hour so maybe I shouldn't be concerned of how much time I Spend trying to make everything keep chronometer timekeeping almost. Citing a Delta of 40 seconds for a 90-year-old watch is quite outstanding.
    • That's an interesting question which I don't think I've seen explained anywhere. But I think the problem will go away just about instantaneously. In other words the  coating is really thin and it should go away almost immediately. So the problem should resolve itself extremely fast.  
    • I experienced that different types of shellac and their ages are affected differently by IPA. Sometimes the shellac dissolves in a few seconds and sometimes several minutes are required. Nowadays I never let shellac come into contact with IPA. It's a hotly debated topic here on WRT if you search. Like John, I don't think you need to worry about the weight of the shellac, but instead that it might start rubbing against something. When I learned how to adjust pallet stones, I tried documenting my experiences in this thread. Hopefully, it can help you. I personally don't believe in the idea of abrading the epilame before oiling so I don't think you need to think or worry about it. The only time I've heard anyone mention this is Alex on the YouTube channel Watch Repair Tutorials but actually no one else. I'm not saying it's "wrong" just that I don't think it's necessary or adds anything.
×
×
  • Create New...