Jump to content

Cleaning


RogerH

Recommended Posts

Hi, I have another lovely Smiths Mantle Clock on the bench. the case is in good condition but inside it appears to have been drenched in some gunky oil and left in a garage!!

The time and chime trains have cleaned up ok but the back plate looks awful. it's been lacquered and is very dark as well as rusty. Would the Laquerre have been put on by the manufacturer? is this something that should been stripped off? I've not had one so grubby before so any good tips on how best to clean it would be much appreciated. 

In the picture shows you can see the right hand side which I've given a bit of a clean.

Smiths Plate.jpg

Smiths Plate2.jpg

Edited by RogerH
Photo added
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That flaking/corrosion at the holes is likely to spread oil. Sometimes you can remove lacquer with water-based cleaner like Elma 9:1 and perhaps with heating applied. On a later clock like that, I would personally use ultrasonic action too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, rodabod said:

That flaking/corrosion at the holes is likely to spread oil. Sometimes you can remove lacquer with water-based cleaner like Elma 9:1 and perhaps with heating applied. On a later clock like that, I would personally use ultrasonic action too.

Thanks Rodabod....if only I had an ultrasonic cleaner 😉 I may try the Elma route and just strip it right back. As you say, the holes are already in quite a state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The lacquer is put on at the time of manufacture. I don't recommend ultrasonic cleaners.   Horolene Clock Cleaning Concentrated Fluid is best make sure you completely  cover the plates. Nail varnish remover will also remove the lacquer.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

do I need to re-lacquer the plates afterwards or will a polish do - possibly the chalk method? I've looked up both Elma and Horolene and both do a similar job. tbh I'm leaning towards Horolene - I'll give it a go and let you know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, oldhippy said:

Horoline its ammonia based

you also want to be careful in that you mix it properly and it doesn't actually say in the instructions but I would not heat it up. Ammonia does a really beautiful job of cleaning but it can get carried away and start etching things you want to keep an eye on it.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Panic not my friends, I'm not a complete novice with Ammonia based cleaner - I currently use Andrew Firth Cleaner which sounds pretty similar to the other versions and so far it's done quite a good job with cleaning. I've just generally cleaned the main plates by hand so as not to damage them - it was just that this particular plate is pretty bad and I didn't know if there was a better way. I'll send the pics when done.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't actually remember where I got it from but it seems pretty good. I now have some Horclean so I'll try that and compare.

Meanwhile see the final plate cleaned and buffed. It has a few historical scratches and marks but overall doesn't look too bad.

20210809_075005.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, oldhippy said:

That looks better. Never ever machine buff any part of any clock. it can cause irreversible damage. Making it nice and shiny will not make it work better.  

it was all done by hand, I just meant I buffed it up with a cloth. It's always satisfying when you take an old clock in a poor state and bring it back to life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rodabod said:

Looks nice and clean now. Did you lose the perlage finish? 

Sadly yes, it was all part of the lacquering so once that was gone it was just back to the smooth finish. So not as fancy but still a lot better than it was. Interesting though as I thought that sort of finish would have been part of the plate but once the lacquer was removed there was no sign of it. It maybe they put it on so as to make it look more expensive than it actually is.

  • Like 1
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

    • Welcome Gary, enjoy the forum.
    • There is a known fault with the 3135 which is if the watch has not been serviced the Auto rotor can wear. See attached pic.    
    • How do I check that?
    • I sort of am expecting that ring to push against the rim of the crystal and possibly a seal against the front of the case. Hence everything comes out the back. Nothing else seems to make sense to me. I am trying to imagine why the crystal would not push out unless the ring needs to be backed off to allow the crystal to be pushed out, but then how does the ring come out? I am new to stripping watches though and am happy to stand corrected. 🙂 
    • Hi @Roll1ex, welcome to the forum. It's considered good practice to introduce yourself to the forum in this thread: https://www.watchrepairtalk.com/forum/23-introduce-yourself-here/ But no worries. I don't have the spec sheet for the 15xx movements, but when I look at the 31xx information, it stands out that the endshake of the rotor should be between 0.01 and 0.03mm. That is LESS than the pallet fork and the lowest of all endshakes in the movement. Not exactly sure what you mean by that. The rotor itself is a unique part which doesn't have different heights. If you mean the height at which it is installed vis-a-vis the automatic bridge, then yes, that can be adjusted a bit via the two jewels that hold the rotor axle. Height differences vis-a-vis the bridge can also be caused by the strength with which the new axle is hammered/riveted into the rotor. And yes, that can be compensated a bit via the jewels.   This would probably indicate that the axle isn't perfectly perpendicular to the rotor. That could explain why the weight is closer to the rest of the movement at 9 o'clock -- it would then be furthest at 3 o'clock. That would be bad news. A new axle should then be installed... and properly this time.   As I wrote already, there is margin for adjustment via the jewels. As for the spring clip, the 15xx movements only seems to have one spring clip thickness (part 7911 - https://www.cousinsuk.com/PDF/categories/2878_Rolex 1530 Pages 6-10.pdf). The later 31xx movments have several versions with different thicknesses. But there is a good chance that the clip is worn (=thinner than it should) and should then be replaced.   But, in conclusion, if the rotor hits the caseback in one particular postion, then my first suspicion is that the axle wasn't punched in at a perfect 90° angle. That must first be re-done correctly. No other fixes will be solving that problem. Furthermore, if the rotor "dings" against the caseback when the watch is shaken (but not in other situations), then there is likely also an issue of endshake (more an issue of the jewels) or lateral play (more likely the sping clip).      PS: by whom? Independent or RSC? 
×
×
  • Create New...