French clock

[Willow]

Thanks for your reply no it's not a visible escapement, took it apart can not see anything wrong back from my daughters now will have another try today.

[oldhippy]

Have you tried this put a little power on it and move the crutch with your hand and take note when and where it fails to escape and mark it with a pen or something that doesn't leave a permanent mark, you can then see if it is just one or many. I trust pivots are nice and smooth and no bushing is needed. Do the wheels have end shake and are nice and free with no power on. Pallet faces nice and smooth. As the crutch is a self-put in beat is it loose because that can cause the clock to stop, it is better for it to be tight then loose.

[clockboy]

I have encountered the fault with the escape teeth being bent and worn. I found the best way to identify the badly bent teeth was to make an impression with one half of the escape wheel teeth in some Rodico and using the impression to find the teeth that need adjusting. 
PS the very last thing I would adjust is the pallets.

[oldhippy]

clockboy that's a good tip. 

[Willow]

While i am waiting for some filler for the porcelain dial face of the french clock, i decided to send for a mainspring for a Rotherham clock, and noticed a number EMO 60 on the mainspring can you order one with that or do the usual way thanks 

[oldhippy]

I haven't come across EMO 60 so I would just order the spring the normal way. 

[clockboy]

Me neither just order by size and strength. Whilst on strength I read somewhere if the barrel inside diameter is say 30mm then the spring strength required is 0.30 etc. I have checked this theory by measuring springs in clocks I have repaired and it seems correct certainly within +/- .5.

 

[Willow]

5 hours ago, clockboy said:

Me neither just order by size and strength. Whilst on strength I read somewhere if the barrel inside diameter is say 30mm then the spring strength required is 0.30 etc. I have checked this theory by measuring springs in clocks I have repaired and it seems correct certainly within +/- .5.

 

Thanks for that clockboy