why does this part not fit

[quantieme]

Hi All, I bought this FHF part for  a cal 372 as I always assumed that the other cal numbers on the packet were associated calibres that the part would fit, but in this case it does not, the cal 59 is a 3.75''' and the 372 is an 8.75''. I did notice there is a small F against the first number on the list. I am hoping someone can explain this for me so i do not make the same error in the future. My original part is on the right and the purchased part is on the left.

thanks in advance Tony

[watchweasol]

Hi   I have attached the sheets for bthe the calibers  and in bothe cases the number is 710 from what I see  the number 710 denotes  the pallet as it appears on most tech sheets as that.

On cousins lists  AS 1393 710 is for the 372  @ £20 74       

FHF 59 710 is for the 59 and 59-21    @  £25.94

Hope this is of use.

2991_FHF 371, 372, 373.pdf 2931_FHF 59.21.pdf

[JohnR725]

the unhelpful answer is you have a mystery? Looking up each of the watches the pallet forks do not interchange.

even going to the bestfit online hoping maybe there'd be some different something newer and know they're both unique.

http://cgi.julesborel.com/cgi-bin/matcgi2?ref=FF_372

http://cgi.julesborel.com/cgi-bin/matcgi2?ref=[]ZDXF[G

http://cgi.julesborel.com/cgi-bin/matcgi2?ref=FF_59N

http://cgi.julesborel.com/cgi-bin/matcgi2?ref=[]ZDXDZG

 

 

[oldhippy]

The F stands for Felsa so the part will fit a Felsa 290 cal

[praezis]

This is really misleading, but "F" is valid for all following numbers, not just 290.

Frank

[quantieme]

1 hour ago, oldhippy said:

The F stands for Felsa so the part will fit a Felsa 290 cal

so the felsa 290 is a 6.75''' size again a different size but the part should fit.

[oldhippy]

As far as I can remember yes. My short memory is poor due to a slight stroke a few years back, long term is good. 

[quantieme]

1 hour ago, JohnR725 said:

the unhelpful answer is you have a mystery? Looking up each of the watches the pallet forks do not interchange.

even going to the bestfit online hoping maybe there'd be some different something newer and know they're both unique.

http://cgi.julesborel.com/cgi-bin/matcgi2?ref=FF_372

http://cgi.julesborel.com/cgi-bin/matcgi2?ref=[]ZDXF[G

http://cgi.julesborel.com/cgi-bin/matcgi2?ref=FF_59N

http://cgi.julesborel.com/cgi-bin/matcgi2?ref=[]ZDXDZG

 

 

yes clearly i cannot see how a 3.75'' part will fit a bigger 8.75'', I did look up some of those calibers and could not see how they could interchange, i have always bought my parts this way so is this now wrong to assume that the part will fit the listed calibers on the packet or is this an anomaly as i have never had this problem before.

1 minute ago, oldhippy said:

As far as I can remember yes. My short memory is poor due to a slight stroke a few years back, long term is good. 

I have always bought my parts this way, so is this now wrong to assume that the part will fit the listed calibers on the packet or is this an anomaly as i have never had this problem before.

[JohnR725]

5 hours ago, quantieme said:

have always bought my parts this way, so is this now wrong to assume that the part will fit the listed calibers on the packet or is this an anomaly as i have never had this problem before.

I suppose because there are so many parts out there there is always the likelihood of somebody making a mistake. Seeing as how you've never had the problem before obviously they don't make lots of mistakes but it's always possible when human beings involved that somebody makes a mistake. But the weird part of the mistake here is not necessarily the pallet fork the weird part is the label is printed wrong war seems to be printed wrong?

I don't actually know how the label parts are generated. I do know how the parts get in the little plastic container though that's a really interesting process. I always regret I didn't take my camera that day so I don't have a picture I only have to go by memory. It is because I saw the spare parts department were there assembling these. There's literally somebody with a little paper cup and by hand dropping them in and then the plastic pieces are in a large spool and on the other side is a large spool of labels and they all come together.

then there is the other minor question the weird symbol towards the right-hand bottom. I wonder if they are outsourcing who makes up the spare parts's?

[watchweasol]

5 hours ago, quantieme said:

so the felsa 290 is a 6.75''' size again a different size but the part should fit.

According to Cousins the FHF59 710 is the same number as the FELSA  290

[quantieme]

2 hours ago, JohnR725 said:

I suppose because there are so many parts out there there is always the likelihood of somebody making a mistake. Seeing as how you've never had the problem before obviously they don't make lots of mistakes but it's always possible when human beings involved that somebody makes a mistake. But the weird part of the mistake here is not necessarily the pallet fork the weird part is the label is printed wrong war seems to be printed wrong?

I don't actually know how the label parts are generated. I do know how the parts get in the little plastic container though that's a really interesting process. I always regret I didn't take my camera that day so I don't have a picture I only have to go by memory. It is because I saw the spare parts department were there assembling these. There's literally somebody with a little paper cup and by hand dropping them in and then the plastic pieces are in a large spool and on the other side is a large spool of labels and they all come together.

then there is the other minor question the weird symbol towards the right-hand bottom. I wonder if they are outsourcing who makes up the spare parts's?

so the part should fit, i will have to assume it was an error at the factory.

1 hour ago, watchweasol said:

According to Cousins the FHF59 710 is the same number as the FELSA  290

so must be a factory error, wrong part put in packaging.

[praezis]

14 hours ago, quantieme said:

so the part should fit, i will have to assume it was an error at the factory.

Imo there is no error!

I wonder if you read the answers given here at all??

Frank