Jump to content

Movement Holder for Mark Lovick Lesson 5


GeoMontreal

Recommended Posts

Hello,

I started new lesson 5 about chronograph by Mark Lovick, there’s 3 movement to be used in the lesson, for the valjoux 7750 I found a movement holder quite easily, but for the venus clone and Poljot I don’t know what I should use, on Mark videos he seems to have movement holder fitted for both movement…

 

Thank you,

 

Georges

Edited by GeoMontreal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen Mark use holders specific to the movement. These can be perfect for chronographs since they can allow access to the pushers. 

Do you have an adjustable holder? Seems that would be where to start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depending on how much the movements cost you, and how willing you are to have scratch marks on the movement, I would prefer to use a purpose built movement holder rather than an adjustable one.

I find that with adjustable movement holders, the movement can flip when applying pressure to loosen a screw, if the screw in question happens to be somewhere in the middle of the movement. Also, adjustable metal movement holders can sometimes leave marks  or scratches on the softer brass movement, which can be a concern on more expensive movements.

A purpose built movement holder will support the entire movement all around the circumference of the movement, preventing flipping of the movement. Since it doesn’t use pressure to hold the movement in place, it won’t leave marks or scratches on the movement. More importantly for a chronograph, the purpose built movement holder will have support for specific movement jewels, which is quite important when fitting hands, which require substantial pressure when fitting in a chronograph.

That is not to imply that adjustable movement holders have no use, because they are still useful. You just need to know their limitations. Also, purpose built movement holders for some calibers may be difficult to find, but if you have access to a 3D printer, you can actually make one, although you will have to find some way to make “posts” to support the movement jewels.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, GeoMontreal said:

Thank you for the answer, what are dedicated movement holder size for Venus  (Seagull ST19) movement , and the one for the poljot 3133 ?

As I have no idea where to find them ….

 

Thank you for your  help,

You can probably get those metal ring sort of movement supports, for a specific ligne size, but it wouldn’t support the jewels that need supporting during watch hand placement. It would be debatable whether these sort of metal ring movement holders would be better than the adjustable ones.

I would suggest you contact @Mark if he could tell you where he got his movement holders, or the schematics if he made those himself. It can be difficult to find the right tools when you work with movements that are not as common as the 7750, or Omega 1861 calibers. 3D printing would be the best option if you could get a 3D printer, and make the measurements of the movement so you know where to put the supports.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Tiny said:

How about going by size or lignes  p3133 is Lignes 14 I have found this site for Bergeon holders  https://www.ofrei.com/page1299.html 

st19 is Lignes 13.75

Correct.

In the videos you might observe that I am using a 13 3/4 ligne holder for the ST19 (also for the Poljot 3133) - the Venus 175 is 14 ligne.

Here is the product on Cousins. Expensive, but very low risk to the movement.

https://www.cousinsuk.com/product/by-size-bergeon-5914

 

Screen Shot 2022-06-25 at 12.07.59 PM.png

Screen Shot 2022-06-25 at 12.08.53 PM.png

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Mark said:

Correct.

In the videos you might observe that I am using a 13 3/4 ligne holder for the ST19 (also for the Poljot 3133) - the Venus 175 is 14 ligne.

Here is the product on Cousins. Expensive, but very low risk to the movement.

https://www.cousinsuk.com/product/by-size-bergeon-5914

 

Screen Shot 2022-06-25 at 12.07.59 PM.png

Screen Shot 2022-06-25 at 12.08.53 PM.png

Is there any concern if the chronograph second hand jewel is not supported by a post in the movement holder during hand installation? I notice that most chronograph movement holders use adjustable posts to support certain jewels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, ifibrin said:

Is there any concern if the chronograph second hand jewel is not supported by a post in the movement holder during hand installation

The above are movement holders for assembly and disassembly of the movement, not support for fitting of hands - although sometimes they can be a combined tool, this is not always the case.

It's more of a concern when fitting new hands which will be tight fitting. Hands previously fitted and removed for service do not generally need to be forced down so hard to the extent that a jewel would be pressed out of position. However, if I felt it does need support and I did not have a dedicated hand support holder for my Bergeon 8935 for a particular movement (not all calibers have a specific one available) then I would use a jeweling tool or staking set to support the jewel whilst pressing down, I prefer to use my staking set as I have a particular punch with a soft flat tip which is ideal for the purpose.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Mark said:

The above are movement holders for assembly and disassembly of the movement, not support for fitting of hands - although sometimes they can be a combined tool, this is not always the case.

It's more of a concern when fitting new hands which will be tight fitting. Hands previously fitted and removed for service do not generally need to be forced down so hard to the extent that a jewel would be pressed out of position. However, if I felt it does need support and I did not have a dedicated hand support holder for my Bergeon 8935 for a particular movement (not all calibers have a specific one available) then I would use a jeweling tool or staking set to support the jewel whilst pressing down, I prefer to use my staking set as I have a particular punch with a soft flat tip which is ideal for the purpose.

Ah ok! That makes sense. Although it does sound a bit cumbersome/tedious to have to manually hold the movement in position in a jewelling/staking tool to support the jewel when fitting hands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, ifibrin said:

cumbersome/tedious

There are many cumbersome and tedious tasks in watch repair, this is not one of them in my opinion 😉

Try removing the black tar gaskets from a 1970s Omega for example 😄

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mark said:

There are many cumbersome and tedious tasks in watch repair, this is not one of them in my opinion 😉

Try removing the black tar gaskets from a 1970s Omega for example 😄

 

That’s true! Those tasks sound like they would require nerves of steel. You sound like a very patient man on YouTube, which was what started me on the journey actually.


I’m just trying to imagine how to hold the movement perfectly perpendicular to the base of the jeweling tool, with the correct movement jewel supported on the anvil/stump, while the hand to be fitted is at the correct position on the pivot, and the flat pusher in position to push the hand home on the pivot. Sounds like you would need more than 10 fingers!

Edited by ifibrin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

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

    • That's very interesting information. I haven't tried to see if my bombé jewel holes have olive holes but I think I should be able to tell on the larger jewels at least. See if I get a chance to have a look later today. This little story was very comforting to read for a "bungler" like myself. That success isn't a given even for a pro. Thanks for sharing!
    • I forgot that I said I would do that. Will take some tomorrow and post them up post haste.
    • I've seen some really nice early 20th century pieces where all the jewels, including center wheel, were convex. Definitely to reduce friction. It can be quite hard to tell if a jewel has olive holes, especially on small sizes, but that again reduces friction- as well as accommodates small misalignments better. Why they aren't used more often? I imagine it was found that at a certain point in the train the actual advantage became negligible, and the added cost on high production movements is why it's not seen on those, just higher-end pieces.   I did an experiment on a little 5x7"' AS 1012 a few years back. These things run OK sometimes, but often are absolute dogs. And AS made gajillions of them. I had a NOS novelty watch in for a service, ran OK flat, massive drop in amplitude vertical. Made like 3 staffs for it trying different pivot sizes, no change. Tried high quality (not Seitz) convex/olive jewels, no change- the original were flat, but could have been olive hole. Same for the pallet fork, then escape wheel, no change. Probably had 20 hours in the watch, new staff and new hole jewels through the escape wheel, no difference in running. Just a dog of a movement. But if I were making a watch I would use them, just because.
    • When Nicklesilver mentioned the use of them on non coned pivots on older high end watches closer to the escapement.  That suggested to me  probably fourth wheels and possibly third wheels. The square shoulder rotatating on the much smaller surface area of a dome as opposed to a flat jewel surface. I'm curious as to why they are not used predominantly?
    • That's what I thought, but as I said, it makes sense. See if any of our pros will have something to add.
×
×
  • Create New...