Foreign Object

[JohnFrum]

7 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

Is that .8mm in length.  If so then its way too small for a dial foot.

Apologies. Placed it on the inch side of my callipers instead of the mm

[Neverenoughwatches]

6 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

Is that .8mm in length.  If so then its way too small for a dial foot.

A seiko dial foot approx 0.9mm diameter 2.7mm length.  I have tbh, this is starting to get on my tits

[JohnFrum]

.635 mm diameter, 2.16mm long

 

Given that the movement was uncased, possibly a foot from a non Seiko dial. 

[markr]

It's obviously the pin missing from the hacking stop arm to my Ball watch.  I'll be needing that back please.

[Shane]

That's 2.159 mm X .635 mm for those of you in the civilized world.  That's smaller any of the spring pin ends that I have in my scrap jar.

Shane 

[Neverenoughwatches]

1 hour ago, JohnFrum said:

.635 mm diameter, 2.16mm long

 

Given that the movement was uncased, possibly a foot from a non Seiko dial. 

Woohoo. Thank god, i was about to crack up.

17 minutes ago, Shane said:

That's 2.159 mm X .635 mm for those of you in the civilized world.  That's smaller any of the spring pin ends that I have in my scrap jar.

Shane 

Why you've knocked a thou of a mil off his length is beyond me shane. As a fact, men would prefer NOT to have anything knocked off their length. 

[JohnR725]

now that we have very exacting assizes of the mystery item. Plus additional bonus pictures of it could we get a picture of the dial the backside. It is unfortunately surprisingly easy to knock dial feet off modern dials.

[Neverenoughwatches]

7 minutes ago, JohnR725 said:

now that we have very exacting assizes of the mystery item. Plus additional bonus pictures of it could we get a picture of the dial the backside. It is unfortunately surprisingly easy to knock dial feet off modern dials.

It didn't come with a dial John. . It only had one foot so it hopped off. 

[Shane]

@JohnFrumI hadn't intended to be correcting your numbers by such an insignificant amount.  @Neverenoughwatches asked for the measurements in metric on page one of this thread and I didn't notice that there was a page two or that you had already converted them.  It's just that I did not round off my numbers and it looks as if you did.

I can see how that may have made me look.  I assure you all it was just unfortunately timed.

Shane 

Edited September 9, 2022 by Shane

[JohnFrum]

1 hour ago, Shane said:

@JohnFrumI hadn't intended to be correcting your numbers by such an insignificant amount.  @Neverenoughwatches asked for the measurements in metric on page one of this thread and I didn't notice that there was a page two or that you had already converted them.  It's just that I did not round off my numbers and it looks as if you did.

I can see how that may have made me look.  I assure you all it was just unfortunately timed.

Shane 

Not a problem. 

Thanks to everyone for identifying the mystery object. 
I’ve been looking at all the parts both with the naked eye and microscope while referring to the 7s26 technical guide. No post seems dislodged from the plate and all wheels are intact.  That pin/dial foot was jammed tight between the center wheel arm and mainplate, preventing the wheel from rotating. 
Will clean and reassemble the movement. Curious to see if it runs. I don’t yet have a timegrapher so will use the watchtuner app for measurements (assuming it starts). 
I’ve been practicing on some Incabloc settings from Otto Frei (mounted in Rodico) so should hopefully be able to handle the bridge shock jewels. Will attempt some balance spring manipulation also. 
 

Edited September 9, 2022 by JohnFrum

[Neverenoughwatches]

3 hours ago, Shane said:

@JohnFrumI hadn't intended to be correcting your numbers by such an insignificant amount.  @Neverenoughwatches asked for the measurements in metric on page one of this thread and I didn't notice that there was a page two or that you had already converted them.  It's just that I did not round off my numbers and it looks as if you did.

I can see how that may have made me look.  I assure you all it was just unfortunately timed.

Shane 

You are a considerate chap shane .I know there are folk that wouldnt care how it made them look, but I'm not at liberty to say  cough his name.

Edited September 9, 2022 by Neverenoughwatches

[spectre6000]

12 hours ago, JohnFrum said:

I’ve been practicing on some Incabloc settings from Otto Frei (mounted in Rodico) so should hopefully be able to handle the bridge shock jewels.

Those extra tiny shock settings are the subject of a recent thread. The moral of the story is it's probably best to leave them in place and oil from the other side. It can be done, and I've done it myself, but it's way more trouble than it's worth is the consensus. Auto oiler is the answer.

[mikepilk]

39 minutes ago, spectre6000 said:

Those extra tiny shock settings are the subject of a recent thread. The moral of the story is it's probably best to leave them in place and oil from the other side. It can be done, and I've done it myself, but it's way more trouble than it's worth is the consensus. Auto oiler is the answer.

I agree entirely. They are VERY fiddly to put back. Clean them in place and oil through the hole. 

You don't need to buy an auto oiler. I use an old oiler sharpened to a point, which I put through the jewel hole resting on the cap jewel. I then use a fine oiler to put some oil at the jewel hole. Capillary action will draw the oil through to the cap jewel.

[Jon]

23 minutes ago, mikepilk said:

I agree entirely. They are VERY fiddly to put back. Clean them in place and oil through the hole. 

You don't need to buy an auto oiler. I use an old oiler sharpened to a point, which I put through the jewel hole resting on the cap jewel. I then use a fine oiler to put some oil at the jewel hole. Capillary action will draw the oil through to the cap jewel.

I agree they are fiddly, but I wouldn't leave them in place to clean, as they aren't going to be cleaned properly, then lubricant is added to a dirty cap jewel. Learning how to remove and replace these springs isn't that hard with the correct tool. I also use a honed down oiler to push the oil through the oil sink.

[Neverenoughwatches]

31 minutes ago, Jon said:

I agree they are fiddly, but I wouldn't leave them in place to clean, as they aren't going to be cleaned properly, then lubricant is added to a dirty cap jewel. Learning how to remove and replace these springs isn't that hard with the correct tool. I also use a honed down oiler to push the oil through the oil sink.

I dont understand how the top of the jewel and the cap jewel can be cleaned properly if it is left in place. Apart from the jewel hole this area is encapsulated, surely dirt could become trapped inside. Or at the very least a residue left behind from the cleaner and any dirt present to then contaminate the new lubricant. From an enthusiasts point of view using a basic cleaning machine. 

[Jon]

10 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

I dont understand how the top of the jewel and the cap jewel can be cleaned properly if it is left in place. Apart from the jewel hole this area is encapsulated, surely dirt could become trapped inside. Or at the very least a residue left behind from the cleaner and any dirt present to then contaminate the new lubricant. From an enthusiasts point of view using a basic cleaning machine. 

You're right. They would never be cleaned properly left in situ. No matter what anyone will tell you, a movement has to be completely disassembled to be able to clean it properly, otherwise you may have a big drop in amplitude and wonder what is causing it, when a glaringly obvious problem of dirty cap jewels and contaminated lubricant was the cause. It's the same with replacing a mainspring, which should be standard practice. Putting the old spring back is a bad idea, as a big drop in amplitude is probably due to the old spring, but if not, you will never be sure, as you didn't rule out the mainspring by replacing it with a new one. You'll end up chasing your tail if the obvious possible causes of problems aren't addressed. I think it boils down servicing a movement properly, or easily. The easy way isn't always the proper way. 

Edited September 9, 2022 by Jon

[Neverenoughwatches]

3 minutes ago, Jon said:

You're right. They would never be cleaned properly left in situ. No matter what anyone will tell you, a movement has to be completely disassembled to be able to clean it properly, otherwise you may have a big drop in amplitude and wonder what is causing it, when a glaringly obvious problem of dirty cap jewels and contaminated lubricant was the cause. It's the same with replacing a mainspring, which should be standard practice. Putting the old spring back is a bad idea, as a big drop in amplitude is probably due to the old spring, but if not, you will never be sure, as you didn't rule out the mainspring by replacing it with a new one. You'll end up chasing your tail if the obvious possible causes of problems aren't addressed. I think it boils down servicing a movement properly, or easily. The easy way isn't always the proper way. 

Thanks for the reply Jon. I've wondered about this non disassembly of the jewel and cap for a while now. You can get in to lubricate the cap jewel with an auto oiler through the jewel if you have to but you cant get in to wipe it down with a chamois until you can see your face in it.

[mikepilk]

1 hour ago, Jon said:

 It's the same with replacing a mainspring, which should be standard practice. Putting the old spring back is a bad idea, as a big drop in amplitude is probably due to the old spring, but if not, you will never be sure, as you didn't rule out the mainspring by replacing it with a new one. You'll end up chasing your tail if the obvious possible causes of problems aren't addressed. I think it boils down servicing a movement properly, or easily. The easy way isn't always the proper way. 

I always used to change the mainspring, but I've come to realise that it is rarely necessary. I'm just a hobbyist and assumed that "the pro's" would always replace mainsprings. But from what I've learned from this site, this is often not the case, and what I thought were "set" springs were actually fine. Even what looks like a "set" spring can give reasonable amplitude.

For the small diashock, when discussed on here previously, the general consensus has been - for the beginner, clean them in place. Go back and re-do them at a future time when more proficient.

I've had years of wrestling shock springs, and although I have no problems with the large (balance) diashocks, I find fitting those small ones (even under the microscope) tricky. A beginner with a loupe - not worth the bother.

 

 

 

Edited September 9, 2022 by mikepilk

[dadistic]

1 hour ago, Jon said:

It's the same with replacing a mainspring, which should be standard practice. Putting the old spring back is a bad idea, as a big drop in amplitude is probably due to the old spring, but if not, you will never be sure, as you didn't rule out the mainspring by replacing it with a new one. You'll end up chasing your tail if the obvious possible causes of problems aren't addressed. I think it boils down servicing a movement properly, or easily. The easy way isn't always the proper way. 

Unfortunately, it is rare for me to be able to get a mainspring for less than $20 when shipping and taxes are considered. Most of the time it's much more.

Many of the watches I work on, I'd never get my money back. They just aren't that valuable.  If I'm working on a watch for a customer, then it's their choice if they want to put the money into the watch.  As often as not it's a no.

I have a large stash of "vintage", mostly blue steel,  mainsprings and I can often find a usable one. Again, if it's for a customer I'll let them know that the spring is just to get the watch running, it is not likely to last, and that they should not expect the watch to be suitable for daily wear.  I have many watches like this in my own collection. Every once in a while I wind one up and wear it, and it's fine.

I'd love to be in a position where I can routinely replace a mainspring,  but until I have clients that  are willing to spend $300+ for a service, can't be done. And there just aren't that many people out there who are willing to spend that much money on a watch service. 

Maybe someday.

Edited September 9, 2022 by dadistic

[Shane]

3 hours ago, Jon said:

I think it boils down servicing a movement properly, or easily. The easy way isn't always the proper way. 

John,

I would never say that you are wrong, it's just that you and others have different goals.

I have quite a few watches within my personal collection.  I like to wear a different one every day or so as I randomly rotate through them all.  If one of my watches runs a bit fast or slow due to something outside of my control, current desire or budget to fix, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.  The odds are it will need to be reset by the next time it's worn anyway.  I certainly can't afford to purchase a new mainspring for every watch I own just for the principle.  I have worked on watches for other people and if it was not obviously (in my opinion) needed, they were given the option with a full understanding of the situation.  After all, it was their money and they are only paying for the parts used (no labor).  Some have opted for and others against but everyone has been happy with their results.  That being said, I try to do the best work that I can within my limitations.  I have repaired watches that have run on the wrist for weeks without a perceptible loss or gain of time and that is good enough for me.

Every one of us must work within our own limits or within the limits of our "customers".

Good luck with everything you try.

Shane

[Neverenoughwatches]

19 minutes ago, Shane said:

John,

I would never say that you are wrong, it's just that you and others have different goals.

I have quite a few watches within my personal collection.  I like to wear a different one every day or so as I randomly rotate through them all.  If one of my watches runs a bit fast or slow due to something outside of my control, current desire or budget to fix, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.  The odds are it will need to be reset by the next time it's worn anyway.  I certainly can't afford to purchase a new mainspring for every watch I own just for the principle.  I have worked on watches for other people and if it was not obviously (in my opinion) needed, they were given the option with a full understanding of the situation.  After all, it was their money and they are only paying for the parts used (no labor).  Some have opted for and others against but everyone has been happy with their results.  That being said, I try to do the best work that I can within my limitations.  I have repaired watches that have run on the wrist for weeks without a perceptible loss or gain of time and that is good enough for me.

Every one of us must work within our own limits or within the limits of our "customers".

Good luck with everything you try.

Shane

A good view to have shane which applies to many of us. Horses for courses, whatever applies to you. 

[JohnR725]

4 hours ago, mikepilk said:

I always used to change the mainspring, but I've come to realise that it is rarely necessary. I'm just a hobbyist and assumed that "the pro's" would always replace mainsprings. But from what I've learned from this site, this is often not the case, and what I thought were "set" springs were actually fine. Even what looks like a "set" spring can give reasonable amplitude.

when I first came to the shop where I'm working now there were three other watchmakers. I learned from them they wouldn't even touch a watch unless they had the replacement mainspring in their hand. When I inquired I was told it was a liability reason. You'll find in most modern shops if not all modern shops they will always replace the mainspring is just what they do.

But is it really necessary? If it's a modern white mainspring and it still looks like it's in decent condition. And in the watch if 24 hours later you have 200° or whatever degrees of amplitude you're supposed to have in other words it seems to be doing the job it's fine.

I do find it rather amusing that Omega has a working instruction on recycling a mainspring parol. They explain how to disassemble the barrel everything is supposed to look at which is not just a mainspring. Everything has to look perfect basically. Mainspring is wiped off with a lint free cloth. Then the whole thing is reassembled. But as we have a Swatch group service center in town the watchmakers I talked to they always replace the entire mainspring and barrel obviously this memo and never made it to the service center

as I'm typically working on vintage watches incoming before I service I like to pre-time. Iin order to pre-time I just need to get the watch running somewhat and I don't worry about whether the mainspring is set or not. A set mainspring will initially run the watch it just will not run the watch for 24 hours. So you have to be careful in assuming her mainspring is good when you finish servicing because unless you run the watch for 24 hours in not necessarily going to know whether the mainspring is good or not.

then do I reuse mainsprings yes. As the mainsprings in pocket watches are getting harder to get if the mainspring in the watch was white it appears to be in good shape all reuse it. In other words if it does the job it stays with the watch.

Then the use of blued steel Springs? For variety reasons I will use blued steel Springs like if it's a small Waltham sometimes the only way to get the hook into the barrel is you have to have original spring too much work to make anything else fit. We take blued steel Springs out of the package some of them actually look more beautiful than a moderate white spring they have a beautiful back curve they been sitting in a package for the last I don't how many years and they look better than a modern spring. Others have rusted and come out in pieces some other times they look set but if they look good there isn't any reason why you can't use them. Oh and some modern white Springs that, the package I've seen them looking set they just don't open up for a big. Is unfortunately no guarantee that your mainspring was properly manufactured in the first place even if it's white and new.

then I'm not good as a hobbyist if the person doing the servicing is the owner of the watch and you're objecting to the high cost of the mainspring. It's a modern way colored mainspring and it looks fine I would just use it again. Only if it's going to be your every day watch that you really need to know what time it is and it's not making it 24 hours and you suspect the mainspring then you get stuck changing it otherwise I wouldn't worry about.

 

 

 

[gbyleveldt]

Everyone has their own thoughts on wether a mainspring should be replaced or not. When you work on lots of similar movements, you get a good idea based on the stripped main spring wether it should be replaced or not. In many cases I re-use the old mainsprings, but if you see the mainspring is obviously misshapen or can see wear marks inside the opened barrel it means the spring (or in some cases the whole barrel) should be replaced.

Its perfectly accepted to re-use mainsprings, but then make sure the old one is suitable. Like I said, if you work on many similar movements you know if the result is correct or not.

Edited September 10, 2022 by gbyleveldt