Jump to content

How do you figure out the correct height of a mainspring if the one currently in the watch is incorrect

GregG
 Share

Recommended Posts

GregG WRT Addict

GregG

Posted
Posted

I have a watch where the mainspring in it is definitely not the original.  There is so much vertical play in the arbor, and you can feel the mainspring knock against the top and bottom of the barrel if you grab and shift the arbor.

I was thinking maybe shove a piece of Rodico in the barrel, and close it.  Then open it, measure it, and subtract maybe 0.1 or 0.2mm to give it some headroom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lexacat WRT Addict

lexacat

Posted
Posted

I'd suggest you could just measure the barrel wall height and subtract about 0.1mm to allow for some headroom. Assuming the lid doesn't protrude into the barrel when fitted. If it does, subtract that amount (or a good estimate of it) from the total also.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Klassiker Distinguished Member

Klassiker

Posted
Posted

I agree with lexacat. You will get much more accurate measurements directly from the spring and barrel than from a piece of Rodico. If you can identify the movement, there are lists of suitable springs. Also, the arbor should not have vertical play, even when the spring is missing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GregG WRT Addict

GregG

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

I remembered my calipers have a depth gauge, so I used that.  The distance from the very top of the barrel wall to the floor of the barrel is 2.14mm.  The vertical dotted lines are the inner shimmed wall of the barrel that the cap fits onto.  The horizontal dotted line is the height of the wall.

The edge of the barrel cap is 0.35mm.  The center of the barrel where the arbor fits into is 0.55mm.  Otherwise, the thickness of the barrel is 0.25mm.  Which measurement should I use to calculate the height I need?  I'm thinking that since the mainspring doesn't actually interact with the arbor pivot or outside wall, I would use 0.25mm, making the height ~1.9mm (minus some amount of tolerance).

The original replacement I purchased was a GR3355 (1.3x0.14x320x11), but it looks like I can use a GR5322 (1.8x0.14x340x11).

j calame robert.jpg

Edited by GregG
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GregG WRT Addict

GregG

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Klassiker said:

It looks like that spring will fit in the barrel, but what makes you think it's the right spring material thickness and length for your movement?

Ultimately, it is a guess, but it's best to have an educated guess. 😉

EDIT: Just realized you had actually given my post a thumbs up back when I posted it.

 

Edited by GregG
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.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • aac58
      Rare Seiko 5actus Watch??!! With a lot🤪🤔😲

      By aac58 · Posted

      This is not rare at all, the dial code and case code don't usually match.
    • Kkramme
      Coil for old Seiko Credor -- 4002920

      By Kkramme · Posted

      Good question!! Anyone know of a substitute movement??!! 🤔🙏
    • Kkramme
      Rare Seiko 5actus Watch??!! With a lot🤪🤔😲

      By Kkramme · Posted

      Interesting issue that I just noticed: this Seiko 5actus Watch from 1977 has a calibre listing on the dial of 7019-8030R but on the case back it says 7019-8010!! Like a mis-printed coin, is this watch therefore worth a lot of money for its rarity?? 🤪😲🤔🤪
    • Mercurial
      Smit

      By Mercurial · Posted

      I wish that was the case. The Aegler movements used in the early days by Wilsdorf & Davis (for brands like Rolex and Rolco) came in several sizes and without designated calibre numbers that survive.  They become a bit easier to identify during the 1920s. Below is an Aegler-Rebberg, 25.74mm in diameter. It’s from a woman’s Rolex wristwatch. Stamped Rebberg and 500 on the dial plate (but it isn’t a Rebberg 500, it’s the wrong size).  I’d be interested if anyone can identify the movement.  It is based off the Aegler Nr.1, circa 1903, but they based many many calibres of different sizes on it. The closest I have to a positive ID is the  ‘Rolex Nr.50’ circa 1917, but no dial side images or movement sizes are available in the references. There are identical looking movements in many sizes.  The 25.74mm of this movement is a particularly strange size for the era, it equates to 11.41 lignes.      Best Regards, Mark
    • GuyMontag
      FHF70 balance jewels settings

      By GuyMontag · Posted

      It looks like this movement comes with a number of different shock settings. Emmywatch shows that it comes in versions with no shock settings, 'Incabloc', 'shock resist', and 'Supershock'. Perhaps the different settings position the impulse jewel/roller table in a non-ideal position relative to the pallet fork/guard pin. Are you able to check under high magnification if the pallet fork and roller table are able to operate without any interference? Just for fun I took a look and I have one FHF 70 in my collection, a West End Secundus with a non-shock protected FHF70. I had a note with the watch that said, "Movement is stamped 'FHF 70', but the FHF70 looks to have sub-seconds instead of center seconds movement (??)" but that a google search turned up both types for this movement. EDIT: I just took a look in my parts drawer and I have a few of these movements, both in center seconds and sweep seconds, but they all are non-shock protected.  
×
×
  • Create New...