My first true project watch. Really nice condition vintage Seiko 7006a. Non running.
-
Recently Browsing
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Topics
-
-
Posts
-
I'd like one of those for my staking set. I bought a cheap roller remover, thinking I could just file the jaws down so that it worked well. It didn't, so I ended up buying the Bergeon version, which does work well. Though, as @Neverenoughwatches points out, you do have to be careful not to damage the roller of staff. Rollers are very soft and easily bent whilst trying to remove or refit. -
then just as I want to see if there is any differences I looked in the balance staff book. So basically with the exception of the super shock whatever that is it looks like they're close enough in length they should be fine. -
By Neverenoughwatches · Posted
Thats what i have scott. Read back a little i posted a few pictures. Basically i put a small quantity of around quarter inch in the bottom of a tin and heated it on a leccy oil burner. It doesn't need much heat, stuck the jewels to the lid with bluetack and the fumes coat the surface pretty quickly although the first i did i left for 5 hours but it does only take 5 mins if that. The coating does seem to come off easily so i am not sure if it actually works, but the stuff is really cheap and worth an experiment or two. I have seen that mix somewhere but vapour coat is supposed to be better. -
Would be interesting to see how well steric acid compares (or not) to the various epilames out there - anyone know the mixing ratios and solvent(s) etc for the steric acid? -
I assume you're using 9415? the concerned with 9415 and I'm attaching a PDF from Omega is too much can cause a decrease in amplitude. This is why you look at what they do they go to extreme lengths to put extremely tiny quantities. so as you've discovered proper lubrication of the escapement increases the amplitude. We've seen it on this group where people are having typically newbies issues and I will ask if they lubricated the escapement the usual answer is no they had not because and once they did they saw spectacular improvement. one of the amusements with lubrication tends to be so many variations. For instance I was in a classroom once and the students all came from for the most part accredited schools in watch repair. So the instructor asked how did we lubricate our escapement's and I don't remember the actual quantity but it's really quite amazing how many people can interpret slightly different ways of doing the same ask. Of course the instructors method was the approved one. This was the place a drop of oil on the impulse face of the exit stone. Allow one third of the teeth to go by and place another drop then another third and your escapement should be lubricated. But sometimes and yes it will show up in the timing machine you'll see in your regular line because if the oil didn't transfer all the way around to the other stone that does cause a issue with the timing machine. Oh but when I was in school we were using 9010 as 9415 did not exist yet although 941 did which is an oil recommended for escapement's. it has to be dissolved in a proper solvent with the right amount of concentration as you want a microscopic layer on whatever your treating. My understanding is the vapor process is the very best but the vapors are not good for human consumption. The reason why the vapor process is nice is that it puts a very very thin coating on versus dipping in a solvent which can vary depending upon the concentration. 8645_WI_40_rules for lubrication cousins.pdf
-
Recommended Posts
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.