Jump to content

Movement "suddenly" stopped working after dial switch


Recommended Posts

So the scenario is that I am quite new to watch repair and have managed to take apart and repair a few vintage watches, so got a basic understanding of things, but no where near pro level.
I was to help out a friend to do a simple dial switch on a relative new GMT movement, not sure which one it is as there are no serials etc. on it.
When I was taking it apart everything looked good and it ran like it should. The new dial had four dial pins, and I needed to get rid of two of them to make the dial fit. So after a few weeks when I received the file I was able to make it flush and could put the dial on the movement. However, this is where the problem begun. 
At this stage I tried to wind it up to see that It worked properly and that the balance was moving nicely etc. But when winding it, it felt strange somehow. And the balance doesn't move by itself, just for a few sec when I'm blowing some air on it. I thought maybe there are some GMT special setting (as the winding stem can be pushed in slightly) that made the movement stop first, but can't seem to find any support when searching google for that. 

I recorded a video of it, mostly to show the sound as I was hoping someone could tell if it is supposed to sound like that or if there are some clue that could be found in the troubleshooting. Not sure what else has gone wrong. I've been gently when working on it, but maybe not gently enough...? 

Any tip would be appreciated!

Link to the video 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi. I take it you took off the dial and tried again, if so what is likely to have happened is a displaced keyless work.  You will need to remove the calendar complication to be able to see the works and discern the problem.  A picture of the watch without the date ring would be useful as members can see what you have got and offer advise. Cheers

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, watchweasol said:

Hi. I take it you took off the dial and tried again, if so what is likely to have happened is a displaced keyless work.  You will need to remove the calendar complication to be able to see the works and discern the problem.  A picture of the watch without the date ring would be useful as members can see what you have got and offer advise. Cheers

Thank you for your replay! I put up some photos of it without the calander ring, hope it helps! 

011011722(1).jpg

011011722(0).jpg

011011722(2).jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look at the intermediate wheel between the hour wheel and the date driving wheel it looks like it is upside down. It may be the angle but it looks like the pinion should be downward to engage the tenth of the date drive wheel. This could be pressed by the dial and therefore stopping the motion works.

 

Tom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, the missing intermediate wheel is on back side of the plate among other wheels! 

 

unnamed (1).jpg

unnamed.jpg

20 minutes ago, tomh207 said:

If you look at the intermediate wheel between the hour wheel and the date driving wheel it looks like it is upside down. It may be the angle but it looks like the pinion should be downward to engage the tenth of the date drive wheel. This could be pressed by the dial and therefore stopping the motion works.

 

Tom

Thank you! I'll take a look at that when I get home soon! 

47 minutes ago, tomh207 said:

If you look at the intermediate wheel between the hour wheel and the date driving wheel it looks like it is upside down. It may be the angle but it looks like the pinion should be downward to engage the tenth of the date drive wheel. This could be pressed by the dial and therefore stopping the motion works.

 

Tom

Never seen a third layer of teeth before but there you go. So that shouldn't be the cause of the problem, seem to work as it should!

20230311_131637.JPG

It seems to be working after a few winds for a couple of seconds, and then come to a stop. Mainspring issue? Gah, really would like to avoid taking it apart.

 

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.

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

    • The Chaika 1601A bridge styles look more like something from an earlier time. It is also finished relatively well for the 1980s, as a lot of manufacturers by then had started a race to the bottom in terms of finishing and materials as a result of the quartz crisis. If you compare it with a comparable Swiss movement from the same period, you will find they have much less elaborate bridges, and other cost cutting measures. Straight cut bridges with no bevel on the edges are much cheaper and simpler to produce than the curved bridges of the Chaika 1601A. They even went to the trouble of stamping a serial number on the movement. A practice which only the higher end Swiss manufacturers were bothering with by this point. The Chaika 1601A does have a relatively cheap balance though. The 'timing screws' in the balance are for decoration only. Having said all that, the USSR caliber designs were fairly conservative, and produced for relatively long periods. This was partly as a result of the command economy, which tended to lead to relatively little innovation in design, and partly because they weren't chasing after the fickle flights of fashion that arguably drove some of the changes from other manufacturers. Some of the USSR designs were licensed or even "borrowed" from Swiss and French designs.   For example I have a Sekonda pocket watch (which may be the next one on the bench for a clean and service). It has a Chelyabinsk Watch Factory "Molnija" 3602 caliber in it, which was based on a Cortébert movement used in Swiss watches from around 1940. Here is one of the examples from Ranfft. You can see that it is similar to the Chailka with curved bridges. They even had Breguet over coil hairsprings and "Geneva" striping. Some had shock protection, some did not.   The Sekonda is in its original 1980s plastic presentation box, complete with "manufacturers guarantee" (although Sekonda obviously didn't manufacture it). This same Molnija  movement was produced in the Chelyabinsk Watch Factory with little change, except notably in the level of finishing, from around 1947 until the early 2000s when production ceased. For comparison, here is a Swiss ST96 from around the same period as the Chaika and the Molnija. . Smaller jewels, flat and unrefined finishing, and all in all, a little bit lacklustre. .. and a Rolex 600 from around 1922   The Chaika, despite being from the 1980s, to my eye at least, looks a little closer to the Rolex than the ST96  
    • Elaborate on this statement. What sorts of things define calibers from different decades? The only thing I can think of short of the pocket to wrist watch shift around WWI and quartz is shock settings starting... late-40s, early-50s?
    • I'm not sure who "we" is as I'm not a part of how "we" do it. Most of "us" develop their own method(s). Please re-read what has been said;  
    • Nice one Andy- a very ‘blingy’ 404 with all those jewels…
    • It's a matter of preference really. You should keep the #5 aside and just use them for fine hairspring work though; otherwise they will end up damaged and be useless for that. Some like #1, some #2, some #3 for general work. Some use brass or nickel tweezers for general work- this is good as they are less likely to scratch delicate parts, and are much "grippier". On that note, the finer the tweezer, the more likely it will be to want to launch parts.   I have a bunch of nickel tweezers that have been retouched so many times they are like 30% shorter than new. Those become handy for when you need very strong tweezers- just used a pair to unscrew the bond from inside a floating barrel. My general use tweezers the last few years are a couple of pair of #5 that have been sharpened enough times that the ends are now very strong; useless for hairspring work, great for general work. These are Dumont Dumostar, which is a much more tough alloy than the Dumoxel, and less brittle than their carbon steel ones.
×
×
  • Create New...