Jump to content

Unknown Tool Labeled Illinois Watch


Recommended Posts

Acquired this item in a lot from a departed watchmaker. It's labeled "Illinois Watch" (well known large American watch manufacturer through much of 20th c) so clearly it's watch-related. Can't find similar in any old catalog or on line and haven't ever seen anything similar in the wild.  The four prongs are springy and may be designed to hold something. The small round shaft does fit into the post on the base, but fit is loose, not the kind of close fit we expect in watches and most watch tools. Possibly these two pieces are not intended to fit together, and it's always possible parts are missing.

Anyone have any ideas before I relegate it to the scrap box? Purpose? Completeness?

20230403_074223.jpg

20230403_074159.jpg

20230403_074145.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll add that I considered it might be a display stand of some kind but I think that's unlikely. It's marked "Patent Pending" on bottom of base and it's substantially built of well plated brass. Seems too substantial for a display piece and they also probably wouldn't have bothered to patent it.

A bit unusual (but not unheard of) to see tools made by manfacturers rather than by the several US watch tool companies active in first 3/4s  of the 1900's. What do we make if that, if anything?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, StickDog said:

I'll add that I considered it might be a display stand of some kind but I think that's unlikely. It's marked "Patent Pending" on bottom of base and it's substantially built of well plated brass. Seems too substantial for a display piece and they also probably wouldn't have bothered to patent it.

A bit unusual (but not unheard of) to see tools made by manfacturers rather than by the several US watch tool companies active in first 3/4s  of the 1900's. What do we make if that, if anything?

My first thoughts were for displaying purposes as no apparent function was immediately obvious. No reason why it shouldnt also have a patent, a design is a design if the creator thought it important enough to have one and it didn't encroach on a similar design. I've seen a few pocket watch displays from very simple to hang the bow from holders to extravagant display stands  but nothing quite like this. It does look like the two parts are meant to be together as the mating surfaces seem to marry up. Also the same finish and name on both parts. A shop display stand ? The curved shape of the tops of the prongs to facilitate the careful placement of a watch. Brass to minimise any scratches ? Is it large enough to hold a small pocket watch ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, grsnovi said:

Possibly an adapter so you could wear a pocket watch on a wrist strap?? Maybe that's crazy??

There were such adaptations Gary when or maybe before wristwatches were starting to become necessary and popular during the WW1. Too cumbersome and time consuming for an officer to have to unbutton his coat to remove his pocket watch to know the time for military operations.  A leather wrist pocket watch pouch would seem a more convenient adaptation. There is some suggestion that shrapnel damage to a watch on the wrist could cause more injury worn this way. Not sure if there was evidence to substantiate this theory.  And then came about wristwatches that could be more appropriately slipped under the cuff. I've read somewhere that the idea of wristwatches for men was introduced a while before this but was considered too feminine.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

There were such adaptations Gary when or maybe before wristwatches were starting to become necessary and popular during the WW1. Too cumbersome and time consuming for an officer to have to unbutton his coat to remove his pocket watch to know the time for military operations.  A leather wrist pocket watch pouch would seem a more convenient adaptation. There is some suggestion that shrapnel damage to a watch on the wrist could cause more injury worn this way. Not sure if there was evidence to substantiate this theory.  And then came about wristwatches that could be more appropriately slipped under the cuff. I've read somewhere that the idea of wristwatches for men was introduced a while before this but was considered too feminine.  

I don't believe the shrapnel theory, would I prefer a  super fast sliver of metal hitting a watch or my skin? If nothing else more surface area so less pressure, bullet resistant vests basically spread the force. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, RichardHarris123 said:

I don't believe the shrapnel theory, would I prefer a  super fast sliver of metal hitting a watch or my skin? If nothing else more surface area so less pressure, bullet resistant vests basically spread the force. 

Tbh it wasn't a great theory and i couldnt find anything that proved it. 

15 minutes ago, RichardHarris123 said:

I don't believe the shrapnel theory, would I prefer a  super fast sliver of metal hitting a watch or my skin? If nothing else more surface area so less pressure, bullet resistant vests basically spread the force. 

I think it was to do with the damage sustained elsewhere on the body/ face from shrapnel spread from a direct hit to the pocket watch. I suppose in some circumstances a single bullet wound could be dealt with easier than multiple shrapnel wounds. Also less shrapnel kept that injury more localised to that individual and not his fighting buddies. 

Edited by Neverenoughwatches
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry. Should have included a scale photo.

Way too small to display any pocket watch. Conceivably a micro lady's watch. Nut not a very good design for a  display piece IMHO. PW WW adapter? Just how do you see that working?

20230403_164859.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, StickDog said:

Sorry. Should have included a scale photo.

Way too small to display any pocket watch. Conceivably a micro lady's watch. Nut not a very good design for a  display piece IMHO. PW WW adapter? Just how do you see that working?

20230403_164859.jpg

How big is the coin for us non Americans?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, StickDog said:

Sorry. Should have included a scale photo.

Way too small to display any pocket watch. Conceivably a micro lady's watch. Nut not a very good design for a  display piece IMHO. PW WW adapter? Just how do you see that working?

20230403_164859.jpg

I'm wondering why its in two parts. Do the prongs just sit in the base and lift out freely.  That would then seem like the base is just a holder and if it is a tool of sorts its just the top part.

1 hour ago, StickDog said:

Sorry. Should have included a scale photo.

Way too small to display any pocket watch. Conceivably a micro lady's watch. Nut not a very good design for a  display piece IMHO. PW WW adapter? Just how do you see that working?

20230403_164859.jpg

We haven't seen the underside of the base yet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The base is pretty small.  Smaller than a pocket watch, even a ladies size.  It would tip over easily.  And the long thin shaft and with the conical hole in the base it fits into (one assumes).  Seems like a complicated thing to make for no real purpose in a display stand.

Maybe a tool for poking holes in bands?  With a wooden file handle in the prongs.

Edited by xyzzy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, appreciate all the input. In the absence of a clear and certain answer I think the winning submission has to go to Old Hippie. Apparently its "one if those thingamajigs!" Thanks to all and sundry!

Edited by StickDog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, StickDog said:

Well, appreciate all the input. In the absence of a clear and certain answer I think the winning submission has to go to Old Hippie. Apparently its "one if those thingamajigs!" Thanks to all and sundry!

I'm disappointed, I thought my idea of eggcup was best. 😄

  • Like 1
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.



  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Lots of rust on that hairspring Nev, would you even try to clean it up ?
    • How do you find the working distance from microscope lens to movement? Is it comfortable enough to get tools in?
    • Once you have the collet closer bits off, and the pulley off, there are two nuts on the spindle. These must be removed. There is a large nut in the back of the headstock with two holes, remove this with an appropriate wrench. The front large nut comes off too. The spindle now comes out- but wait- there's more! There is a spacer between the outer races of the bearings; the spindle will almost certainly come out "assembled" with both bearings and this spacer (it can actually come out front or back-ways with the large nuts off the headstock). You have to manage to press out the spindle from the rear bearing, get the spacer off, then remove the front bearing, now you can get to the key.   Imagining you get it all apart without causing any damage to the bearings, now the fun part starts. You must apply preload to the bearings, and this is a very tricky endeavor. Basically once you have the bearings back on, and are in the casting, you snug up the rear nut (one of the two) on the spindle, checking the play of the spindle with at least a 0.002mm reading indicator, until there is zero axial play, then just a little more, then snug up the second nut to lock things in place. Of course snugging up the second nut influences the preload, so you can go back and forth a few times to get it right. Too much preload and bearing life diminishes, too little, and you get poor performance, poor surface finishes, ball skidding, etc.   When I replaced the bearings in one of mine many years ago, I was surprised to find that the bearings were regular deep-groove bearings, but of a higher precision class than normal. I replaced with dimensionally identical angular contact bearings, class P4. In trying to set the preload, I just about lost my mind, so called Barden (the high precision arm of FAG bearing makers, and who made my new ones) and a nice engineer told me that the folks at Leinen were either crazy, or really good- he also said it's 100% A-OK to set up deep groove bearings with preload like this, but best is angular contact. In this bearing setup, the standard way to do it is to have a spacer between the outer races, and another between the inner races. Leinen has the former but not the latter, haha. His advice was to make an inner spacer. The trick is it has to be the exact same length as the outer spacer, within like a micron.  Then you just tighten everything up and the preload is set, because the bearings (the new ones) are ground in a way that they have proper preload in that situation. Easy. Sort of- if you have the means to make the other spacer!   Just to note- Schaublin does the preloading as Leinen did on these on their lathes using angular contact bearings. There is a procedure in the manual, where you tighten the nut until axial play is zero, then a certain number of degrees more. This works on their setup as the nut itself locks without a second nut, and they spent the time to figure it all out in a repeatable way.   I say all this not to scare you off from dismantling your headstock, just to give a heads-up what you're up against to get it back to where it was before.
    • Do, write a nice letter to Santa. I do all disassembly and assembly under the microscope. I consider it a necessity.
×
×
  • Create New...