Jump to content

ingenious? Make your own winder?


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

Who else  noticed the four mangled springs in the corner of the room 😆. Tbf not a bad idea with a bit of tweeking. Not so sure about the barrel arbor in the pin vice though, under magnification thats going to show up some scuffing of a polished arbor shaft.

You could use a barrel arbor holder($$) or collet holding pinvise ($$ plus collets $$).

 

Though some cheap pinvises have fairly soft jaws, might not mess up the bearing surfaces.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, nickelsilver said:

You could use a barrel arbor holder($$) or collet holding pinvise ($$ plus collets $$).

 

Though some cheap pinvises have fairly soft jaws, might not mess up the bearing surfaces.

Wow not cheap a full complement of all 8 sizes of Bergeon arbor holders runs to  £500 at best. I guess some luck and a good gauge of how much to tighten your pinvice helps. An unnoticed damaged arbor will surly chew up the barrel or lid's arbor bearing in time. 

39 minutes ago, nickelsilver said:

You could use a barrel arbor holder($$) or collet holding pinvise ($$ plus collets $$).

 

Though some cheap pinvises have fairly soft jaws, might not mess up the bearing surfaces.

This might be a good alternative it was a tenner. The jaws are wide, thick and made of brass and when fastened down give good coverage of whatever they are gripping. The only issue is the size 1.8mm to 3mm so well out of the range of most arbors. Or this steel pin vice - square off the jaw tips and smooth broach out the jaws. I think that one was only about four quid.

16834831648498808611590155529953.jpg

16834831914718356690836124018642.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw the video on YouTube last week but I thought the acrylic sheet would get chewed up pretty quickly. Aluminium would probably be sturdier. 

I use a brass jawed pin vise from Cousins for inserting stubborn arbors. It holds the arbor very securely and so far has not scratched or damaged any arbors yet. 

Great idea. I've always wondered why nobody manufactures a winder like the types for clock mainsprings, which uses the original arbor and steel containment rings.

Can you imagine if clockmakers had to buy a different winder for every movement they worked on? ($$$$$$)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/8/2023 at 12:12 AM, HectorLooi said:

I saw the video on YouTube last week but I thought the acrylic sheet would get chewed up pretty quickly. Aluminium would probably be sturdier. 

I use a brass jawed pin vise from Cousins for inserting stubborn arbors. It holds the arbor very securely and so far has not scratched or damaged any arbors yet. 

Great idea. I've always wondered why nobody manufactures a winder like the types for clock mainsprings, which uses the original arbor and steel containment rings.

Can you imagine if clockmakers had to buy a different winder for every movement they worked on? ($$$$$$)

I think they used to make these in the past :

LGMainspringWinder.jpg

But in real life practice these old types probably weren't ideal, i.e. I'm guessing it was prone to errors and mainsprings kept getting damaged. Or maybe someone lost an eye 😄 . The Bergeon type winders replaced them as they are much more reliable for professionals.

I built a 3D printed design similar to that in the video, a while back. It will work. Though the biggest problem I had was my arbor would often slip and get badly scratched up, as it really is just floating there in a hole with opposing forces trying to twist it around. The second problem is the insertion step (pushing into the barrel), during which the mainspring tail end will usually refuse to go in properly if you don't push the whole thing out evenly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Zero said:

I think they used to make these in the past :

LGMainspringWinder.jpg

But in real life practice these old types probably weren't ideal, i.e. I'm guessing it was prone to errors and mainsprings kept getting damaged. Or maybe someone lost an eye 😄 . The Bergeon type winders replaced them as they are much more reliable for professionals.

I built a 3D printed design similar to that in the video, a while back. It will work. Though the biggest problem I had was my arbor would often slip and get badly scratched up, as it really is just floating there in a hole with opposing forces trying to twist it around. The second problem is the insertion step (pushing into the barrel), during which the mainspring tail end will usually refuse to go in properly if you don't push the whole thing out evenly.

Would you believe i have a similar  german made one of these that is adjustable in size. They actually do work but a bit fiddly to work with and not a go to tool. Its design only allows for pocketwatch mainspring and maybe a really big wristwatch.

On 5/8/2023 at 1:12 AM, HectorLooi said:

 I use a brass jawed pin vise from Cousins for inserting stubborn arbors. It holds the arbor very securely and so far has not scratched or damaged any arbors yet. 

Do you have a link for it HectorLooi please. I've had a look on cousins site but cant find any pinvices that have brass jaws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What bad practice. The reason you use watch mainspring  winders is so you do not distort the spring and so your fingers do not contaminate the spring because of the oils in your skin. He is touching the spring all the time.  I suggest if you go down this road wear finger cots. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, oldhippy said:

Wrong. Handling the mainspring makes it an issue to wear finger cots. 

Not if you are just demoing a technique on an old spring. I admit, that should be made clear in the video, but that wasn't a professionally made video, it's youtube!

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

    • I have two Seitz sets, one ancient (with the 3mm anvils) and one just old (with 4mm anvils) plus a collection of spare pushers of assorted vintage. Not one of them is marked with it's size. Something which I have found very irritating when I have been using the tool and not returning pushers to their correct place in the tray every time as it means that I have to get the calipers out and measure them. These were bought as sets and collectively I have over 100 pushers so it would seem highly unlikely (if not inconceivable) that they are all cheap knock offs, especially as they are old enough to pre-date the prevalence of the Chinese knock off industry (at least as applied to watch making tools). I therefore believe them to be original Seitz parts. And there is no numbering. The shape of the bottom of the pump pushers is the same as your photo. The only thing that may not be the same is that the slotted insert (looks like a screw but is in fact a bayonet) should be brass. Yours looks the same colour as the steel but that could just be the lighting.
    • The original database is available on iOS devices here: https://apps.apple.com/fi/app/ranfft-watch-movements-archive/id6502008939
    • I no longer have my set so I can't help anymore sorry. Many on here have the set as its a must have tool for watch making/ repair.
    • It needs to be stirred before use and that makes it feel a lot thinner than when in the bottle. Does it feel as thin as 9010 after stirring it? I guess not! Yes, it's strange! I don't know, but if it is on impact it would make sense.
    • Thanks, OH! I agree with you. I'm currently looking at them under magnification, and they are consistent in shape and form for each section (flat pushers, pump pushers, concave, reamers, etc.). Though, a few are in bad condition and need to be replaced.  Before I cancel the return I have already initiated on eBay, can any of our members check to see if there are inconsistencies in markings on their sets? Also, I have included a snapshot of the bottom of one of the pump pushers, which are very unique in shape.  Can someone tell me if the bottoms of their pump pushers match this photo?  I'm hoping that Seitz had some inconsistencies in manufacturing over the years regarding markings.  Crossing my fingers. I appreciate you guys. Frank
×
×
  • Create New...