Timegrapher or microscope?

[Mike78]

I will be looking to make my next major purchase as continue to explore watch making.  I have all the basic tools to service a watch.  

In your opinion what would you buy next?  A timegrapher to see how a watch is performing before and after service or a stereoscope to make working 

on a movement easier.  Give me your thoughts and opinions.  I really am torn on which to purchase next.

[GuyMontag]

I would guess the microscope will cost about 3X as much as the timegrapher so I might lean towards getting that bigger purchase out of the way now and using a free/cheap timegrapher app on your phone in the interim as you save up for the timegrapher.

Edited May 10, 2023 by GuyMontag

[mikepilk]

I agree with @GuyMontag, a stereo microscope is a game changer. Once you've used one there's no going back. 

[Endeavor]

Then again, I've done 8 years without a microscope. For sure, I could not have done 8 years without a decent timegrapher .........

Decisions, decisions, decisions .......... 

[VWatchie]

With a stereo microscope, you can see what you're doing and assess the result of it. Invaluable!

Wait with the timegrapher, and if you have a smartphone I believe there are timegrapher-like apps. Likely not as good, but will at least tell you if something is seriously wrong. 

[luiazazrambo]

Timegrapher is free (Tg, Watch-O-Scope) while the stereo microscope is a game changer. Anyway I think there is only one purchase here. There are discussions on WRT about everything. Stereo Microscopes, DIY and professionals timing machines/microphones and even a discussion what to have first. My bet is on the microscope, but I know that other ppl would you advise differently. Anyway I think you could have both at the same time with just one purchase. I personally have a second hand trinocular amscope, cannot live without it now.

[Neverenoughwatches]

4 hours ago, Mike78 said:

I will be looking to make my next major purchase as continue to explore watch making.  I have all the basic tools to service a watch.  

In your opinion what would you buy next?  A timegrapher to see how a watch is performing before and after service or a stereoscope to make working 

on a movement easier.  Give me your thoughts and opinions.  I really am torn on which to purchase next.

For me it was the microscope which i bought second hand £100 new around £220.  Not the best but it did and still does a reasonable job with 2 fixed magnifications x10 is the most used.  I now have 3 a small Russian biology scope that runs at x8.7 they often crop up on ebay for around £50 and is very portable. And then my dream scope is the mother of all microscopes which is very non portable with 6 fixed magnifications. And unless you are very adept with using a loupe ( some folk are and if i remember rightly our Mr. Mark Lovick here prefers a loupe and I've never actually seen him use a microscope ) they are without a doubt gamechanger. As anyone here will tell you  "You can't fix what you can't see ".  Tbh the timegrapher came very soon afterwards, both were important. 

[HectorLooi]

I had a stereo zoom microscope for close to twenty years but didn't really use it for watch repair until about 4 years ago. Now I can't live without it. 

A timegrapher is absolutely essential. There is no way to see what a timegrapher can measure and no easy way to regulate a watch to that degree of accuracy. 

So if you ask me. Get the timegrapher first.

[haratua]

It took me 10 years after I bought a Timegrapher before getting a Microscope. My reason for a microscope is that my eyesight is getting worse, and my back is not as strong anymore. I find my sitting position with a Microscope is much better for my back, this is because I am using a standard height desk. I wish I didn't wait that long to get a Microscope. 

However, a Chinese-made Timegrapher is much cheaper than a decent Microscope. If you can afford a Microscope, but that. And use your a phone app as a timegrapher until you save enough to buy one (hopefully it's not that long after).

[Knebo]

I have a timegrapher for 200 USD/EUR (the Weishi 1000) - perfectly sufficient. I consider it to be quite essential to see if your work is good/improving. I used some apps before that but I think the proper one is a game-changer. Especially when you want to test in different positions.

I don't have a microscope. I guess this is way more expensive. I've never worked with one - must be cool!

Get both  

 

[JohnR725]

15 hours ago, mikepilk said:

I agree with @GuyMontag, a stereo microscope is a game changer. Once you've used one there's no going back.

maybe we can flip a coin? We have a microscope at work do I use it yes what I do all by work with it never. I find my loop works just fine but I got used to my loop. I do know of a lot of people love their microscopes. Even people mount the microscope above their watchmaker's lathe when they're turning staffs they wouldn't even think of using a loop are doing it any other way.

2 hours ago, haratua said:

However, a Chinese-made Timegrapher is much cheaper than a decent Microscope. If you can afford a Microscope, but that. And use your a phone app as a timegrapher until you save enough to buy one (hopefully it's not that long after).

the phone apps tend to be crap to be blunt. There's a lot of timing apps that basically for this discussion group are a waste of time if you're answering questions. not all full naps though are bad there is a company that makes a microphone with the phone app and I think that's more than the cost of the Chinese timing machine so I would prefer the Chinese timing machine.

1 hour ago, Knebo said:

I have a timegrapher for 200 USD/EUR (the Weishi 1000)

when you're looking out the 1000 machine also look at the 1900 it has some slight enhancements and usually isn't that much more money. But either way both of the machines are excellent machines. There's a lot of things in watches that even with a microscope you can't see but the timing machine will show you those things. It's not just use for regulating a watch is used for diagnostics.

2 hours ago, HectorLooi said:

So if you ask me. Get the timegrapher first.

oh just a comment to certain degree I'm biased against microscopes because I have a problem with stereo vision. So I tend only use one eye it's very hard for me to get a true stereo vision with a microscope so I will use them but I would definitely recommend the timing machine first.

otherwise if you can't decide flip a coin as based on this discussion that's about the way were going everybody has an opinion.

[Knebo]

1 hour ago, JohnR725 said:

the phone apps tend to be crap to be blunt. There's a lot of timing apps that basically for this discussion group are a waste of time if you're answering questions. not all full naps though are bad there is a company that makes a microphone with the phone app and I think that's more than the cost of the Chinese timing machine so I would prefer the Chinese timing machine.

when you're looking out the 1000 machine also look at the 1900 it has some slight enhancements and usually isn't that much more money. But either way both of the machines are excellent machines. There's a lot of things in watches that even with a microscope you can't see but the timing machine will show you those things. It's not just use for regulating a watch is used for diagnostics.

I agree, the phone apps don't cut it. 

I though the only difference between the 1000 and the 1900 is the screen quality. Or is there something else? I find the 1000 screen totally fine for the task...

A timegrapher is important not only to compare before-and-after performance (i.e. define you success and progress) and to regulate, but also to diagnose problems (via various wave patterns etc). @JohnR725 posted this incredibly useful set of charts to interpret timegrapher patterns in this thread:https://www.watchrepairtalk.com/topic/19740-yup/

In sum, I think a timegrapher is indispensable. 

 

Edited May 11, 2023 by Knebo

[mikepilk]

27 minutes ago, Knebo said:

I though the only difference between the 1000 and the 1900 is the screen quality. Or is there something else? I find the 1000 screen totally fine for the task...

I believe the difference is that you can set the gain on the 1900

[Knebo]

1 hour ago, mikepilk said:

I believe the difference is that you can set the gain on the 1900

Oh, interesting. I didn't know that.

[Marc]

1 hour ago, mikepilk said:

I believe the difference is that you can set the gain on the 1900

The 1900 also has a two colour screen, with the ticks and tocks either blue or yellow. This is useful when adjusting beat error as it allows you to see if you've gone too far.

I believe the 1000 is just a single colour.

[Knebo]

1 minute ago, Marc said:

The 1900 also has a two colour screen, with the ticks and tocks either blue or yellow. This is useful when adjusting beat error as it allows you to see if you've gone too far.

I believe the 1000 is just a single colour.

I can confirm that. The 1000 only has one colour. True, that is an inconvenience when adjusting and back and forth across the 0.0ms and not knowing on which side you are. It still works just fine -- you just need a little more time to find the sweet spot. 

[VWatchie]

14 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

I now have 3 a small Russian biology scope that runs at x8.7 they often crop up on ebay for around £50 and is very portable.

That sounds interesting! What should I be searching for? I tried with "Russian biology scope" but nothing much came up (except Russian sniper rifle scopes). Have a picture?

5 hours ago, Knebo said:

I don't have a microscope. I guess this is way more expensive. I've never worked with one - must be cool!

It's way more than cool, it is (IMO) essential!  Anyway, the only thing you'll regret if you get yourself a stereo microscope is not getting one sooner. It is, as many testify, a game-changer!

Edited May 11, 2023 by VWatchie

[Marc]

5 minutes ago, VWatchie said:

What should I be searching for?

Try looking out for BM-51-2. There's an overview of one here.

I have two of these which I picked up at car boot sales for less than £10 each. They are extremely good for the money.

 

[VWatchie]

2 hours ago, Knebo said:

I though the only difference between the 1000 and the 1900 is the screen quality. Or is there something else?

I could be wrong, but I believe the 1000 does not have a gain setting which in my experience is crucial to adjust to get the correct readings for some movements.

 

[Knebo]

3 minutes ago, VWatchie said:

I could be wrong, but I believe the 1000 does not have a gain setting which in my experience is crucial to adjust to get the correct readings for some movements.

 

 

53 minutes ago, Knebo said:

Oh, interesting. I didn't know that.

 

Indeed. I can confirm that. No gain setting on the 1000. Within my short watchmaking journey, I've not yet needed it; but I trust your experience. 

[Neverenoughwatches]

23 minutes ago, VWatchie said:

That sounds interesting! What should I be searching for? I tried with "Russian biology scope" but nothing much came up (except Russian sniper rifle scopes). Have a picture?

Hi Watchie. It was my wife that actually bought it as she was also having a go at repairing watches. She's been very busy at work past six months and I think the idea has died off for now. This is it anyhow, i think a great starter scope and easy to pick up to move around. The magnification is 8 and three quarters only, possibly seperate eye pieces available somewhere, working distance of 150mm. There was a bit of slop in the adjustment for eye spacing but some electrical tape and a bit of foam gave it a fixed distance. The big boy is my baby, 1960s surgeon's microscope, a gift from a friend. 

[mikepilk]

31 minutes ago, VWatchie said:

I could be wrong, but I believe the 1000 does not have a gain setting which in my experience is crucial to adjust to get the correct readings for some movements.

I have the 1000 and rarely have problems, but if I bought again, I'd get the 1900.

When the movement is in a thick case I've had problems - I have a Seiko Diver that just won't work when the movement is in the case.

3 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

Hi Watchie. It was my wife that actually bought it as she was also having a go at repairing watches. She's been very busy at work past six months and I think the idea has died off for now. This is it anyhow, i think a great starter scope and easy to pick up to move around. The magnification is 8 and three quarters only, possibly seperate eye pieces available somewhere, working distance of 150mm. There was a bit of slop in the adjustment for eye spacing but some electrical tape and a bit of foam gave it a fixed distance. The big boy is my baby, 1960s surgeon's microscope, a gift from a friend. 

That looks great - looks like it should be on the bottom of a periscope !

8x mag is fine for general work

[Neverenoughwatches]

48 minutes ago, VWatchie said:

That sounds interesting! What should I be searching for? I tried with "Russian biology scope" but nothing much came up (except Russian sniper rifle scopes). Have a picture?

Here is the same one at a ridiculous price. My missus paid about £40 and at the time there were a few hovering around £70

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/174631114442?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=mEputrRFTJa&sssrc=2349624&ssuid=tBiLZaCfRb2&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY

7 minutes ago, mikepilk said:

That looks great - looks like it should be on the bottom of a periscope !

Its ok actually, the field of view is about 20mm so only a small 8 ligne movement is completely in view . No way to tilt it either so you are directly over the work. 

Edited May 11, 2023 by Neverenoughwatches

[VWatchie]

4 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

Here is the same one at a ridiculous price. My missus paid about £40 and at the time there were a few hovering around £70

Yep, it would seem the word is out! The least expensive I found on eBay was this (€150). Double that and you have a new decent scope.

[Neverenoughwatches]

45 minutes ago, VWatchie said:

Yep, it would seem the word is out! The least expensive I found on eBay was this (€150). Double that and you have a new decent scope.

Way overpriced. Its worth around 50 quid but thats all certainly for repairing watches its quite limited.