Jump to content

I never expected that - crazy stuff.


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, rehajm said:

Here's two for inspection...

IMG_1111.thumb.jpeg.a6c04ff3da8b47b4760411ad73efcdcd.jpeg

 

IMG_0994.thumb.jpeg.672c33f6a381dbc6c9b63efc1480408e.jpeg

...part of the challenge is there were so many variants- replacements and originals. What's the 'standard' IWC dial I wonder?

The DDs where made and issued towards the end of the war, and the production numbers seem fairly strick and reasonably accurate though certain brand figures are approximated. Because of the war i would assume the orders were taken and received within a short space of time and not repeated with the war coming to an end within a year . Omega being Omega we would think are consistent with quality and accuracy so not much would change. These two dials look quite different the most obvious being the pregnant 4.  But who knows what they did, the ATPs vary considerably from brand to brand, within the same brand some manufacturers made a few variations .

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

Because of the war i would assume the orders were taken and received within a short space of time and not repeated with the war coming to an end within a year

My understanding is many were trickled out to the public after they weren’t needed or still went to troops around the world, not all if them bearing foreign service markings. So yes, as with ATP, variants likely emerged- which IWC dial is ‘correct’ for example?

…and yes I do tend to agree with your analysis- the older patina dial is from a watch that looks like DD to me and the second one is…something else. But what 🧐?

Edited by rehajm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, rehajm said:

My understanding is many were trickled out to the public after they weren’t needed or still went to troops around the world, not all if them bearing foreign service markings. So yes, as with ATP, variants likely emerged- which IWC dial is ‘correct’ for example?

I've also read that before, Bravingtons retailers were asked to sell them along with the no longer used ATP.  One brand that eventually replaced them was Mellor's Cabot watch in thecesrly 70s.  Just looked at the IWC, 3 different variants, maybe they are all genuine but only one is the original design. The pattern may have changed once or twice as the original stock ran out as damaged watches needed replacement dials.

25 minutes ago, rehajm said:

and yes I do tend to agree with your analysis- the older patina dial is from a watch that looks like DD to me and the second one is…something else. But what 🧐

Just a later pattern ? maybe the watches lasted longer than expected so dial production had to be re-started now and then. The dials might have aslo been outsourced to different dial makers over the years as more dials were needed.  A hundred from here one year and a hundred from there another year. I wonder how much degrade the lume has when its stored on a shelf in the dark unactivated ?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. l was just after a few funny stories but we got treated to the cold war space race and a brilliant analysis of wartime Omega www . You guys love to ramble - better than the brilliant Karl Schlapp on Chronoglide. More horror pictures please. By the way the Omega 30T with the dimples also had some paper shims. Desperate. Needless to say the expensive overcoil balance spring had been damaged and needed a sweaty days reshape. All running great now. The alumium case is scary fragile - why did they use Al ?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, hofnerpres said:

Wow. l was just after a few funny stories but we got treated to the cold war space race and a brilliant analysis of wartime Omega www . You guys love to ramble - better than the brilliant Karl Schlapp on Chronoglide. More horror pictures please. By the way the Omega 30T with the dimples also had some paper shims. Desperate. Needless to say the expensive overcoil balance spring had been damaged and needed a sweaty days reshape. All running great now. The alumium case is scary fragile - why did they use Al ?

Aluminium case ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, hofnerpres said:

Photos as promised. The movement number date checks out as 1939 ish.

 

DSCF6833.JPG

DSCF6834.JPG

DSCF6815.JPG

I dont know what that is. Its not a variation i have seen. 

6 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

I dont know what that is. Its not a variation i have seen. 

Ah a pilot's watch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ramble away - I'm still battling trying to get that Breguet overcoil at the correct height - getting enough clearance and allowing for a little endshake is a real challenge. The microscope is no good at looking sideways.

Yes I know I can get a decent view if you hold the movement sideways. My problem was getting things in focus - with a 0.5 Barlow lens on my Amscope it's just beyond the zoom limit. Just tried it without and Bingo - the working range is close but the image double the size so will do nicely for balance fiddling. There will now be an intermission for Irish Stew....

Edited by hofnerpres
  • Like 2
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

    • 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.
    • Hold the end stone down in chaton with your tweezers to remove the rodico.   Once shock spring is locked in the setting, you can whipe / clean  any residue off the setting.     Swiss setting holds the spring in place but the spring in chinese setting  fall out.  To remove the srping from Swiss setting , you got to remove the setting or at least raise it .
×
×
  • Create New...