Hunt for (a bit) more amplitude - Rolex 2135

[Knebo]

Hello friends, 

I shared a bit about my journey with this watch/movement in this thread already: https://www.watchrepairtalk.com/topic/28505-reminder-on-meticulous-inspection-of-parts/#comment-240623

But since I'm now looking for feedback, I thought it would be ok to start a new thread. 

Now... the movement is already running quite well. Very consistent across positions and pretty much dead-on. 

Below are dial up and dial down at full wind (+30min run time). Of I put it on the timegrapher immediately after winding fully, it'll briefly go to 270°. But after a few minutes, it settles at around 250°. I didn't take a picture, but in vertical positions, it also runs consistently with a low delta and amplitude of 230-235.

So, nothing of major concern... BUT the amplitude is a tad low for my liking. It does stay above 200° degrees in all positions after 24h, though - which is the Rolex minimum requirement. Still, wondering why it's not higher. I recently did a 2035 movement and it was doing nice 280-290° horizontal, full wind. 

I already double checked everything and disassembled and reassembled the train. Cleaned and oiled the balance jewels and one of the two escape wheel jewel settings. I gained a few degrees, but not much. 

There's only two things I can see/imagine at this point:

1. Maybe the mainspring from GR is a bit weaker or my breaking grease (8217) application lets the mainspring slip a bit too early.

2. There might be something going on the the escape wheel or its capped jewel settings. See below picture. Notice how the oil circle is not fully central compared to the pivot? Strangely, this is the case on both sides/jewel settings (dial side and train side). I meticulously re-cleaned the setting on the dial side (cleaned every corner with pegwood etc) and re-oiled. Still same odd oil circle. 

Does the cap jewel not sit evenly? Would that cause the problems I'm seeing? Or is this within normal margins? 

 

Thanks for any feedback on these points OR any other ideas. 

[Knebo]

Hello all,

just a slightly more specific update on how it's running after 24h.

- Dial up: -4 seconds/day @ 245° amplitude
- Dial down: -2 @248°
- Crown down:  -2s/d @ 229°
- Crown left: -7 s/d @ 231°
- Crown right: -5s/d @ 217° 
- Crown up: -13s/d @ 215°

- Traces are perfectly straight.

- In sum, all safely above the 200° minimum amplitude requirement from the Rolex manual. Positional delta is also within the required margin.

- I'll try to regulate it a bit to make it run a bit faster overall.

STILL, what do you think about the non-concentric oil circle on the escape wheel jewels? And do you think that the difference in amplitude between vertical positions (with the worst being Crown up) point to something?

Cheers,

CK

 

PS: another small observation:

If I put my timegrapher to the shortest testing period, i.e. it'll give me a new amplitude reading every 2 seconds, I see a bit more fluctuation than I'm usually used to. At full wind, dial up, it'll hit 283° for a second and then go down to 255°.  I can't see a perfect pattern, but these fluctiations are in an overall "rythm" of 2-3 minutes. Could it just be the measurement error of the cheap Weishi 1000, or it it pointing me to an a (particular) wheel in the gear train?

Edited February 7 by Knebo

[JohnR725]

12 hours ago, Knebo said:

Of I put it on the timegrapher immediately after winding fully,

Watch companies normal procedure for fully wound up is not to put it on the timing machine where it's fully wound up. It depends upon whose technical sheets you look at but you're supposed to wait at least 15 minutes basically up to one hour is considered fully wound up. As you can see if you can fully wind the watch up better if it wasn't an automatic if you can wind a manual wind that extra little just before you start breaking something you can get some really nice impressive amplitudes which is not what you're supposed to be doing which is why you're supposed to let the watch settled down a little bit

12 hours ago, Knebo said:

So, nothing of major concern... BUT the amplitude is a tad low for my liking. It does stay above 200° degrees in all positions after 24h, though - which is the Rolex minimum requirement. Still, wondering why it's not higher. I recently did a 2035 movement and it was doing nice 280-290° horizontal, full wind.

Would you like an answer from the group or my answer? Let's see the groups answer is your amplitude sucks and who cares what Rolex thinks they are only concerned about timekeeping. So you need to get that amplitude up about a stronger mainspring that should do it?

Yes the stupid watch companies all they care about is timekeeping what idiots they are

1 hour ago, Knebo said:

If I put my timegrapher to the shortest testing period, i.e. it'll give me a new amplitude reading every 2 seconds, I see a bit more fluctuation than I'm usually used to. At full wind, dial up, it'll hit 283° for a second and then go down to 255°.  I can't see a perfect pattern, but these fluctiations are in an overall "rythm" of 2-3 minutes. Could it just be the measurement error of the cheap Weishi 1000, or it it pointing me to an a (particular) wheel in the gear train?

Looks like you need a new timing machine or software-based timing machine. The Chinese machines average slightly different than the witschi machines using the watch companies say set the average to 20 seconds to get a smoother rating. Then it's not a measurement error the timing machine it's you need a different timing machine. I'm trying to think of which witschi you could get the cheapest one but you're still looking at thousands of Swiss francs in your case. I was just thinking sincere in Switzerland grab your Rolex and pop over to witschi and see if they can run a demo on one of their machines. Tell them you thinking of purchasing one you want to run a time plot on the watch. I think the cheapest one that would do that is not cheap.

Mechanical watches are interesting they tend to have power fluctuations through the gear train ideal a it tends to be random but if you're having a gear issue or some other issue you can get something that's not random. Typically though if you put the hands on and watch the watch you typically wouldn't see the problem because the average out all of this.

So for instance this shows the effect of the gearing how often things would repeat

Here is an example of one another timing machine would do for you

And the lower plot you can very clearly see fluctuations on the other hand the timekeeping is relatively minimal. This is where you'd never see this with your watch hands because this would all get averaged out. But if you want to be obsessed about this I'm attaching a PDF. Ideally you shouldn't be seeing what were seeing in the Rolex up above

For instance this comes from a Elgin 17 size pocket watch that hasn't been serviced in no idea when and notice we barely can see a pattern but we can see much greater timing fluctuations. Your Rolex doesn't have regulator pins which is really nice regulator pins will make things Much worse which is why it's nice if you just break them off and throw them away but unfortunately we can't.

Another pocket watch example

Notice on the 992B example where yes there is fluctuations of amplitude but timekeeping is really really really tight. Same as the fluctuations with the Rolex on timekeeping really isn't affected. But you are seeing the fluctuation on your timing machine which would be a powertrain fluctuation I wonder if witschi has a show room you could go visit?

 

1 hour ago, Knebo said:

And do you think that the difference in amplitude between vertical positions (with the worst being Crown up) point to something?

I think you should have longer averaging times in some of these issues might go away.

That I see the timing and all positions at 24 hours I don't see the one fully wound up and fully wound up means fully wound up and wait about 15 minutes I just curious what all the positions look like

Okay here's what you absolutely must buy I'm sure it can't possibly be that expensive?

https://www.witschi.com/en/products/chronomaster-auto/

Sometimes a website could be a bit weird of Fedora cousins here beer cheapest alternative it's only 3000 of whatever your favorite currency is will be close enough you want the Pro version because I think the Pro version adds in all the stuff. Including the trace function which I call a time plot.

Then yes you can do some of this with software-based timing machines for a considerably less money but witschi makes it look so nice and pretty and just think how professional you'll be with a $3000 timing machine up your game considerably. Then I'm not sure that the automatic microphone version is available for sale we get I haven't seen it and I bet you it's expensive. But this thing of all the stuff you could be concerned about with your newfangled timing machine.

https://www.cousinsuk.com/product/witschi-mechanical-chronomaster-pro

 

 

 

 

 

 

Horologica Times -- May 2004 From the Workshop witschi time plot.pdf

[Nucejoe]

I have no advice to give, but questions to ask, 

Based on tg printout.

Would touching this escapement be stupid thing to do?         Are you happy with the lock on pallets?  I would manually add a bit of power to the barrel and observe what the tg shows.

TG tells, you done fine work so far,  good luck with your pursuit of excellence.

Rgds

 

 

 

[Knebo]

Hi @JohnR725

Thanks for your valuable input, as always.

  

2 hours ago, JohnR725 said:

Watch companies normal procedure for fully wound up is not to put it on the timing machine where it's fully wound up. It depends upon whose technical sheets you look at but you're supposed to wait at least 15 minutes basically up to one hour is considered fully wound up.

Sorry if I wasn't clear. The pictures in my initial post are after more than 30min run-time after full wind. 

 

2 hours ago, JohnR725 said:

Would you like an answer from the group or my answer? Let's see the groups answer is your amplitude sucks and who cares what Rolex thinks they are only concerned about timekeeping. So you need to get that amplitude up about a stronger mainspring that should do it?

Yes the stupid watch companies all they care about is timekeeping what idiots they are

I think you're misunderstanding WHY I'm striving for amplitude here. Timekeeping is doing well, as you can see. But, to me, amplitude also indicates if there are any possible issues that could cause wear in the mid-term.

Rolex provides a desirable range of amplitude (max at full wind and minimum after 24h). The movement is designed to deliver that amplitude with the pre-defined power of the mainspring.

If amplitude were lower than the desired range, and despite great timekeeping, this would indicate to me that something is off. Maybe bad lubrication somewhere, or a bad pivot, whatever... all things that could cause wear over the next months or (too few) years.

That's what I'm primarily concerned with now.

 

2 hours ago, JohnR725 said:

Looks like you need a new timing machine or software-based timing machine. The Chinese machines average slightly different than the witschi machines using the watch companies say set the average to 20 seconds to get a smoother rating. Then it's not a measurement error the timing machine it's you need a different timing machine. I'm trying to think of which witschi you could get the cheapest one but you're still looking at thousands of Swiss francs in your case.

Unfortunately, this is out of range for me. 

 

2 hours ago, JohnR725 said:

 

This is a very interesting example. I assume this is a nicely serviced 3135 movement -- somewhat comaparable with the 2135 on my desk. Amplitude fluctuates by almost 20° (min 279, max 298). A bit less then my 30°, but not so dramatically different.

 

2 hours ago, JohnR725 said:

I think you should have longer averaging times in some of these issues might go away.

Haha, the issue will not go away, but be hidden behind an "average". That is, IF there is really an issue..

I normally have it set to 20sec average. Just as I was seeing some fluctuations, I tried to see more detail with the 2sec average setting.

 

Thanks, @Nucejoe.

41 minutes ago, Nucejoe said:

Would touching this escapement be stupid thing to do?         Are you happy with the lock on pallets?  I would manually add a bit of power to the barrel and observe what the tg shows.

I looked at the lock and it looks just right. Photo below (not great quality, though).

 

I'm not sure I understand by what you mean with "manually add a bit of power to the barrel". You mean, in a different way from winding the crown?

Edited February 7 by Knebo

[Jon]

What you will find is with the auto module and rotor off this particular movement you will naturally see a lower amplitude.

It appears in your photo that this is the case. If it is, then the amplitude you are getting which is around 250 to 260 degrees is quite natural.

Put the auto module and rotor on and give the rotor a few turns when fully wound, this should give you the extra amplitude you are looking for. I know you should time a manual wound watch after an hour, but this is an automatic, so those rules don't apply here, as the watch is running at full wind when on the wrist, so you take your timing at full wind. The auto module and rotor give the movement a little more torque on the mainspring, hence seeing more amplitude. This idiosyncrasy doesn't happen with all automatic watches, but you will be surprised how much more amplitude you'll get. sometimes it can increase by about 30 degrees. If you have been a bit too liberal with the breaking grease then this might have a detrimental effect on the amplitude, due to slipping a little too early. Let us know how you get on?

[Knebo]

4 minutes ago, Jon said:

What you will find is with the auto module and rotor off this particular movement you will naturally see a lower amplitude.

It appears in your photo that this is the case. If it is, then the amplitude you are getting which is around 250 to 260 degrees is quite natural.

Put the auto module and rotor on and give the rotor a few turns when fully wound, this should give you the extra amplitude you are looking for. I know you should time a manual wound watch after an hour, but this is an automatic, so those rules don't apply here, as the watch is running at full wind when on the wrist, so you take your timing at full wind. The auto module and rotor give the movement a little more torque on the mainspring, hence seeing more amplitude. This idiosyncrasy doesn't happen with all automatic watches, but you will be surprised how much more amplitude you'll get. sometimes it can increase by about 30 degrees. If you have been a bit too liberal with the breaking grease then this might have a detrimental effect on the amplitude, due to slipping a little too early. Let us know how you get on?

Thanks @Jon! That's also encouraging. True, I recently did a 3135 movement I got around 295° after manually winding and waiting 30min. But when I was wearing it and put it on the TG immediately off the wrist, I got frightfully close to knocking (330°) [it calmed down after a few days. I suppose, as the breaking grease spread out].

I'll definitely let you know when the movement is cased with the auto module.

 

Does anyone have any thoughts on the below picture, though? 

17 hours ago, Knebo said:

Does the cap jewel not sit evenly? Would that cause the problems I'm seeing? Or is this within normal margins? 

 

[rehajm]

2 hours ago, Jon said:

I know you should time a manual wound watch after an hour, but this is an automatic, so those rules don't apply here

I was taught this, yes. Automatic winding was an invention for the improvement of accuracy not necessarily for convenience. Automatics run at full wind, or whatever term is appropriate for a properly slipping mainspring…

[Knebo]

Another follow up on that potential issue with the escape wheel jewels:

the non-concentric oil circle is observed on BOTH sides. See the below two pictures. Both pictures are taking in such a way that the "perspective" is the same = the pallet fork and balance wheel are located above at 12 o'clock.

1. train side

2. keyless/dial side

 

Now, let me try to visualize my thinking of what this may imply (please excuse my mediocre graphical design skill and my apparent desire for a good burger for dinner):

 

What do you think? Am I over-thinking? Have you ever seen anything like this?

 

[Neverenoughwatches]

7 minutes ago, Knebo said:

Another follow up on that potential issue with the escape wheel jewels:

the non-concentric oil circle is observed on BOTH sides. See the below two pictures. Both pictures are taking in such a way that the "perspective" is the same = the pallet fork and balance wheel are located above at 12 o'clock.

1. train side

2. keyless/dial side

 

Now, let me try to visualize my thinking of what this may imply (please excuse my mediocre graphical design skill and my apparent desire for a good burger for dinner):

 

What do you think? Am I over-thinking? Have you ever seen anything like this?

 

Ok so before i get involved,  can i just say that this last picture looks like a jewel burger, i mean there's even a fork to eat it with.

10 minutes ago, Knebo said:

and my apparent desire for a good burger for dinner):

 

11 minutes ago, Knebo said:

Have you ever seen anything like this?

 

McDonald's only not as appetising. 

15 minutes ago, Knebo said:

Another follow up on that potential issue with the escape wheel jewels:

the non-concentric oil circle is observed on BOTH sides. See the below two pictures. Both pictures are taking in such a way that the "perspective" is the same = the pallet fork and balance wheel are located above at 12 o'clock.

1. train side

2. keyless/dial side

 

Now, let me try to visualize my thinking of what this may imply (please excuse my mediocre graphical design skill and my apparent desire for a good burger for dinner):

 

What do you think? Am I over-thinking? Have you ever seen anything like this?

 

Omg we had fish jokes a few months ago , i wonder whats in store for this one.

1 hour ago, Knebo said:

Another follow up on that potential issue with the escape wheel jewels:

the non-concentric oil circle is observed on BOTH sides. See the below two pictures. Both pictures are taking in such a way that the "perspective" is the same = the pallet fork and balance wheel are located above at 12 o'clock.

1. train side

2. keyless/dial side

 

Now, let me try to visualize my thinking of what this may imply (please excuse my mediocre graphical design skill and my apparent desire for a good burger for dinner):

 

What do you think? Am I over-thinking? Have you ever seen anything like this?

 

For starters that endshake is unlike anything I've seen before and the balance is missing all of its components, and that pallet fork well thats completely in the wrong position. Believe it or not unbeknown to this discussion group i have actually been helpful today in other ways elsewhere .

[Knebo]

2 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

For starters that endshake is unlike anything I've seen before and the balance is missing all of its components, and that pallet fork well thats completely in the wrong position. Believe it or not unbeknown to this discussion group i have actually been helpful today in other ways elsewhere .

Not sure we're understanding each other here. The drawing is of the ESCAPE WHEEL and its jewels, NOT the balance. The Rolex escape wheel has capped jewels and shock springs. That's that I'm talking about. 

The jewels on the balance have perfectly concentric oil circles. 

2 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

i mean there's even a fork to eat it with

I was hoping someone would get the joke

[nickelsilver]

Your oil concentricity on the escape wheel isn't robbing amplitude.

Also, I've seen folks eat burgers with fork and knife in Switzerland .

 

Funny, I have a friend who worked for rolex as an instructor, and they actually stipulate (or used to) to: peg jewels, and stick pinions into button pithwood soaked with benzine (lighter fluid) prior to machine cleaning.

 

I had a zenith el primero on the bench with lackluster amplitude, tried this (pinions in pithwood), and dang if I didn't get a good 10 degrees. Maybe it was just the manipulation.  Maybe it was the running a bit more. But Rolex does what books from 1905 say to do, must be a reason.

 

But he also said they don't all hit 270+ full wind minus an hour. What they do do  (gross!) is keep time really well. Your 24h amps are great and within spec, I would let this one go.

 

Or, start adjusting the escapement (I do this all the time and I'm like the only watchmaker I know who does, haha).

Edited February 7 by nickelsilver

[Nucejoe]

6 hours ago, Knebo said:

@Nucejoe.I'm not sure I understand by what you mean with "manually add a bit of power to the barrel". You mean, in a different way from winding the crown?

 With a pegwood  add SLIGHT AMOUNT OF  FORCE to  the barrel ( itself ) in the direction it supplies power to the train, to compensate for insufficient torque due to a weak spring, without putting extra load on mainspring and causing unwanted slips of the spring.

 The amount of force you apply is a matter of the feel you develope over time and your familiarity wiith the calib ur working on.

 When you add extra torque to a fully wound spring through the crown, you expectedly will cause the spring to slip unwantedly. so add torque to the barrel itself.

Good luck 

 

Edited February 7 by Nucejoe

[Neverenoughwatches]

29 minutes ago, Knebo said:

Not sure we're understanding each other here. The drawing is of the ESCAPE WHEEL and its jewels, NOT the balance. The Rolex escape wheel has capped jewels and shock springs. That's that I'm talking about. 

The jewels on the balance have perfectly concentric oil circles. 

Ah ha that would make much more sense, everything except the piece of cutlery,  which now also makes sense. Do you think it matters if the oil bubble is not in the centre of the jewes. The bubble is from the capillary action of the oil forming around the two mating surfaces of the cap jewel and the holed jewel. If either or both of the jewels are tilted then it stands to reason that the mating surfaces wont be in the center of the setting.... yes?  Does it matter where the pivot picks up oil from within that bubble as long as sideshake still exists. The pivot end might ride differently .

[Nucejoe]

10 minutes ago, nickelsilver said:

Your oil concentricity on the escape wheel isn't robbing amplitude.

 I would let this one go.

Good to know this.

 

Question,   

But senario 2 or 3 which knebo shows, can actually happen and introduce more friction against mainspring torque. 

Thanks in advance.

[Knebo]

26 minutes ago, nickelsilver said:

lso, I've seen folks eat burgers with fork and knife in Switzerland

hahaha, for sure!

26 minutes ago, nickelsilver said:

Your oil concentricity on the escape wheel isn't robbing amplitude.

27 minutes ago, nickelsilver said:

But he also said they don't all hit 270+ full wind minus an hour. What they do do  (gross!) is keep time really well. Your 24h amps are great and within spec, I would let this one go.

Those are certainly things that I like to read.. 

 

28 minutes ago, nickelsilver said:

Or, start adjusting the escapement (I do this all the time and I'm like the only watchmaker I know who does, haha).

haha, good on you. But for me... absolutely not. I don't have the skills and experience for that. And I'm definitely not going to try with a Rolex where a replacement fork would cost me and arm and a leg.

 

32 minutes ago, Nucejoe said:

With a pegwood  add SLIGHT AMOUNT OF  FORCE to  the barrel ( itself ) in the direction it supplies power to the train, to compensate for insufficient torque due to a weak spring, without putting extra load on mainspring and causing unwanted slips of the spring.

 The amount of force you apply is a matter of the feel you develope over time and your familiarity wiith the calib ur working on.

Thanks for that idea, but as you say, you'd need some sort of familiarity with the calibre -- and I don't.  So I don't want to risk anything. 

 

33 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

Ah ha that would make much more sense, everything except the piece of cutlery,  which now also makes sense

I'm glad we get each other now

 

36 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

If either or both of the jewels are tilted then it stands to reason that the mating surfaces wont be in the center of the setting.... yes? 

Exactly! That's my "theory". However, I really cleaned the setting and don't really see how/why the jewels wouldn't be flat on each other.

 

46 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

Does it matter where the pivot picks up oil from within that bubble as long as sideshake still exists. The pivot end might ride differently .

Exactly again. I am NOT concerned that the pivot would lack oil. But rather, that the pivot rides on a slanted slope instead of a flat/horizontal surface. 

 

31 minutes ago, Nucejoe said:

Question,   

But senario 2 or 3 which knebo shows, can actually happen and introduce more friction against mainspring

Yes, that's my question. Anyone?

[Nucejoe]

2 hours ago, Knebo said:

Thanks for that idea, but as you say, you'd need some sort of familiarity with the calibre -- and I don't.  So I don't want to risk anything. 

It isn't risky, just that, springs are made to specific torque but our hand isn't . how does one know how much torque he is applying  by hand ? 

Let say the feel one developes by experience is a mental calibration. 

 

3 hours ago, nickelsilver said:

or,  start adjusting the escapement (I do this all the time and I'm like the only watchmaker I know who does, haha).

That was one of my questions, if issue turn out to be only lock on palette , should we attack such nice escapement, tg print out looks real  good , I  wouldn't touch it for the fear of knocking  it out of such fine adjustment. 

Sure you will, I wouldn't , sounds knebo wouldn't either.

in fact most of don't.

Rgds

Edited February 7 by Nucejoe

[rossjackson01]

Really good to have follow up. Thank you

Edited February 7 by rossjackson01

[eccentric59]

Eating burgers with a fork notwithstanding, here's what i think. The location of the oil droplet is for the most part a function a combination of surface tension, capillary action and where it's initially placed. Your diagram @Knebo is not taking into account the shock spring or the chaton. So let me provide an upgraded rendering.

 

 

The lower jewel is fixed in the chaton while the upper shock jewel sits within the chaton, but not in direct contact with the lower jewel. The pivot end should not exert any pressure on the upper jewel and the downward force of the spring should keep the gap uniform. As long as the bubble of oil is surrounding the pivot and not extending to the edges of the jewels (too much oil) then you're okay.

 

The only way your second and third scenarios would be possible would be if the cap jewel was the wrong size or the chaton was bent or damaged. (or you dropped a bit of mustard in the hole while eating a burger with a fork).

[nevenbekriev]

12 hours ago, Knebo said:

Another follow up on that potential issue with the escape wheel jewels:

the non-concentric oil circle is observed on BOTH sides. See the below two pictures. Both pictures are taking in such a way that the "perspective" is the same = the pallet fork and balance wheel are located above at 12 o'clock.

1. train side

2. keyless/dial side

 

Now, let me try to visualize my thinking of what this may imply (please excuse my mediocre graphical design skill and my apparent desire for a good burger for dinner):

 

What do you think? Am I over-thinking? Have you ever seen anything like this?

 

You for sure are over-thinking. There is no problem with the esc. wheel bearings. The actual picture is different thow, the hole stones have convex outside surface, and the direction of oil drowing is actually to the other side than in the pictures. If something is really tilted there, it is the hole stonses, but it is not of any significance. The effect that You are trying to describe with the 'scenario 3' actually does not exist.

 

16 hours ago, Knebo said:

Rolex provides a desirable range of amplitude (max at full wind and minimum after 24h). The movement is designed to deliver that amplitude with the pre-defined power of the mainspring.

If amplitude were lower than the desired range, and despite great timekeeping, this would indicate to me that something is off. Maybe bad lubrication somewhere, or a bad pivot, whatever... all things that could cause wear over the next months or (too few) years.

This is correct, but I will try to point to something: You replaced the main spring, yes? What would the amplitude be with the old one? This is interesting to me. And, another thing - when amplitude is lower, this will result as reduced wear, at lease in the escapement and balance, and if the reason ie weeker mainspring, then wear will be reduced in whole movement

Edited February 8 by nevenbekriev

[Neverenoughwatches]

10 hours ago, Knebo said:

Exactly! That's my "theory". However, I really cleaned the setting and don't really see how/why the jewels wouldn't be flat on each other.

What if the bottom holed jewel is not straight within the setting, in technical jargon, squiffy. Maybe the jewels are not perfectly manufactured ?

8 hours ago, Nucejoe said:

mental calibration. 

I think i have that condtion, most days i hover around 4-5 on a bad day it can be 9 1/2 - 10

2 hours ago, nevenbekriev said:

And, another thing - when amplitude is lower, this will result as reduced wear, at lease in the escapement and balance, and if the reason ie weeker mainspring, then wear will be reduced in whole movement

Thats something I've said a few times. More amplitude = more torque = more wear, if that extra amplitude gained is the product of using a new or stronger spring pushing through excess friction. In an ideal world aim for a very free running movement with a mainspring producing the minimal amount of force needed to keep good time and an acceptable amount of power reserve with a relatively low amplitude that has the effect of causing the least amount of wear.  Its all just a big balancing act.

[JohnR725]

19 hours ago, Knebo said:

I think you're misunderstanding WHY I'm striving for amplitude here. Timekeeping is doing well, as you can see. But, to me, amplitude also indicates if there are any possible issues that could cause wear in the mid-term.

Rolex provides a desirable range of amplitude (max at full wind and minimum after 24h). The movement is designed to deliver that amplitude with the pre-defined power of the mainspring.

If amplitude were lower than the desired range, and despite great timekeeping, this would indicate to me that something is off. Maybe bad lubrication somewhere, or a bad pivot, whatever... all things that could cause wear over the next months or (too few) years.

That's what I'm primarily concerned with now.

Okay tell you what I scrapped my entire answer and will start over with a new answer embracing your concerns.

First will start off with one of my concerns is out of movement holder I see are you holding your movement In a movement holder in the timing machine if so why?

 

Then in addition to your concerns of things wearing out I always have concerns about people shortchange on lubrication or types so maybe you can list out the lubrication's they used on this watch?

Then I'm assuming you used a genuine mainspring not a counterfeit because that's going to change things. I do curiosity I looked to the base calibers 2130 and they had two mainsprings the normal and a slightly weaker one.

Then I don't suppose you thought of changing the balance staff? Your balance staff might look perfect but I bet lectures where the people lecturing work and service centers comment that they change more balance staffs for timing issues and for actual broken staff issues. Although ideally fewer changing the staff you would want to get a real staff and not an aftermarket where you might introduce new problems conceivably.

Then problems with the pictures below well one of the pictures. Side shake your example it is huge and yes I know that's a huge image but still you shouldn't have that much side shake at all and how much do you have? In other words if you look down at the pivot and you grab the escape wheel carefully or just push on it can you see the side shake? I suspect technically even the much improved second image conceivably is actually too much side shake I think site shake is even specified anywhere other than it should be very small.

 

 

Then what is specified as an end shake I assume you did check all of them? Then yes I know we don't have a measuring stick the measure these.

Then while were discussing end shake as unfortunately all the rest of the things involve people pushing the setting is around with the jewels and conceivably they can screw those up by twisting them is a didn't push evenly. The balance is relatively simple as it has an adjustment screw so have you verify that the balance end shake is correct is if it's too tight you'll lose amplitude there or conceivably it to lose other things could occur.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Knebo]

6 hours ago, eccentric59 said:

The only way your second and third scenarios would be possible would be if the cap jewel was the wrong size or the chaton was bent or damaged. (or you dropped a bit of mustard in the hole while eating a burger with a fork

Thanks for your illustrations. I just tried to keep it simple (and I was lazy, drawing this up in Powerpoint...).
Indeed, my worry goes mostly in the direction of your quote. I've cleaned it meticulously to remove any "mustard" :-D. Size-wise, the cap jewels fit perfectly into the chatons. It's weird, though, that BOTH jewel setting exhibit the exact same symptoms. If it was something bent or so, I'd expect this to be the case on only one jewel setting...

5 hours ago, nevenbekriev said:

something is really tilted there, it is the hole stonses, but it is not of any significance.

2 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

What if the bottom holed jewel is not straight within the setting, in technical jargon, squiffy. Maybe the jewels are not perfectly manufactured ?

I was afraid that might be the case. Rather than a manufacturing error (at Rolex?? ), I was afraid that it could have shifted through any of my interference -- but I can't really imagine how I'd have done so.
But happy to hear that this wouldn't be too dramatic.

 

5 hours ago, nevenbekriev said:

You replaced the main spring, yes? What would the amplitude be with the old one?

58 minutes ago, JohnR725 said:

Then in addition to your concerns of things wearing out I always have concerns about people shortchange on lubrication or types so maybe you can list out the lubrication's they used on this watch?

Then I'm assuming you used a genuine mainspring not a counterfeit because that's going to change things. I do curiosity I looked to the base calibers 2130 and they had two mainsprings the normal and a slightly weaker one.

Yes, I did replace it with a generic GR spring (named "2130-311" at Cousins). Sure, I acknowledge that a genuine spring would be better and that differences may exist. I have no indication, though, that it would be the intentionally weaker "311-1" spring equivalent. Possible, though. If so, my overall results of amplitude and timekeeping would be great.

 

5 hours ago, nevenbekriev said:

when amplitude is lower, this will result as reduced wear, at lease in the escapement and balance, and if the reason ie weeker mainspring, then wear will be reduced in whole movement

2 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

Thats something I've said a few times. More amplitude = more torque = more wear, if that extra amplitude gained is the product of using a new or stronger spring pushing through excess friction

Yea, but this logic hinges critically --as you say-- on the the reason for the lower amplitude. If it's due to a weaker mainspring -- then yes. If it's due to bad lubrication (or so) -- then no, wear would be increased.

 

1 hour ago, JohnR725 said:

embracing your concerns

Thanks!

 

1 hour ago, JohnR725 said:

First will start off with one of my concerns is out of movement holder I see are you holding your movement In a movement holder in the timing machine if so why?

I really prefer doing it this way. It greatly removes the risk of causing any damage to the movement when putting it into those spring-loaded holders of the Weishi TG. It can slip out, etc. I do adjust the gain setting to maximum and I've not observed any issues in picking up a clean signals.

 

1 hour ago, JohnR725 said:

Then I don't suppose you thought of changing the balance staff? Your balance staff might look perfect but I bet lectures where the people lecturing work and service centers comment that they change more balance staffs for timing issues and for actual broken staff issues

As far as I know, Rolex balances have a special collet that can't be removed. So apparently replacement is only possible with a balance complete (~500USD)... 
I inspected them thoroughly and they look very good under 40x magnification. As far as I can tell..

 

1 hour ago, JohnR725 said:

Then problems with the pictures below well one of the pictures. Side shake your example it is huge and yes I know that's a huge image but still you shouldn't have that much side shake at all and how much do you have? In other words if you look down at the pivot and you grab the escape wheel carefully or just push on it can you see the side shake? I suspect technically even the much improved second image conceivably is actually too much side shake I think site shake is even specified anywhere other than it should be very small.

Of course, I drew a ridiculous side shake! I was really just trying to make a point for illustration. If I had drawn to scale, all three pictures would probably have looked the same, hahaha. I did check endshake and sideshake of the balance and they seem fine. I don't have much experience with "feeling" microns, but nothing was really off. I used the eccentric screw of the balance cock to try increase and decrease endshake by small amounts, but put it back to the original adjustment afterwards (it seemed the best).

 

1 hour ago, JohnR725 said:

Then what is specified as an end shake I assume you did check all of them? Then yes I know we don't have a measuring stick the measure these.

I did check endshake everywhere. Again, I don't have a sophisticated feel for it yet, but all endshakes were absolutely minimal and nothing was "stuck"/"squeezed".

[Neverenoughwatches]

9 minutes ago, Knebo said:

was afraid that might be the case. Rather than a manufacturing error (at Rolex?? ), I was afraid that it could have shifted through any of my interference -- but I can't really imagine how I'd have done so.
But happy to hear that this wouldn't be too dramatic

how old is the watch ? I wonder what Rolex actually made before they bought out who they used.

[JohnR725]

8 minutes ago, Knebo said:

As far as I know, Rolex balances have a special collet that can't be removed. So apparently replacement is only possible with a balance complete (~500USD)... 
I inspected them thoroughly and they look very good under 40x magnification. As far as I can tell..

 

Yes that can be a truthful statements but it also brings up a problem from the image below

Is now past my bedtime and I'm tired I was trying to go to bed earlier this week so much for that dream is I need to get up really early on Saturday and I like to be awake when I go to the meeting I'm going to. Which is interesting meeting as many many years ago at this meeting of watchmakers hobbyists and professional somebody showed how to replace a balance staff in a Rolex where the collet cannot be removed. That by the way would explain why the balance staff is available of course the problem was he at all kinds of fancy tools well not so much fancy but had tools you don't have so yes it can be replaced but probably isn't practical for you.