Jump to content

Accutron missing dial feet--proposed solution


Recommended Posts

Background:  Somebody sent me an "Accutron" that was a gift many years ago.  Somewhere along the way, the Accutron died and somebody replaced it with an NH35.  It, of course was too thick, so they removed the auto wind oscillating weight. Ouch!!!  Since the dial feet did not match, they cut them off the Accutron dial and used sticky tabs to attach the dial to the NH35.  What a frigging abomination!!!!

Anyway, this "somebody" sent me two accutron movements in hopes that I could return the watch to its former glory.  OMG, these were hacked up as well.  But!!! I was able to make one functioning movement.  Cleaned, oiled, and soon to be adjusted.

The BIG issue now is the dial.  I am pretty sure I cannot solder feet on the dial.  I did give it a try.  No bueno.

Here is my idea.  Drill holes through the dial where the dial feet belong.  Then insert and glue posts (feet).  I checked the visibility of the dial through the crystal and the drill holes would not be visible.

Thoughts??

image.png.5b189908e753c1911ced5b668190e36d.png

Edited by LittleWatchShop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, RichardHarris123 said:

How much is hidden on the face side of the dial. Could you form a head, like a nail, on the feet to give more surface area for the glue?

It would be close.  But these Accutron dials are relatively thick.  I think there would be enough surface area to make a good bond.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went for it. Turned these feet on the lathe

image.png.944574736394c3b7f55f5bab166f262c.png

image.png.5cd9cc84df91b7e7e7212896aa1769cd.png

1 hour ago, eccentric59 said:

dial foot repair tools

I have one of these.  However, the Accutron dial makes an abrupt curve near the edge where the foot goes.  This tool/feet would not work.  I could have opted not to drill all the way through the dial.  If I had a visibility issue, I would have done that.

  • Like 3
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 agree with @Waggy, no need to adjust. That looks very good to me. The factory specs for 7S26 are something like -35 to +45s/day, but they are usually better. The amplitude is good. When wearing, the most important positions are dial up, crown down and crown left. You need to regulate so that these positions average out to about zero. Crown down is showing +14, so you may have to set dial up to slightly minus s/day. The absolute values of +/-s/day don't really matter, as long as they aren't too far out. The only way to get good accuracy is to wear it for a couple of days, recording the errors, and gradually tweaking.
    • @Jon The link is no longer working and I wanted to see that demonstration again. Is there any chance you can make it available again? I'd appreciate it!
    • Or, if you have a staking set or jewelling too, just use one of the stumps. You can choose a fine tip to fit inside a jewel if necessary.
    • Good morning,   To be honest, I'm not sure I trust my own logic anymore 😅. But here's a picture of my own (failed!) attempt to install a new rotor axle. I punched way to hard and even split the metal of the rotor. My thinking was that, in my case, the axle sits "deeper" in the rotor and hence the rotor would be closer to the movement plates. Vice versa, I was thinking that a very light punch could cause the rotor to sit rather high. But not sure that makes sense because in both cases, the flat part of the axle and the rotor align equally.     Sorry, but is he saying that the outside of the caseback has been polished to such an extent that the inside of the caseback has deformed/sunk??? That sounds crazy to me because those casebacks are thick! Can you see any signs of that on the inside of the caseback? Have you tried screwing in the caseback a litte bit more or less so that the supposedly "sunk" part of the caseback would move from 9 o'clock to e.g. 6/7 or 11/12 o'clock?  If the caseback is truly deformed, maybe it could be punched/pressed back into shape (e.g. with glass/caseback closing press).      I agree with your choice. But yea, Rolex makes it VERY hard for independent watchmakers to do a perfect job because we can't get (original) parts easily.      Your pictures aren't too bad. But still impossible to see if the rotor isn't perfectly flat. You'd have to look at it with your loupe, from the side (like the pictures), and turn the rotor to see if the gaps (with the automatic bridge plates) increase/decrease.     Finally... how is the up/down play of the rotor? To test, take a toothpick/pegwood and press on the small triangular side of the rotor next to the axle (NOT the big side where the weight is. But the opposite side.). Does that lift up the weight-side of the rotor? There can be some play, but it should really be minimal. If there's too much play, a new spring clip is the first thing to do. After that, one could play around with the jewels. This is too much:
    • could start a new sub-brand: Bergeon-Pro Worked for Apple phones! Ah they already beat me to it:  
×
×
  • Create New...