Regulating an F6922 without a timegrapher

[WpgRob]

In 2020,I picked up an Orient Mako II online. It ran at +15 seconds per day and after 3 years of resets more than weekly, it was time to crack the seal and take a shot at regulating it. Not having a timegrapher, I used a spreadsheet to track the time, referenced the Canadian NRC website, wore the watch between adjustments, and used the back end of some tweezers to lightly tap the regulator daily until it ran to within one second per day.
 

Two months later, it’s still running to within 1 second per day when measured over a week or longer, while daily variations are up to 9 seconds per day. For my purposes, its overall stability is surprisingly good.

Is this method of adjustment “better” than adjusting to 5 positions using a timegrapher, since during the adjustment period the watch is already in the environment in which it’ll be used?

Rob in Winnipeg 

[tomh207]

Best is to combine the 2, timegrapher regulation 48 and 72 hours after servicing then wear for a week to confirm or return to regulation as you have done above. The timegrapher will get you to a good standard and has the bonus of showing if there are any residual issues, however is only part of the story when practical timekeeping is thought about.

 

Tom

[clockboy]

Agree with Tom, a timegrapher shows more than regulation. Such as beat error. Also with a timegrapher you can regulate in different positions to get a better average. 

[VWatchie]

4 hours ago, WpgRob said:

Is this method of adjustment “better” than adjusting to 5 positions using a timegrapher, since during the adjustment period the watch is already in the environment in which it’ll be used?

As it is your watch the answer is yes! When regulating a watch for someone else there's no way we can tell in what environment the watch is used and how often the wearer of the watch will wind it. In that situation, a timing machine is a handy tool to get close to something that likely will be acceptable. As indicated by @tomh207 and @clockboy a timing machine is a great way to quickly determine the health of the movement.

If you are considering a Weishi I'd recommend the 1900 model over the 1000 model as the 1900 has a gain setting. These machines work well but aren't foolproof. If you want something more advanced I'd recommend the PCTM software from @praezis.

Edited May 19, 2024 by VWatchie

[Neverenoughwatches]

5 hours ago, WpgRob said:

In 2020,I picked up an Orient Mako II online. It ran at +15 seconds per day and after 3 years of resets more than weekly, it was time to crack the seal and take a shot at regulating it. Not having a timegrapher, I used a spreadsheet to track the time, referenced the Canadian NRC website, wore the watch between adjustments, and used the back end of some tweezers to lightly tap the regulator daily until it ran to within one second per day.
 

Two months later, it’s still running to within 1 second per day when measured over a week or longer, while daily variations are up to 9 seconds per day. For my purposes, its overall stability is surprisingly good.

Is this method of adjustment “better” than adjusting to 5 positions using a timegrapher, since during the adjustment period the watch is already in the environment in which it’ll be used?

Rob in Winnipeg 

My thinking is yes it is better if you were to choose this or a tg, although the tg can do more . This way the watch is adjusted specifically to you and your routine. As an example i restored an old Smiths pin pallet watch ( typically an inaccurate movement ) around 3 months ago. Adjusted through 5 positions on a tg initially proved ok but not precise over time.  Having then re- regulated the movement after each week of wearing over a period of 6 weeks brought the timekeeping in much closer, now within 1 minute/week

[nevenbekriev]

12 hours ago, WpgRob said:

...Is this method of adjustment “better” than adjusting to 5 positions using a timegrapher...

Hi Rob,

I am not sure if You understand the meaning of 'Adjusted to 5 positions' correctly. Just to clarify, do You believe, that if You get a cheap 'Unadjusted' movement, It will be possible to turn it to 'Adjusted to 5 positions' just by adjusting the rate regulator with the help of some kind of timegrapher? Sorry if it is my missunderstanding...

[Neverenoughwatches]

26 minutes ago, nevenbekriev said:

Hi Rob,

I am not sure if You understand the meaning of 'Adjusted to 5 positions' correctly. Just to clarify, do You believe, that if You get a cheap 'Unadjusted' movement, It will be possible to turn it to 'Adjusted to 5 positions' just by adjusting the rate regulator with the help of some kind of timegrapher? Sorry if it is my missunderstanding...

You would at least need to poise through those positions before regulating.

[WpgRob]

Hi Nevenbekriev,

Thanks for your reply. I’m a hobbyist and my understanding of escapement theory is incomplete and rudimentary. But I do understand that preparation is necessary before static or dynamic poising can begin, such as cleaning, polishing pivots and pinions, properly oiling, adjusting the regulator pins, setting it in beat, ensuring the outer coil is concentric and regulator pins are ok.

To adjust a cheap unadjusted movement to a state of “adjusted to 5 positions,” I think the success would depend on the movement. With a Timex pin pallet escapement it probably can’t be done, however with polished pivots in jewel settings, a Breguet overcoil, a beat adjust and proper oiling, dynamic poising of an unadjusted watch could have some benefit.

There seem to be a few “sleeper” movements out there, i.e. a good movement that was cheapened and cased in base metal to compete. Bulova did this with their Caravelles. Conversely, there are some jewelled watches out there with pin pallets; and the Chinese picked up very good Swiss tooling but the product QC is hit or miss. I suspect some of those unadjusted movements could be improved, while a Timex probably can’t, much.

interesting topic!

[Knebo]

Hi @WpgRob and welcome to the forum.

for YOU, your approach works just great. It is regulated to YOU and YOUR wearing pattern. Perfect.

"Regulated to 5 postions" or so would, however, imply that you can give the watch to someone else with a different wearing pattern (e.g. you walk all day whereas the other person sits at his desk all day; at night, you put your watch dial up whereas the other person puts it crown up) -- and it would still run at equal rate/precision.

Regulating the average rate with the regulator lever is easy. But regulating across positions, particularly across vertical positions, is much harder (incl balance wheel poising..).

 

 

[nevenbekriev]

I will try to explain what i mean...

If You see 'Adjusted to 5 positions' on a movement, this means the movement has passed certain porocedure of regulation, that ensures in the outcome variations of rate in the different positions will be in certain limits. Wether this limits will be COSC standard, railway grade standard or some kind of internal factory standard, it is not important. Usually procedure includes dynamical poising and different isochronism correction measures. In the past, the railway grade watches needed 3 months to be adjusted, that's why they were expencive...

And If You see 'Unadjusted', this usually means the balance has been not poised at all - neither statical, nor dynamical. In this case movement counts only on good amplitude for good performance.

In both case the regulator can be used to finally adjust the rate, and this can be done with the help of timegrapher or without. But actually, the 5 positions ajustment is rather all that is done before that final adjustment with the regulator, and has nothing to do with it.

 

[Knebo]

4 minutes ago, nevenbekriev said:

But actually, the 5 positions ajustment is rather all that is done before that final adjustment with the regulator, and has nothing to do with it.

exactly