Unable to wind my Seagull 1963 42mm version
-
Recently Browsing
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Topics
-
-
Posts
-
Drilling is going to be difficult, firstly because the drill bits are so thin and brittle, expect to break a few. The second issue is access to the 'hole', as the other lug will be in the way, meaning that you will have to drill at a slight angle, putting a bending stress on the drill bit and with the slightest drop in concentration .... and back to my first point. I would be tempted to grind them flat with a Dremel type tool or small jewelers file, and then put a center punch in the center of the bit to be drilled so the drill bit doesn't skip around and break... but expect this to be slow and frustrating work. By the time you have done 4 of these you'll be an expert and can come back and tell us all the best way to do it if you go down this route. However, I would seriously consider What @watchweasol said and drill from the outside-in, this will ensure straight holes without having to work around the other lugs. It may be worthwhile making yourself a simple paper template so you can be sure to match the position of each hole before drilling. In the end you will be left with 4 holes on the outside of the lugs, but many cases are made this way and unless you are looking for it you probably won't notice or realise that it's not the way the watch was meant to be in the first place. -
What works for me (waiting for the villagers to assemble with torches and pitchforks) is to put a liberal (in watch terms) spot of 9010 on one of the pins of the pin pallet, this seems to improve amplitude and beat error.
-
Non-magnetic is a poor description of such a hairspring. A better description would be unmagnetisable hairspring. There are metals and alloys that are attracted to magnets, but don’t become magnetised themselves. A hairspring made out such a material will be attracted to magnetised tweezers, but will not become magnetised. These hairsprings can be disrupted by being in close proximity to a magnet, but the disruption will cease the moment the magnet is moved away. These are hairsprings that could conceivably be disrupted by a magnetised hairspring stud. Best Regards, Mark -
By ManSkirtBrew · Posted
More than enough. Here's mine at the height I work at. I think the working distance with the included 0.5x Barlow lens is about 9". So yes, that halves the magnification. The full story is the objective lens goes from 0.7x to 4.5x. The eyepieces are 10x, giving you the advertised magnification of 7x-45x. However the working distance is unacceptably short, so it comes with an 0.5x Barlow lens, reducing the magnification range to 3.5x-22.5x, but giving you a good working distance. What I did was buy a pair of Extreme Widefield 20x Eyepieces for when I need more magnification. You keep your high working distance, but get your 45x magnification back, at the cost of some width of field. -
By Neverenoughwatches · Posted
Modern ones after blue steel, invar, elinvar and nivarox , the shiny one are not supposed to become magnetised. But i have had them jump to tweezers. And i dont really understand the comment that what can be magnetised is the stud carrier and rate regulator and they can attract the hairspring ? If the hairspring is non magnetic then how can it be attracted to something else thats become magnetise, its non magnetic , that doesn't really make sense to be ?
-
Recommended Posts