Jump to content

Poljot Sturmanskie 3133


RyMoeller

Recommended Posts

About a week back I picked up this Sturmanskie after following @Endeavor and @GeorgeClarkson through the service of their Soviet chronographs.  The seller stated the watch dated from 1988 and included the original receipt and box.  Unfortunately, I cannot read Cyrillic so I was forced to take the seller at his word; regardless of it's origin though, the watch is a beautiful specimen and I'm happy to have it.  

IMG_2549.thumb.JPG.0dba09cc8cbaf5ad1d6cd741a5716480.JPGIMG_2554.thumb.JPG.4422506c44535a4119bb17d476bc0010.JPGIMG_2560.thumb.JPG.30e478263d19f2642e9357dbfddea420.JPGIMG_2562.thumb.JPG.9bc0922e1a2169e8075d66db485c77cf.JPG

Unfortunately I was unable to remove the caseback until today.  I took Roland's advice and used a jeweler's hammer and a sharp razor to work my way around the caseback slowly creating enough of a gap for a case knife to exploit.  It was a nerve-wracking experience!  In the end, the caseback came away with no damage to the watch.

IMG_2581.thumb.JPG.7fe078cf1fb3b82a30c6c3d1e13a9ac9.JPG

I'm always very anxious to gaze upon a new chronograph movement- it's certainly geeky but I'm not afraid to admit it.

IMG_2593.thumb.JPG.fd3e481d58d836726e001331809520c3.JPGIMG_2594.thumb.JPG.cada6837617b325a68cf894a331132b8.JPGIMG_2587.thumb.JPG.b840aee2079c8f4d072028ad2b77557c.JPGIMG_2591.thumb.JPG.e9c412c88fe0f427ce2677ad351c12c2.JPGIMG_2589.thumb.JPG.b96b3b93367e86dff0ccab685010a3e4.JPG

It looks like I'm not the first to open this case though.  Many screws have marks on them indicating they've been removed at some point in the past and replaced.  I believed this movement to be 31659, but alas, there is no hacking mechanism that I can see.  Over all the movement is in good shape and appears complete.  It will need a proper cleaning before it's ready to wear and I'll be sure to post about it when I have the chance.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I don't have that tool (yet).  I had only just discovered it when researching how to open this particular watch.

While I wouldn't suggest using a hammer on a watch, a few light taps here and there seemed to work well in this regard and the caseback was removed without damage to the case, gasket, or movement.  The key was finding a blade that was thin enough and strong enough to work all the way around the caseback.  This watch is plated soft metal which would can easily deform.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@RyMoeller Glad you got the case open without dynamite any further damage ! :)

Great pictures you took ........ crystal clear !!

According to the Polmax3133 guide (http://www.polmax3133.com/guide.html ) the SU 3133 stamp on the bridge was first introduced in 1990. Version #1 (1990), version #2 (1992-1993) and the last version #3 (1993-1995). By the looks of it, the SU 3133 stamp you have on the Chrono-bridge suggest version #3.

The dial and hands seem identical to the 1988 one I have. I know this type of watch has been made for a while and is therefor called "Classic", but I can't find info from when - till when it was made. Perhaps @GeorgeClarkson can fill us in?

This may help to determine whether the movement (or just the bridge) has been changed out at some point, or all is original from that period?

Nonetheless, the watch and movement looks great :)

 

Edited by Endeavor
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Endeavor said:

@RyMoeller Glad you got the case open without dynamite any further damage ! :)

Great pictures you took ........ crystal clear !!

According to the Polmax3133 guide (http://www.polmax3133.com/guide.html ) the SU 3133 stamp on the bridge was first introduced in 1990. Version #1 (1990), version #2 (1992-1993) and the last version #3 (1993-1995). By the looks of it, the SU 3133 stamp you have on the Chrono-bridge suggest version #3.

The dial and hands seem identical to the 1988 one I have. I know this type of watch has been made for a while and is therefor called "Classic", but I can't find info from when - till when it was made. Perhaps @GeorgeClarkson can fill us in?

This may help to determine whether the movement (or just the bridge) has been changed out at some point, or all is original from that period?

Nonetheless, the watch and movement looks great :)

 

Thanks Roland.  :)

Yes, I compared what I've got with the Polmax guide and it looks like it's mostly an early 90's piece.  The stamping on the bridge is rough and has the "SU" prefix dates later than '88.  The balance is also from a later date.  So I'm not sure if it's a retrofitted piece, a Franken Watch, or an aberration.  Regardless, the movement is complete and in good condition and the watch was keeping time although it's in need of lubrication (and a thorough cleaning).

I'll note also that the dial and hands are in fantastic shape, as is the case.  This I'm quiet pleased of.  I also really dig the design of the sweep second hand- even my Speedmaster doesn't sport that type of swagger!

Oh, and I'm still quite happy with the purchase, but then I haven't regretted picking up a chronograph yet!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be clear, it was not my intention to point out flaws, or whether it was a Franken or not. I only know a very little of these watches and can only go by the Polmax3133 information; "hear-say" I like to call that ;)

I was a bit surprised to see that it wasn't a 31659 and to see a "SU" in the chrono-bridge, so I started digging. As said, the dial and hands seem completely identical with my watch, and so does the watch-case.

What can one do if the movements packs in and needs replacement? Perhaps somewhere in the '90's and was replaced with a new movement at that time. Does that make it a Franken? It's still replaced (if at all !!??) by an original Poljot movement. Basically, it's all original Poljot ! If you would have found a Seiko inside ....... sure, I would call that a Franken .......

Al in all, it's a great watch and I'm looking forward to a walk-through if you are going to do one !? Your pictures are for sure a pleasure to look at, and your descriptions / story are a joy to read ......  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Endeavor said:

To be clear, it was not my intention to point out flaws, or whether it was a Franken or not. I only know a very little of these watches and can only go by the Polmax3133 information; "hear-say" I like to call that ;)

I was a bit surprised to see that it wasn't a 31659 and to see a "SU" in the chrono-bridge, so I started digging. As said, the dial and hands seem completely identical with my watch, and so does the watch-case.

What can one do if the movements packs in and needs replacement? Perhaps somewhere in the '90's and was replaced with a new movement at that time. Does that make it a Franken? It's still replaced (if at all !!??) by an original Poljot movement. Basically, it's all original Poljot ! If you would have found a Seiko inside ....... sure, I would call that a Franken .......

Al in all, it's a great watch and I'm looking forward to a walk-through if you are going to do one !? Your pictures are for sure a pleasure to look at, and your descriptions / story are a joy to read ......  :)

Oh for sure- my apologies if I sounded a little defensive.  Truth be told, I'm not bummed in the slightest regarding the originality of the watch or movement.  It seems pretty clear the movement is from the 90's and although I would have been a bit more interested in the hacking 31659, the base 3133 is fine for my purposes.  I'm also interested in inspecting the non-glucydur balance.

My best guess is that the watch is simply from a later date than the seller thought.

At any rate, I set out to find a Venus 188 or Valjoux 7733 based chronograph and this fits the bill.  I'm also a bit interested in the quality of the Russian mechanical and in that respect this is may be a bit better than what I was hoping for as the movement is a bit further removed from the original Swiss engineering.

Franken is a funny term for me.  I wouldn't consider this a Franken Watch because as you pointed out, it has a proper movement inside (regardless of whether it's the original movement).  Go to the Omega forums and you'll get a completely different definition of Franken Watch!

I will be doing a full service on this piece in the near future and will post about it here too.  Thanks for the kind words regarding my photography too- I've had a year to work on it and it's evolving.  ^_^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That could be another interesting thread, you photography setup! Or as a continuation on the existing " Horology Photography Thread"; http://www.watchrepairtalk.com/topic/3985-horology-photography-thread/#comment-40451

Very curious what your "good pictures" secrets are ..... :ph34r:

Well, I'm not curious, I just want to know ....... !! :D

Edited by Endeavor
  • Like 1
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

    • It looks like the canon pinion function is part of this great wheel. The pinion nearest the clip runs the minute wheel on the dual side. The pinion nearest the wheel is driven by a small wheel from under the setting lever cover plate that engages in hand setting position.    So when assembled the crown was driving the whole great train. Does this mean the pinions are too tight? Should I attempt to disassemble this great wheel and lubricants?
    • Picking up this side-tracked post again as I just removed a balance staff of a 1920's Omega (35,5L-T1) I was impressed by the way @Delgetti had his setup when he had to change out a balance-staff (https://www.watchrepairtalk.com/topic/28854-new-balance-staff-not-riveting-to-balance/page/2/#comment-244054 Not only that, but also the idea of removing the seat first before punching the staff out from the seat-side, avoiding the whole discussion of the rivet yes/no enlarging the hole. I didn't have the fancy clamps & tools Delgetti has, so I used my screw-head polishing tool. Initially I used #1500 grit diamond paste on the steel wheel, which kinda worked, but very slow. I changed to #800 grit diamond paste, which worked better, but still slow. Then I glued #240 sanding paper to the steel disk; That worked and the disk was hand-driven. Once close to the balance wheel, I took the sanding paper off and continued with #800 diamond paste. One can only do this when the balance wheel sits true on the staff and has no "wobble". I went on grinding until I saw some diamond paste on the rim of the balance wheel. This was as far as I could grind and it seemed that there wasn't much left of the seat. Carefully, with my staking set, I knocked the staff from the seat-side out. Turns out that the thickness of the seat left, now a small ring, was only 0.1mm. The balance wheel hole is in perfect shape and no damage done to the wheel at all. Of course, if the wheel has a "wobble" or isn't seated true on the balance staff, you can't get as close and there will be more left of the seat. In my case, it worked perfect 🙂 I'm very happy how this method worked out ! 😊  
    • As is tradition, one step forward, two steps back. Got the board populated and soldered into place without any issues.   But no hum. So I started testing the coils with an ohmmeter. I got 5.84k ohms across D1 (from red to red in the picture below), which is as expected. But I'm getting an open circuit for the other drive coil and feedback coil, D2 and F1 (from green to each of the two yellows).   Since the movement was working with my breadboard setup, it implies I somehow broke the connection between the coils and the solder lugs. They're all the way at the bottom of the lugs, but maybe the heat migrated down and broke the connections? I guess it's possible it happened while cleaning the flux off, but I used a soft artist's brush and isopropyl alcohol. I did a lot of high magnification examination, and I don't see any issues, but let me know if you see anything I missed or if you can think of anything else I should check.
    • 1947 NOS Ambassador 'C'. Actually, the case came without the movement so the movement isn't NOS, but she sure is pretty.
    • Hi attached is the AS 20XX. Service sheet although there is no 2063 mentioned it may be of some use to you AS_AS 2060,1,2,6,4,6.pdf
×
×
  • Create New...