Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I like to pick out a watch from my collection from time to time and give it a check and run to make sure it's working OK. I was wearing a particularly tight (round the wrist) shirt and sweater the other day, which make checking my watch difficult, so remembered I had a nice 1950s Marvin Hermetic on a Bonklip strap. The Bonklip was designed to be worn outside a shirt or jacket in cold conditions where it had to be referenced easily without constantly pushing up clothing - hence its popularity in aviation.

Anyway, I checked out the movement - the regulator is bang in the middle - and have been wearing it for several days now. Perfect time running; a little stiffness when changing the time indicates a clean and lube is probably in order at some stage.

Marvin 520 face.JPG

Marvin 520 movement.JPG

Marvin Bonklip.jpg

  • Like 6
Posted

A good looking watch !

I like the easy to read face.

I once had an Omega Speedmaster but could never see the small dials without putting on reading glasses. Eventually sold it and vowed never to have any timepiece which could not be easily read with 71 year old eyes !!!!!

Posted

I know what you mean (I'm 73 this year). I've seen some incredibly expensive, amazingly designed watches with innumerable complications - that did everything but display the actual time efficiently!

That's why, for example, I would never buy some skeleton watches - the background of the movement distracts from the time display.

The Marvin is on the small side, compared with today's gas meter dials - around 32mm - but I don't mind dial size as long as the watch is comfortable and elegant.

  • Like 1
Posted

The dial doesn't glow in the dark and there's no burnout on the dial or glass, so I suspect it's not lumed. But good advice all the same.

Posted

Marvin watches are very underated and as a result they are good value, an inhouse movement if I'm not mistaken.

Only thing is most of them come in Gold-plated cases which wear terribly. Willfly, yours is one of the few stainless steel and its in beautiful condition!

Anilv

  • Like 1
Posted

All Marvin movements, as far as I know, were in-house, as you say. The one in my original post is a 520 movement. I also have a 510 which is good, bit not quite as smart as the 520, as  you can see below.

Marvin 510 movement.JPG

Marvin 510 face.JPG

  • Like 1
Posted

I love the Marvin's and the wind like no other watch that I have owned. One that is close is an old 20's Imperial winds almost as smoothly.

fantastic piece I have one that I love wearing and needs servicing.

  • Like 1

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

    • Regarding the spring winders, I made my own and used copper pipe reducers as the tubes to retain the spring. You will need to cut out a section for the end of the spring to protrude but if you watch one of the many videos on this subject that will make sense. You can find a selection of sizes on Ebay for very little cost. I'll attach a pic showing one of mine.  Good luck!
    • There were things bothering me about this discussion that took me a while to figure out the problem. In the image below it appears to be the spring may be pushing up? Normally when Omega has a spring pushing up the pinion has a pivot with a bridge to hold it in place so in other words the spring can push on something that stationary as opposed to this which appears to be floating? To understand the problem with the above image we need another image of side view which I have below. In my image down below on the left-hand side it agrees with the image up above. But the only problem is the left-hand side is defective and the right-hand side image is the way it's supposed to look. Then Omega if you can access the right documents does explain how and why this problem occurs. With the pinion floating around it might be assumed that you support it when putting on all the hands but you do not because as noted below if you do this small bush on the pinion will relocate out of position exactly what we see in the image up above.   Then Omega does not mention this but there is a possibility of also damaging the pinion and causing the bush to move to where it's not supposed to be when removing the hands.   
    • Maybe show us 1) the watch, 2) timegrapher readings in DU, DD, PU, and PD.
    • The timegrapher displays significant beat error variations in the dial-up position. When the watch is lying flat (face up), the beat error is much higher than in other positions. Beat error readings are inconsistent, with especially large gaps in the face-up position.  Please help !  
    • Looks like an open-access journal that runs as a glorified pre-print server with no true peer review, so it’s not easy to judge the veracity of the conclusions.
×
×
  • Create New...