Jump to content

Mainspring help (again)


Recommended Posts

Hi guys, been awhile I know, another question, I need a new mainspring for a nice old cylinder fob watch im working on, 

My springs dimensions are as follows, 1.29mm height x 0.16mm thick x 300 mm length, barrel diameter is 11.31mm

On cousins the closest that my untrained brain can find is 1.25 x .115 x 340 now I know these measurements are abit off from my original ones but could someone please tell me what measurements are allowable to change so you can get a spring as close as possible if an exact replacement is not available? 

I can hazard a guess that I could drop a little on height as I have done so before after a kind member here pointed me in the correct direction for a new spring once before, but before I continue to ask the same quest over and over I need to learn this stuff once and for all so I don't have to keep annoying you all.

cheers guys

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting situation. I'm no expert by any means but it looks like you should give it a shot. The replacement spring may be a touch underpowering but it's also longer, so it may work to fit it in the barrel. I figure the power difference would be low enough that you could compensate by regulating the hairspring.

The alternative is a thicker hairspring which would over power a bit which is find unless the movement knocks.

Let us know how it turns out!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing to remember a third of the barrel too be taken up by the barrel arbor a third by the spring and the other third left for space.

With many of these old pocket watches, you will never find the exact match. It is better to be a little weaker then to strong, providing it will run for 30 hours unless it is of 8 day duration.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably me that pointed you at this page last time... http://www.vintagewatchstraps.com/blogmainsprings.php

I wouldn't assume the watch has the correct spring fitted, but would work backwards from what you know... barrel diameter and arbour diameter, and use the calculator.

If you can't find a spring on Cousins, then try John at obsoletewatchandclockparts

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thickness 0,16 is much too strong, 0,115 much too weak.

Hight and length are no critical sizes, but thickness should be right. My calculator says thickness  0,135 ... 0,14  length 350 ... 360.

I will post a little program for this and other calculations soon.

Frank

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Manyy thanks guys, sorry was away with work again and haven't been online for a couple of days let alone at the bench trying to solve the mainspring problem, will hopefully be on top of this in the next few days and have one on order and soon fitted back in the movement

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Hello Wai and welcome to the forum. A little information to enlighten you a little more TZIllustratedGlossary.pdf
    • I am certainly not the first one who happen to ruin the chronograph center-wheel of a Seiko 6139B. The internet, when you search for it, is littered with stories, even here on WRT there are some. One of the problems is that the service manual of the 6139A is readily available on the net, not so with the service manual of the 6139B. On top, reading other forums & stories, there are people who claim that there is hardly any difference between the 6139A and the 6139B movement, so the 6139A service manual will suffice. However, one of the crucial differences is the design of the chronograph center-wheel. Also the Seiko reference numbers are different. For the 6139A, the reference number for the chronograph center-wheel is 888610 and for the 6139B: 888611 or 888612, depending on which manual you are reading (and perhaps there is a difference between these two wheel too !??) To lubricated the 6139A chronograph center-wheel, the following graphic picture in the 6139A service manual is given; One has to press down the sprocket and oil it. Unaware of the difference in chrono center-wheel design, I pressed down on the sprocket, but there was no movement. Perhaps not understanding or interpreting the drawing correctly, I pressed with the tweezers on the 4th wheel. This caused the 4th wheel, which turned out to be a press fit to the sprocket by the 6139B, to strip off the sprocket. Thereby me joining the line of all the others, who tried this before and are now searching for "how to fix" this misfortune. In an older thread on WRT, member @ricardopalamino place a picture in which he shows the difference in center-wheel design between the 6139A and the 6139B. To the left the 6139B and to the right the 6139A. As can be seen on the left center-wheel, the 4th wheel is pressed onto a sprocket. Pressing down on it, as shown in the 6139A service manual, gives a ruinous result. People did several attempts to repair the damage, but so far, I haven't found a success story. Here is one of the attempts; Reading what already has been tried, I tried a different approach ..... but sadly failed too. Nevertheless, I'll show what I've done; perhaps somebody may fine-tune or expand on the idea and has success? In my staking set was an anvil with a 4.5mm hole, exact the size needed to fit the chrono center-wheel "up-side-down". The distance between the clutch parts and the 4th wheel was 0.25mm. To support the 4th wheel as close as possible up to its center, I used feeler gauge blades, on one side a 0.25mm blade, and on the other side a combination of 0.15mm + 0.10mm blades. This allowed me to tap the sprocket back onto the 4th wheel ...... The thickness of 0.25 blades doesn't prevent some "spring" action, and so my 4th wheel was slightly deformed. The re-attachment seemed successful, but when trying to true the wheel, the connection failed again 😭 Currently there is a NOS 6139B chronograph center-wheel on eBay. Last Sunday the price was €150, on Monday the seller increased the price to €165 !!         Prevention is better than the cure and I do hope that anyone in the future, searching for a 6139 manual, with see my "Warning". As for my Seiko, I'm not going to invest €165 for one part and since the rest is pretty good, I will sell the for "parts or repair" 😞  
    • Off the top of my head I can't remember which was which, but one of the hands had the clutch with the very fine radial teeth as described above, the other had a flat disc with two tiny 'pins', there was what looked like the remains of something black smeared on the opposite face, maybe the remains of rotted rubber? When I can get some good pictures of both I will post
    • Hello and welcome from Leeds, England. 
    • If you read the NAWCC link 😀: it says, this cal. has a fine teeth clutch, no rubber. Frank
×
×
  • Create New...