Jump to content

1989 Elgin Grade 110 S0--Pallet fork catching?


Recommended Posts

 

IMG_20171007_141533.thumb.jpg.a8619371caba3a60556d92470c47b4de.jpg

The watch winds, and I've verified that there are no blockages in the gear train (torque is getting to the escape wheel when the watch is wound). The hairspring and balance all seem ok, but the balance/escape wheel interaction doesn't seem correct and the watch does not tick. Watch is dry.

IMG_20171007_141805.thumb.jpg.1da444a22709e008430600094d6bb1e5.jpg

Initially on inspection I noticed that the escape wheel jewel was badly cracked, and thought that this was the reason the escape wheel wasn't operating properly. I obtained an identical movement from the same period with unbroken jewels and swapped the escape wheel bridge, but the escape wheel was still getting stuck.

IMG_20171007_141614.thumb.jpg.d91166bfe756b685e3c2f7355af97949.jpgIMG_20171007_150226.thumb.jpg.1a39477f1c07aa99af2981fb791c4abc.jpg

On further inspection I noticed that the escape wheel appears to be catching on the pallet fork in between the pallet jewels, as if the escape wheel and pallet fork axles are too close.

Possible causes:

  • Lack of oil. Possible--the watch is dry--but this doesn't seem like a normal contact point that would require oil. Could be wrong.
  • Broken escape wheel jewel is causing the escape wheel to sit too close to the pallet. This seems a little unlikely, since swapping the escape wheel bridge showed exactly the same issue. This could be a bad test, since the escape wheel bridge from a different unit may itself be slightly different.
  • The escape wheel and/or pallet fork have been replaced in the past, and weren't properly fitted. This seems possible, but why would a watchmaker perform the swap and return a non-functioning watch?
  • The tolerance was already marginal at the time of manufacture, and over time wear + oxide layer growth have caused the parts to begin rubbing. Possible, but I have no sense of what the oxidation properties are for these materials or if this is a common problem.

Other clues:

  • It looks like the pallet fork guard pins are set too wide. Either I've misunderstood how these are supposed to be set, or whoever was in here last set them incorrectly, possibly for debugging.

Is the escape wheel supposed to make contact with the pallet fork near the pivot like that? Any comments or suggestions for things to try would be welcome--I don't have a formal background in watch repair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, clockboy said:

Anyway I have attached a web link that has animations of how the escapement should work. 

No link. I'm not linking one because I'm confident the OP knows how the escapement works. Surely, pallet depth is very difficult to diagnose and fix for a beginner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are we confident that is the correct escape wheel in the movement?

I've got 'ebay bargains' before that were Frankenstein watches made up from parts of more than one watch that had no chance of ever been able to make work.

 

Possible the watch has already been through the hands of someone else who didn't know what they were doing, or worse an unscrupulous seller putting together msitmatched parts to make the watch look complete.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me it is not clear if the escape wheel spinning if You wind the watch a bit without pallet fork?

Without the pallet fork bridge installed the upper pivot is not upright, so it is possible that the escape wheel engaging the fork in the middle.  Are You sure that it is sticking there if the pallet fork bridge is installed as well?

It should work properly even without oil.

Basically, You could file down a tiny bit from the pallet fork. The question is which part is the franken one? The wheel or the fork? 

What if You try the fork or wheel from the donor movement? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, clockboy said:

have you adjusted the guard pins.

I have not adjusted the guard pins since receiving it, but I also don't know who adjusted them last or why.

5 hours ago, Tmuir said:

Are we confident that is the correct escape wheel in the movement?

I've got 'ebay bargains' before that were Frankenstein watches made up from parts of more than one watch that had no chance of ever been able to make work.

 

Possible the watch has already been through the hands of someone else who didn't know what they were doing, or worse an unscrupulous seller putting together msitmatched parts to make the watch look complete.

While I can't know for sure if the escape wheel is original, comparing it side-by-side with the donor I don't see any differences that would lead me to believe the escape wheel is from a different movement.

Original on the left, donor on the right:

IMG_20171008_090516.thumb.jpg.77e12dcb45e797f595a03e89e71bb349.jpg

IMG_20171008_090845.thumb.jpg.a9a970b3a2dead9c493f42edc54cb7ef.jpg

IMG_20171008_090644.thumb.jpg.acc225c31b9d6a305aec573e3f9e2e96.jpg

5 hours ago, szbalogh said:

For me it is not clear if the escape wheel spinning if You wind the watch a bit without pallet fork?

Without the pallet fork bridge installed the upper pivot is not upright, so it is possible that the escape wheel engaging the fork in the middle.  Are You sure that it is sticking there if the pallet fork bridge is installed as well?

It should work properly even without oil.

Basically, You could file down a tiny bit from the pallet fork. The question is which part is the franken one? The wheel or the fork? 

What if You try the fork or wheel from the donor movement? 

The escape wheel spins freely if I remove the pallet fork and apply a light winding torque. Thanks for the suggestion! This is a cool test I'd not thought of. 

I tried swapping the escape wheel with the donor movement, but I see the same issue--appears to contact the fork in the middle.

I also tried swapping the forks, with the same result. I have not tried swapping them both.

The escape wheel definitely seems to be engaging the middle of the pallet fork, even when the pallet fork bridge is installed. If I wait for the escape wheel to catch--with neither of the pallet jewels touching the escape wheel--and I move the pallet fork a bit, I can see it backdriving the escape wheel, so I know it's making contact somewhere. Through the pallet fork bridge jewel I can see an arm of the escape wheel that definitely looks like it's making contact with the middle of the pallet fork, so I'm pretty certain this is what's happening. 

image.png.422a0c3e6ec2b5df52fa5212ef7804d4.png

When I removed the escape wheel I noticed a set of witness marks around the lower pivot hole that are not present in the donor:

IMG_20171008_093109.thumb.jpg.0915e93fe82a7b06a449d3dc2e4eb981.jpg

There are actually two sets: a bunch of very clear inner circular marks, and one or two light outer circular marks, maybe twice the diameter of the inner ones. Looks like maybe someone took a punch or staking tool to press down material that was binding? I really don't know, but the donor definitely does not have these marks, so someone had to futz with this one at some point in the past for some reason.

Filing down the middle of the pallet for seems like it would work, but I wanted to exhaust all other less-intrusive options first (which, I am admittedly running out of). What tools and setup would I use to do this? Is there a video somewhere showing this sort of operation?

Only other thing I can think of would be to adjust the guard pins, but I don't see how that would help....though I admit I'm not super clear on their purpose.

Big thanks to everyone for their quick feedback and suggestions--I've been fumbling through this in a vacuum for a while so it's great to have knowledgeable help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some thoughts...

Try examining the interaction between the pallet fork and the escape wheel of the donor watch in situ in the donor watch. If all is well then transfer both the wheel and the fork to your own watch. If the problem reappears then try your own wheel and fork in the donor watch and see what happens. If the problem goes away then it is likely that neither the wheel or the fork is at fault and the issue lies in the main plate  and/or the cock.

It looks like the pivot hole in the main plate is not jewelled. Is it possible that the witness marks you can see are due to a worn bearing that has been rebushed? In which case is the height of the bush correct? If it is too low then is it possible to raise the bush slightly using a jewelling press so that the fork clears the escape wheel teeth without compromising the relationship between the pallet jewels and the escape wheel teeth? Also check what this would do to end shake.

It may also be worth comparing the original cock with the cock from the donor to see if there has been any modification to account for excessive end shake following a rebushing of the main plate pivot hole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, woodshop said:

When I removed the escape wheel I noticed a set of witness marks around the lower pivot hole that are not present in the donor:

IMG_20171008_093109.thumb.jpg.0915e93fe82a7b06a449d3dc2e4eb981.jpg

 

So this is the problem. The hole in the mainplate is not where it should be. It is shifted towards the pallet fork and from the second wheel. The problem here is not just stated in the OP, but the ascape wheel is not upright and the gear teeth are also far, maybe just engaging. 

The solution is not that easy. You have to measure the proper hole distance from the pallet fork AND from the second wheel WITH a depthing tool. After that mount the mainplate on the lathe and drill a new hole. You can add a jewel or bushing thereafter. 

Or just use the donor mainplate ;)

 

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

That will be a very difficult fix indeed.The only fix I can think of is to drill out the plate and fit brass bushing in its place. However the positioning of the bushing will be difficult. Personally I would just put it in my scrappers draw and move on to the next project.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are many punch marks around that lower pivot hole so it is hard to see if the hole is out of position, slthough that feels like a good line of investigation?

Does the escape wheel sit upright in the movement? The upper pivot hole is jewelled and the jewel appears concentric with the recess in the bridge, so this should be a good guide. If the lower hole is offest and you don’t have a depthing tool, you may be able to plug it and re-establish the hole position in a pillar drill or on a lathe if you can clamp the mainplate in position, centre on the jewel, then remove the bridge without moving the mainplate before drilling through.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Yes I have that in my watch list a JUF if cheap enough I will have a go , if nothing else it will be good for spares, I have a few JUF’s
    • Less give a damn- more **BLEEP** it! …nice that it is keeping time I’ve done a couple of these (one with your assistance) and there’s a third that needs work on the tension between what drives the hands and the barrel. Did you have any issue with that? …and I saw Ranfft make a small comment in a thread re: pin pallets- a couple drops of Tillwich blu, let it run down the pins. It is good for 20 degrees of amplitude… I’m using this oil as a cheat code on my unmotivated Venus chrono…
    • This is a very sad day for the industry.. For most of us being amateurs the cost of replacing parts for ETA,s etc will be beyond affordability for the customers.   see full statement below   We have now received the decision from Judge Michael Green on whether or not the High Court has jurisdiction to hear our claim against Swatch, and sadly it is not the decision we had hoped for.   As we have pointed out in previous news items (see below),the rules that Judge Green had to apply strictly prevented him from examining in any way how the Swiss Court arrived at its verdict, even if it is blatantly obvious that the verdict is wrong.   As Swatch’s lawyer was summing up in the last few minutes oft he hearing, the Judge twice pinned him asking if it was alright if, as a result of the Swiss verdict, consumers had to pay 50% more for their watch repairs. After some stumbling, their lawyer’s reply was “Yes”, so  I am quite sure that Judge Green left his court fully aware that the Swiss verdict does not reflect the norms of British Competition Law. However, the rules simply do not allow him to take that simple fact into account.   Judge Green noted that our two arguments relating firstly to British Competition Law now being different from that of the EU, and secondly to the contention that the legality of the Authorised Service Networks has not been tested, had both been mentioned in the Swiss verdict. Because they had been mentioned, he felt that to allow us to argue them again would constitute re examining the Swiss case, and could not be allowed.   As to our claim that we were denied our right to be heard because our evidence was not considered, our lawyers had argued that the evidence we provided could not have been looked at because had the Swiss Court done so, it could not have reached the conclusion that it did. In his verdict, Judge Green highlighted general statements in the Swiss verdict that evidence had been looked at, and acknowledged the arguments we made to him, but again he considered that this was re-examining the Swiss verdict, and could not be permitted.   Our case has attracted considerable interest within the Legal community, and within minutes of the decision being made public we were approached for comment by one of the largest subscription news services, Global Competition Review. They asked us two very pertinent questions, and I reproduce them for you below along with our responses, as they neatly summarise the consequences arising from our case.   What are the key takeaways?   Enormous damage has been done to the fundamentals of UK and European Competition Law by the Swiss courts. It has always been the case that the effect on consumers and competition has to be considered in any decision making, but we now have a ruling that states even monopolists can remove wholesale markets from the supply chain without any consumer benefit based justification. Those entities looking to subvert Competition Law and exploit consumers for their own benefit will be looking at this very carefully.   Has the court made the wrong decision? If so, will you appeal?   The issue lies not with the High Court, but rather with cross border jurisdiction treaties that have no requirement in them for foreign jurisdictions applying UK law to take account of the Ratio Legis [a legal term for the fundamental reasoning why the law was written] of that law, and have no remedy within them for UK Courts to overcome decisions that clearly do not.    After eight years of work, and a very considerable sum in legal costs, I can not begin to tell you how disappointed I am at this outcome. For the time being, there is no further route through the British Courts that Cousins can follow. However, I promised that we would fight to the end, and that promise stands.   The UK is no longer part of the Lugano Convention, whose rules Judge Green has applied, and as yet nothing permanent has replaced it. The political tide turned against repair prevention by restricting supply of spare parts some time ago, and our efforts on behalf of the Watch Repair industry have resulted in high level contacts within several Government Departments. You can be sure that we will keep working to overcome this unjust situation that we now all find ourselves in.    I will keep you advised.   Kind regards   Anthony
    • Dell fancy a challenge🤣   https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/285785684626?itmmeta=01HT29WVJY21Q94C73GYHGBTFX&hash=item428a277a92:g:15YAAOSwNRVmBAUz&itmprp=enc%3AAQAJAAAA0DIe4QLQBW66rSyIMiyBuk8GY%2B86pQ%2BQnxGbcNq7egAGe5DIs9YMmiWJIbZtMSxwNJIiJxuojbq523IeUSBQ6pJEIQ0tfz2ChrBR03BksmKINyklg1IK4GAfAcYY9Hta9wVeSZSZN7ZCNAfZTgKs9c4%2BUIUZ3Qjc3QjUXDn2uPRo1FiYOEewMG5A26EXb%2BclBgrqtbOmM6P3bea%2F8ZImOAXNI1HtbmtMk84pIGoM6ISwaM1PKFuADtTFMccS5e3ZjndCbXYXHrW3CecsV0edw3M%3D|tkp%3ABk9SR8q588nQYw Darwin’s theory of evolution has not been proven to be absolutely.  😀 
    • A already know the size movement I have the problem is the dial a had purchased has a dimension 20.6mm wide a want to find a watch case that going to fit the dial perfectly 
×
×
  • Create New...