Jump to content

Pre bond omega seamaster 200


Recommended Posts

Hi guys, I know I’ve asked this in a previous thread but that thread got into different subjects etc and I think one of questions was lost, my question is this, I’ve the part numbers etc for the rubber flat caseback gasket and the crown gasket, but I’m unsure about the flat white silicone/plastic gasket that was sitting in the case, I’ve attached a photo for you to see the item in question. If some one could possibly help me with the part number for this I would be very greatful, my basket at cousins is filling up and I don’t want to order the incorrect partsCABEAA43-78_A3-43_E3-_B836-2588_B0_F2_A3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you saying that maybe for arguments sake the last time it was serviced the caseback gasket wasn't changed so when the two part case back was screwed back on there was too much slack due to the old gasket having been compressed?

Or is this a part/trick that is known by smiths that they use to solve a problem? 

Bottom line is then that this is not a part fitted by omega on the old omega seamaster quartz 200m models?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My other hobby is toy steam engines, and I used to make gaskets for them using teflon sheet, I used to punch them out to size using leather punches. I never made one as big as would be used in a watch, but with a bit of thought and a hand made punch it should be possible.

You can buy teflon sheet in different thicknesses off ebay.

Here is one 0.3mm thick

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Teflon-PTFE-Film-Sheet-Virgin-High-Strength-Temperature-500x250x0-3MM-White/192312942296?hash=item2cc6be9ed8:g:Of8AAOSwQm9Zw9bU

Or 0.5mm

https://www.ebay.com/itm/White-Teflon-PTFE-Film-Sheet-Virgin-High-Strength-Temperature-500-250-0-5MM/282743496698?hash=item41d4d35ffa:g:cYAAAOSw~RVaFS6Y

Obviously easier if you can get the original part, but its another option

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, transporter said:

Here’s a couple of pictures showing parts for the case with part numbers. Could anyone let me know what the one with the handwriting is for, is it the “Teflon” one? 

On cousins site it also lists a hard plastic gasket, so getting abit confused now folks

image.jpgimage.jpg

Looks like that is the one. 0,1 mm thick and 25 x 29,5 mm in diameter. If you could find a sheet i think you can make it. I read that it is obsolete at Omega to. The change the case and caseback if you send it to them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  •  
10 minutes ago, transporter said:

Cousins have it in stock and it’s in my basket but you did say that it might be used as a case tightening gasket? Would it be wise for me to order it and fit the normal case seal and see if the case is watertight 

I saw that . But cousinsuk says it's a rubber gasket? I would probably check with cousisnuk first . Before i order it. To make sure it's the correct gasket. If it is and you want to be 100% sure it's watertight go for it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes its confusing isn't it ive listed the omega part numbers then the cousins ones 

OMEGA                                                                                                            COUSINS

088NS0416 seal O ring                                                            Product code X13098 Pendant tube gasket Omega 088.0416

D 1.5   D 2.3   ○0.4                                                                                   No measurements given

088NB1142 Flat seal                                                                 Product code X13211 Back gasket, rubber Omega 088.1142

D 25  D29.5  TH 0.1                                                                                 No measurements given

088NS0824 Seal O ring                                                             Product code X13129 Back gasket rubber 088.0824

D 28  D 29.6  °0.4                                                                                     No measurements given

So a slight quandary here, the flat seal seems to be the same measurement as the Teflon one that I have but Cousins say it's Back gasket rubber seal?? So I guess I'll be calling cousins tomorrow before I order as these three alone are £33 less P&P

I did find one other selected that came up when I put the case number in the cousins search and it's this one,

Gasket hard plastic, Omega 098.21424  Product code X13310, I can't find and part number similar to this on the attached photo with the part numbers on my previous post, I don't know if this one might be the little white Teflon one.

So anyone with any ideas before I give them a call?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Similar Content

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • 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 
    • Hi.  I would like to take issue here regarding battery driven , watches, clocks,etc. I will and do repair these clocks in fact I have sever al in my collection as well as the regular mechanical ones. I have one on my mantle piece over 60 years old tha belonged to my wife’s Aunt,  long gone Iam afraid and it has been cleaned etc and never missed a beat and is accurate. Every one has their preduices as regards Electrical /electronic Horology but I regard it as part of the progress time line of the art of Horology and to be treated as such. Like Darwin’s theory of evolution it evolved.  Two cavemen knocking rocks together and a shard broke off , looking at it he worked out if it was stuck on the end of a stick he would have a spear. Likewise his pal seeing what he was up to picked up a piece  and did the same, now that’s evolution. Some clockmaker decided to build a clock that ran with a battery and no spring to wind up and break, progress and both the mechanical and battery driven clocks evolved, the battery ones got better to the point that if it broke you changed the complete unit. Likewise watches did the same but both can be repaired by people who approach Horology with an open mind without preduice.  We all have our likes and dislikes bu I for one would never dismiss any technology because I don’t like it.   The mobile phone is a good example of modern technology at work as is the automotive industry. There buttons and switches in my car I don’t use because to me they are not nesessary but I still drive the car.
    • I haven't gone through all the reading of what it might be or not. The first thing I would do if nothing obvious stands out is replace the mainspring, you have to start at the source of the power. Nine times out of ten that is the problem.  
×
×
  • Create New...