Jump to content

Sundays Clock Quiz


oldhippy

Recommended Posts

I'm torn between number 3 and number 2 as the earliest but I think 3 would be the earliest of the clocks from the very small picture I can see it has half hour markers common to clocks from 1670 to 1705, the hood has barley twist pillars that where in use until 1705 and the minute chapter appears to be on the outer edge of the chapter ring so I think this clock would be 1670 to 1695.

Number 2 is of a very similar period marquetry cases where used on the most expensive cases 1675 to 1720 and only in London the dial has half hour markers so that would move the date to 1675 to 1705 it appears to have a outside minute track so that narrows the date to 1675 to 1695, but the hood pillars are of a rather plain style which I dont think would have been common for that period.

I really think now 2 and 3 are of the same date no later than 1695.

Number one is the latest of the 3 brass dials ran until 1770 moon rollers came in  1770 and ran until 1830 minute numbers at every 5 minutes 1770 to 1800 so I think this must be one of the earliest of the moon rollers and date to 1770.

These are rather inexperienced observations

As a note to anyone interested in clocks I can recommend the following books I am currently reading for dating clocks,

English Domestic Clocks by Herbert Cesinsky and Malcom R. Webster ( rich in detailed illustrations)

English House Clocks, 1600-1850 Anthony Bird ( Good section as it happens on Verge to Anchor conversions in chapter 11 )

White dial clock by B.Loomes

CARRIAGE CLOCKS - HISTORY & DEVELOPMENT by Charles Allix and Peter Bonnert

All out of print but can be bought very cheaply of ebay

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 views and only 1 reply.:pulling-hair-out:


I'm only a hobby watchmaking enthusiast so can't add anything constructive in answer to your quiz but please hold back on the hair pulling. Personally I find them very informative and educational and add to my enjoyment of this forum.

This one is of particular interest as I've just inherited the family grandfather clock which had been in the family for at least 4 generations. No idea of its age so was planning to post some pictures at some stage. Won't hijack your thread with these now but thanks for your posts and keep them coming.



Sent from my moto g(6) play using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No winner with this quiz. The correct answer is 2 C1695 3 C1730 1 C1840

Early good longcase clocks will most certainly have a glass in the door (sometimes they are called a bullseye). This was so you could see the pendulum. If you come across such a clock and you are not sure if the movement is correct, if you cannot see the pendulum it sure is a different movement. Early Longcase clocks always had narrow long doors. The latter the clock the shorter the door and it will be wide.

Thank you for taking part. Even if it were only two. Members do not be shy next time have a go.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I shall have to digest my books some more, but thanks for sharing your wealth of knowledge I know it has certainly kindled a thirst of knowledge in me, I haven't worked on a watch now for over a month but I have serviced  the following clocks in that time I shall have to post some pictures of them they include a Winterhalder 3/4 Westminster, Lenzkirch ting tang, R and C striking carriage clock, various timepiece carriage clocks, various french striking clocks and  I've an unusual German Blackforest striking clock on the way that I look forward to working on, the only problem with going from watches to clocks is the room they take up !

Many thanks for taking the time,

Wayne

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the feedback. wis1971 you should post your work. It will also be interisting for me and others. How about a before and after. It will also be interesting for me and others. How about a before and after.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


The late Victorian Longcase clocks those that were called county clocks were plain and dull and not very good full painted dials. It was also a time where many people were involved in the making. You would have the movement makers, dial makers and painters, false plate makers and cabinetmakers.    

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

    • Thank you all for the replies!  Very informative! True enough, the Gamsol took some time to evaporate and does leave a residue. So not all naphtha are created equal!  Need to find alternatives then. i was able to try Hexane recommended by Alex and it seems great.  I wonder what the cons are?
    • Yeah, I saw that in the tech sheet but I don't see how it can be adequately cleaned with the friction pinion still in place. I've accidentally pulled the arbor right out of the wheel once when I used a presto tool to try and remove it. Mark shows how he does it with the Platax tool. Those are a little too pricey for me so I got one of these from Aliexpress and I just push down on the arbor with the end of my brass tweezers. That usually gets it most of the way out and then I just grab the wheel with one hand the and the friction pinion with the other and gently rotate them until it pops off. Probably not the best way but it's seemed to work for me so far.    
    • Thanks, Jon Sounds like a plan. Obviously I'll have the face on so do you think gripping with the holder will create any problems, but I will check in the morning to see how feasible it is but I assume it only needs to be lightly held. As for holding the movement instead of the holder won't be possible in this scenario as one hand will be puling on the stem while the other pushes the spring down. That was my initial concern is how the hell can I do this with only one pair of hands. All the other times I've had to remove the stem hasn't been a problem, apart from the force required to release the stem from the setting lever, but now I need to fit the face and hands its sent me into panic mode. If it had the screw type release things would be a lot simpler but that's life 😀   Another thing I will need to consider is once the dial and hands are fitted and the movement is sitting in the case I will need to turn it over to put the case screws in. I saw a vid on Wristwatch revival where he lightly fitted the crystal and bezel so he could turn it over, is this the only option or is there another method?      
    • Hi Jon, do You think that relation spring torque - amplitude is linear? I would rather guess that the amplitude should be proportional to the square of the torque. I had once idea to check it, but still haven't.
    • I did not. I thought about it, but I had cleaned it in my ultrasonic, and the tech sheet shows lubricating it in place already assembled, so I figured discretion was the better part of valor. Although since I have to depth the jewels anyway, maybe I pull the pinion off to rule it out 100% as part of the problem. Do you know if there's a safe way to do it? I don't want to use a puller because it would push down on the plane of the wheel, and that seems like a Bad Idea. I thought about using a roller table remover, but I don't think I have a hole stake pointy enough to push it down.
×
×
  • Create New...