Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

I set a brush bristle into a pinvice, its diameter is around .15

ha ha, mine used to look like a Saturday morning Tiswas Phantom Flan Flinger did it.

  • Haha 1
Posted
14 minutes ago, Waggy said:

what do you use on your pallet stones, epilame and...?

Just realised my previous reply could be misunderstood.

I epilame treat the pallet stones (not the entire fork) but I do not let it run dry before applying the Moebius 9415.

George Daniels is likely turning in his grave over the use of epilame, oiling, and the use of the Swiss lever escapement.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, VWatchie said:

Moebius 9415. Hope that answers your question.

image.png.6181e1706679a8f642cc67ac040d95b7.png

Just browsed it through and found a reference to "Working Instructions", but I would need a login for that and I guess that won't happen without being accredited. I'm super curious to know if Omega recommends the "rub of epilame method" on the pallet stones before applying the oil. Can you please check for us @JohnR725?

I was thinking that yesterday, thats one place where epilame should be, around the backside of the impulse face .

10 minutes ago, Waggy said:

ha ha, mine used to look like a Saturday morning Tiswas Phantom Flan Flinger did it.

Ahhh Sally James my dream woman when i was 15. One whole lotta woman. 😅

Posted
10 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

I dont use epilame at all just 9415, thixotropic oil that changes viscosity when its struck. Epilame and 9415 = belt and braces ?

Hmm...

The viscosity of Moebius 9010 is 150 cSt at 20 °C

The viscosity of Moebius 9415 is 110 cSt at 20 °C

So 9010, which is considered a thin oil, is thicker than 9415. Can't find any info about the viscosity at impact but that should be ever lower (thinner). In comparison, the viscosity of water is roughly 1 cSt at 20 °C.

Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, VWatchie said:

Hmm...

The viscosity of Moebius 9010 is 150 cSt at 20 °C

The viscosity of Moebius 9415 is 110 cSt at 20 °C

So 9010, which is considered a thin oil, is thicker than 9415. Can't find any info about the viscosity at impact but that should be ever lower (thinner). In comparison, the viscosity of water is roughly 1 cSt at 20 °C.

That is true H but 9415 is under the classification of a grease. Theres a lot of oils that have a high viscosity than greases which make little sense to me. But using them both the 9415 seems much thicker than 9010. Very odd, a lube discussion is on the horizon. 

3 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

That is true H but 9415 is under the classification of a grease. Theres a lot of oils that have a high viscosity than greases which make little sense to me. But using them both the 9415 seems much thicker than 9010. Very odd, a lube discussion is on the horizon. 

Might the specified viscosity rating be measured before a thickening agent is added ? Or that rating is on impact ?

Edited by Neverenoughwatches
  • Sad 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

lube discussion is on the horizon. 

Its like a black hole..... try and escape the event horizon!

  • Haha 1
Posted
5 hours ago, VWatchie said:

The viscosity of Moebius 9010 is 150 cSt at 20 °C

The viscosity of Moebius 9415 is 110 cSt at 20 °C

So 9010, which is considered a thin oil, is thicker than 9415. Can't find any info about the viscosity at impact but that should be ever lower (thinner). In comparison, the viscosity of water is roughly 1 cSt at 20 °C.

I wonder if 9415 is based on a base oil of 941?

image.png.af055c8e98e7c627397e28eca4627259.png

5 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

Might the specified viscosity rating be measured before a thickening agent is added ? Or that rating is on impact ?

it's interesting what questions bring and the tech sheet answers it's the viscosity of the base oil. Then the impact? There is something we're missing here for that which would have a big influence on all of the house

image.png.2238d6b7cc6293c946774e7d4e7b8cb8.png

image above is 9514 image below is 941.then always interesting when specifications do not exactly agree? They ledge above for 941 indicates 110 viscosity but the image off the spec sheet is slightly less but I guess close enough

image.png.305012238ff632d959739e0bc7eaa60e.png

 

my understanding of the concern of too much 9415 is as we know the loss of amplitude. But why do we have a loss of amplitude? So impact it's basically oil should be very slippery. But what about non-impact? Like the edges of the escape wheel?

Another thing that comes to play here is the shape of the escape wheel itself. Notice on the last a more vintage escape wheel with just a flat surface whereas the modern escape wheels usually made out of steel versus grass much much thinner their contact areas greatly been reduced and sometimes I think there even slightly curved. So is it conceivable at everything that isn't a flat surface on impact is going to be sticky? So this is where the shape of the escape wheel will have a big impact literally on how slippery things are.

Oh and for all of you obsessed with worrying about too much 9415 I never worry about it because typically I'm doing pocket watches and it doesn't seem to be an issue at all. on the other hand I'm much more concerned about a watch that keeps time for 24 hours as opposed to the concern of the group of keeping amplitude for 24 hours. Then yes some pocket watches have steel escape wheels and do look like the escape wheel on the right. 

image.png.9521854168dadd3f6b34e46212615f06.png

 

  • Like 2
Posted
20 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

But using them both the 9415 seems much thicker than 9010.

It needs to be stirred before use and that makes it feel a lot thinner than when in the bottle. Does it feel as thin as 9010 after stirring it? I guess not! Yes, it's strange!

20 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

Might the specified viscosity rating be measured before a thickening agent is added ? Or that rating is on impact ?

I don't know, but if it is on impact it would make sense.

  • 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.


  • Similar Content

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I have acquired a Citizen Leopard 36000 watch. My reason for purchasing it was my desire to own a timepiece with a 36,000 BPH movement, and the price was reasonable. Another motivating factor was gaining hands-on experience with the mechanism. The watch is in good condition, but I intend to fully disassemble it for maintenance. First and foremost, if anyone has prior experience with this particular model, I would greatly appreciate their insights. I do not have access to Citizen’s specialized lubricants and will need to use the ones available to me, such as 9010, 8000, and 8300 grease. Additionally, I do not possess the appropriate oil for the pallet jewels and will only be able to clean them.
    • Hello all, I am working on an older Valjoux Chrono. It doesn't have a stamp on the movement anywhere but I believe it is a Valjoux 72. I installed the train of wheels and they will not turn. The problem appears to be the 4th wheel and the escape wheel are not interfacing correctly. I had to replace both of these parts as the pivots were broken on each. I sourced genuine Valjoux/ETA replacements. I think the problem is with the escape wheel as all the wheels turn perfectly if I remove just the escape wheel.  My question to those with more Valjoux experience is am I mistaken? Is this some other model altogether and I have the wrong part or parts?    
    • I would remove the wheels, check for damage and if not damaged, clean. 
    • Thanks for the replies! Here's a photo of the front of the clock and a GIF animation of the movement (exposed by removing the black cap in the centre of the clock). You can see the behaviour of the gears. It's a fairly valuable clock from the 80s (Braun ABW 35). I'm not sure if replacing the movement would diminish the value, so I'd prefer to keep the original parts if it's easy to fix. But since the movement itself is pretty generic, I guess, maybe replacing it wouldn't make any difference with regard to the value of the clock? Or would it? I suppose the value is mostly in the design.
    • Well, my fundamental stance is that I want to go in and out without leaving any trace other than a shining, perfectly running movement. So, no scratchings on the inside of the case back lid, no marred screws, no debris, no fingerprints, and so on. That is, my goal is to make it impossible for the FBI to track me down. As a professional, I suppose you might want to keep track of returning watches, but as @JohnR725 mentioned, we can keep detailed computer records without marking the watch at all. That may not be true for every watch, but luxury and COSC-certified movements do have unique numbers. John also says it’s best to leave no sign you were ever there, and I couldn't agree more. Now, suppose the Sea-Dweller I'm working on is one day scrapped, and you want to sell the case-back separately (perhaps the case was destroyed in a plane crash). Then the scribbles on the inside no longer reflect the current movement inside the case. Also, the engraving will likely halve the market value of the case back. It had been "sleeping" for about a week and a half. Yes, the "debris/old lubricant" theory is my hypothesis as well! It will be interesting to see what I find once I have time to start disassembling the movement.
×
×
  • Create New...