Jump to content

Record 1955-2 train question


Recommended Posts

I bought an old Record cal 1955-2 recently on eBay. It was described as needing a new balance, but otherwise looked in great condition for what must be nearly 50 years old.

Indeed it needed a new balance, although at first I was confused. The hairspring wasn’t located between the pins so I sorted that and put it on the timegrapher whereupon it ran beautifully... although I subsequently realised when it lost time that it was running at 18000bph instead of 19800bph. I tracked down a new balance and now it beats beautifully at 19800bph... but it still loses 5 seconds every minute.

The 1955-2 is equivalent to Longines 505 (http://www.ranfft.de/cgi-bin/bidfun-db.cgi?10&ranfft&&2uswk&Longines_505). Longines 506 and 508 in the same series run at 21600bph, so I’m assuming that someone took parts from a 506 or 508 train and put them in this watch. Question is, how do I find out which ones? The usual on line parts source directories (Cousins, Boley, Borel) don’t list the train wheels for the two so I can’t work out which ones it might be.

I have seen escape wheels for both the 19800 and 21600 calibres listed on eBay and the photos of these show identical numbers of teeth, so I guess that isn’t it, (unless one of them is wrongly listed) but I wondered if anyone knows any simple tricks for working this out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounds like the hairspring needs to be shorter. Too long and it will run slow, too short and it will run fast. This is provided that it simply isn’t running erratically because of another problem somewhere.steve


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a formula for calculating out the frequency so you have the right gear ratio for your gear train. It's found that the link below. You can at least do the calculation and see what frequency your gear train thinks it's for. Then if you're good at math you can probably figure out which wheel is at fault. Then the escape wheel for the 506 and 508 are the same. The number of teeth on the escape wheel are probably the same but the number of leaves On the pinion is probably not. 

https://books.google.com/books?id=nZ27BvJwol4C&pg=PA81&lpg=PA81&dq=Calculation+of+the+number+of+vibrations+per+hour+Watch&source=bl&ots=5qP-k1sz-I&sig=bL28H-7jfrQKM6V4-l8B88Quo7I&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiH1oGglYXeAhW0KX0KHc05BWsQ6AEwCXoECAAQAQ#v=onepage&q=Calculation of the number of vibrations per hour Watch&f=false

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks John.

This was easier than I thought when I got into it...

(72 teeth on 4th wheel x 15 on escape wheel x 2 pallets x 60 rotations of second hand per hour) / 6 leaves on escape pinion = 21600 bph

Changing the leaves or teeth on the escape wheel gives wierd answers, but substituting 66 teeth on the 4th wheel gives 19800bph. Lo and behold, looking at pictures on eBay, the correct listed part has 66 teeth. It even has 7 spokes instead of 6 to make it easier to tell apart.

So far my £45 bargain watch has cost me £40 to get a balance sent from the US (which I was kind of expecting) and now it looks like another £25 for a 4th wheel, and I still have a worn bush on the auto winder and a dodgy quick date change to sort out before I strip it down for a proper clean. Let’s hope I don’t find much else, and it’s a good job I’m not doing this (or worse still paying someone else) to make a profit!

72B64DFC-785F-434A-AD4C-2215D20B05A9.thumb.jpeg.7606c7c04aca8c436e12efa32d6b19fb.jpeg

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • hmmmm.... maybe there is a way to skin that cat 🙀 let me think on it... unless anyone else has any ideas? I left the opening in the side of the base and ring quite large to maybe allow you to grip the crown, but appreciate this may not always be possible, especially for small movements where the crown will not extend past the outer wall of the holder. I noticed this also, but after using the holder for a while I noticed that the ring/holder began to wear into shape (rough edges/bumps worn off) and the size became closer to the desired movement OD. Maybe with some trial and error we could add 0.5 mm (??) to the movement OD to allow for this initial bedding-in?
    • Hi nickelsilver, thanks for the great explanation and the links! I'll take a good look in the article.  Especially this is great news to hear! Looking through forums and youtube videos I was informed to 'fist find a case and then fit a movement for it'. But seems that's not the case for pocket watches at least?  I guess I should be looking to find some 'male square bench keys' for now. I was thinking of winding the mainspring using a screwdriver directly, but I found a thread that you've replied on, saying that it could damage the spring. 
    • Murks, The rate and amplitude look OK, and the amplitude should improve once the oils you have used get a chance to move bed-in, also I notice that you are using default 52 degrees for the lift angle, if you get the real lift angle (assuming it's not actually 52) this will change your amplitude - maybe higher, maybe lower. I notice that the beat error is a little high, but not crazy high. At the risk of upsetting the purists, if the balance has an adjustment arm I would go ahead and try and get this <0.3 ms, but if it does not have an adjustable arm then I would probably leave well alone. Just my opinion.
    • Hi everyone on my timegrapher it showing this do a make anymore adjustment someone let me know ?    
    • Maybe I'm over simplifying this and I'm a little late to the discussion, but just by my looking at oil when I use it on a treated cap jewel  the oil stays in one nice bubble, but when I don't it spreads out to the edges of the jewel. I'm not sure (but could well be wrong) but the analogy of a waxed car and rain is accurate in this case, the wax is very hydrophobic and repels the water, however, the process epilame works by is a different physical process based upon cohesion/adhesion (oleophilic) not repulsion (oleophobic)  at least as far as I have read/observed. If one were to use a oleophobic substance equivalent to wax (hydrophobic) then one would need to create a donut shape to fence in the oil, however if one used such a strategy with a epilame which is oleophilic then the oil would sit on the ring of the donut and not in the 'donut hole', exactly where you don't want it. Even if the oil is smeared then the oleophilic epilame should pull it back to the center (see diagram below). Reference For interest the chemical in epilame is 2-(PERFLUOROHEXYL) ETHYL METHACRYLATE, CAS NO: 2144-53-8
×
×
  • Create New...