Leaderboard

It's a cylinder escapement. Goggle it.

Finished up this ~1969 Longines 285 (Ref 8265-4) yesterday. Such a nice looking movement and a joy to work on.

Just a quick update. I still feel like a beginner. Slow learning but hopefully reasonably thorough. State of play. Working watches. Left to right. First two. Battery changes. Seiko 6309. Full service and parts. Sekonda 2428. Full service Sekonda 2427. Full service Sekonda 2427. Full service (my favourite) I do have many others that are work in progress Seiko's. 6119. 6309. 6319. 7009. 7S26 Citizen 8200 3 Enicar with differnet movements. St69. 2 x AR167 I watches of Switzerland Seafarer. Ross

Maybe another question you want to ask yourself is if they've cheapened out on the box have they cheapened out on anything else? In other words the prices Swiss tools keep going up and up and up does the quality of the tools go up to match? Vintage because they were meant to last forever. I would definitely go with this set versus a modern? Yes just because the Swiss are selling it doesn't mean the Swiss made it and I'd be concerned about the quality of things. I don't think just because you spend lots of money that you necessarily to get a quality tool anymore. But a lot of times for people in the group it's more about look at my impressive new set then something is necessarily functional here's a website that talks about the used one you're looking at https://kanddinverto.weebly.com/

The first place to start would be identifying the movement which conveniently you did not show us a picture of?

One trick that I've seen, was to put the train bridge on and align the screw holes. Then screw the screws in halfway and drop the bridge on top of the wheels. Now gently tap laterally the movement holder a couple of times and usually the small pivots will find their way into the proper holes. I've seen it, and I've tried it once and surprisingly it did work. Good luck.

Finished off the set with a 3D printed holder. If I had to do it over, I'd not have gotten the Bergeon #4 handle, as the cheap set has a couple of handles that may suit.

Yeah. And always check your cleaning jars and baskets carefully for small parts hiding somewhere after every use.

May I weigh in on the Chinese "Horia" tool? (My comments might apply generally to several other types of Chinese tools as well.) First, I'm struck by the amount speculation here from folks who have never actually seen or used the tool in question: the steel may not be good, fit and finish may be poor, durability and precision are suspect, etc. I suggest people considering a purchase take such comments for the unfounded speculation that they are. I have a Chinese "Horia" in hand, and I've been using it extensively over several weeks to practice installing friction jewels and adjusting end shakes. I was impressed with the general fit and finish of the tool as received but, as with many watchmaking tools it did benefit from a bit of tuning. I took a couple of hours to surface and polish each of the stumps and pushers in the set I received. I just cucked the item in my 8mm lathe and pressed a piece of emery paper (first 220, then 600, finally 1,000 grit) against the working surface using the flat face of my tailstock runner. (You could do the same on a drill press if you lack a lathe.) I disassembled the pump pushers before doing this. Then I cleaned everything in my ultrasonic, dried, lightly oiled, and put everything back together. I also took the press apart. Cleaned it and lubricated the screw and the sleeve bearing with Fomblin grease. This gave a nice silky feel to the screw advance. All this took me perhaps 3 or 4 hours. Would the Swiss tool have required similar? Used, I'm sure it would have. New? I don't know. Anyway, having completed this tune-up the tool has performed flawlessly. As to the fact the pushers are flat rather than concave I'd say, first, that in my set of 24 of pushers, about a third of them are so very small in diameter that no meaningful "convexing" seems even remotely possible. As to the rest, after dressing as described I'm confident the faces are flat, or very close to it. In any event, they have performed just fine and I've yet to break a jewel. The press has been accurate: as noted elsewhere, and as with the Swiss tool, you generally must advance the screw 1/100mm past your target depth to account for accumulated lash in the system. Now's discuss the price. I paid $160 US, delivered, for the press and a full set of 24 each, stumps and pushers. For the equivalent Swiss tool, new, US suppliers were asking about $700 for the press and $1,800 for the stumps and pushers. So I paid about 6.5% of the price of the Swiss tool. Let's get some perspective here. What's the worst that's going to happen if the Chinese model underperforms in some way? You break a $6 friction jewel? I can run that risk. Inferior steel? Well how would anyone know without actual metallurgic testing, but what result? It wears out faster? Given that I can buy 10 Chinese tools for less than the price of the Swiss one, vague speculative concern about long-term durability doesn't hold much weight. To me the question is not so much weather the Chinese tool is a good value (I assure you, it's a fabulous value) but why on earth anyone would put up with the usurious prices demanded by Swiss manufacturers. The answer used to be that there was no alternative, but now there are some. By the way, I too am left wondering if the Swiss and Chinese tools perhaps come out of the same factory in China. My understanding (possibly incorrect) is that to be labeled "Swiss Made" 60% of the value must originate in Switzerland. Given how inexpensively the Chinese can sell this tool at retail, it seems the Swiss could buy these wholesale, spend a bit of expensive Swiss labor "convexing" the largest pushers and perhaps painting and packaging the press and claim that 60% of the (ill-defined) "value" originated in Switzerland. But I suppose we'll never know . . . Someday I'll get the Chinese and Swiss models side-by-side and report further.

Always important to learn from your mistakes like always look for the inner ring before dismissing. Always remember to tighten the dial screws they don't have to be supertight but they have a habit of coming out when you're cleaning the watch depending upon how you doing it. So I think both of these for one of the first things I learned when cleaning watches. Which of course is why we all knew what the ring was instantaneously.

Ideally something you can mount on the scope just above the objective lens. Or how about just some kind of usb spot light that you can direct at the movement ? You'll get there Ross.

Yes. Done one with using my home made staking set. Would love to own a proper set. I do feel confident enough. Using my saving method it will take me 17 weeks to get enough to place an order for a cheap Chinese set. Ah well.

I love your updates Ross, you're making good progress. Do you have any immediate plans to learn some repair techniques involving staking and jewelling tools ? Many years ago now but It was my first time for having bacon eggs and honey pancakes on the same plate, i remember thinking # what the hell is this all about # You can do it Nessie, organise that space , set up the scope, lay out the tools, crack your knuckles stretch out them pinkies and off you go. Is this the single eyepiece accutron scope ?

Hello, way to go on starting watchmaking journey. I have had many crazy repair methods come acorss my bench over the years. If you can upload some photo’s, I might be able to help as best I can. The most common alterations I have witnessed are, bent regulator pins and bent banking bins. Keep a look out for these also.

Hello and welcome. Start a new thread and post some pictures of the corroded area.

You need to remove the bezel, lot's of discussions on tools and techniques on here. I'm puzzled on how you removed the movement without the dial attached. I see that you are a new member, so hello and welcome. You need to remove the bezel, lot's of discussions on tools and techniques on here. I'm puzzled on how you removed the movement without the dial attached.

Faster? On the disassemble yes. On the rebuild, a little. I'm far more careful. I look at each item removed to see if it has a problem. I look a the same item again before assembling, then check the motion of the movement at each stage. I use tweezers far more gently and pegwood to hold and re-position. Never screw tight on input, only after final check for motion. I am slower as I as trying to use my Digital Microscope at all times. Same working position, as I only use the microscope recording and for visual checks of problems. For this Chronoglide is a great help as 'Kalle' is like 'Mark' in deep explanations on what may have caused the problem in the first place. I do spend a lot of time looking at Youtube videos of teardown and assemblies. These do help. Still a lot to learn. Ross

Wooooooooooow, that's a watch I've never seen but it sure is interesting and ...can we say stuff like sexy or watch porn or centerfold here? I hope so. More pics please.

Must be the crown wheel ring. Try to see if it would fit in here.

That looks like the inner ring of the crown wheel.

Took 12 days but finally got my Timex lot. The telephone dial is in near mint condition. The case and back is in the ultrasonic and I have the correct size crystal. Bad news is not a runner and I am a novice with Timex watches. Dial indicates 027 movement from 1975. Could be original crown and the stem seems different. Fully wound but the balance seems like it wants to go...

I am assuming this uses the Rolex method of assembly (which is a good one). The crystal presses over the OD of the Rehaut, and then the bezel presses over the OD of the crystal. The later Sapphire watches have the crystal sitting on top of the rehaut with a plastic ring that engages a slot in the bottom edge of the crystal. The plastic gasket has a lip on the bottom as well, that engages a slot in the OD of the rehaut. Then the bezel (or crystal retainer on diver watches) presses over the plastic bit to smoosh it all together. Those gaskets are a one-shot deal. Always get at least two. For removal, you need to get under the bezel evenly on at least two sides (four is better). I have a tool for that, since I work on a few Rolex and Omega watches. It has two wedges on opposite sides, set at 45 degrees. They are flat on top (I did additional polishing on them to avoid scratching)and you place the watch bezel down and align the wedges between bezel and case, so the flat tops of the wedges are against the case top. As you close the "jaws" they wedge between and lift the bezel evenly. Go too far and you destroy the rehaut. Back in the dark ages I used a drywall razor blade to get it started- working around evenly. Then a caseback knife and old credit card to protect the case. It worked, but it takes 20 minutes to remove a crystal retainer (or bezel on non-diver watches). You may be inclined to try this if you don't want to buy the correct tool. Once you have it apart, you need to get careful measurements of the rehaut OD; bezel ID and plastic "gasket" thickness and be sure it'll all stack up right, and seal tight. Best bet is to measure the old crystal and find a suitable replacement. Try "Clark's watch parts" on eBay. They are good people and very helpful. Personally, I'd keep it plexi. It has a much warmer look and feel. A Tudor 125 crystal might be a good fit, but I have no idea.

Here is the watch that started it all. A Sicura "Voyageur" 17 jewel Ronda automatic.

There is quite a deep scratch between the 6 and 7 hour markers that I do not think will polish out. I have purchased some Polywatch to give it a try but I am not hopeful. Thank you! I am going to get a quote on having a watchmaker do it for me. If it is outrageously high I might give it a go myself. Thanks Joe.