Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I have got some with J>140 but  A~620,  One would think to cut out a pivot on it at 580 on lathe. The measurements you gave are inexact too. 

To do without lathe,  we both should do better homework.

I have set aside a number of possible candidates.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Posted

I’m now thinking of getting a lathe, I managed to get the A measurement by balancing staffs in place until I found the correct one. The other measurements I got from the existing staff. Thank you so much for looking through your collection you’ve definitely gone above and beyond. The movement is Swiss and doesn’t seem to conform to a standard size, I could potentially ask a professional to trim an existing staff to size, I would love to buy a lathe and adjust one myself but money is definitely tight during lock down I have a feeling that this project will be ongoing for some time. I suppose being patient is a good virtue for a amateur watchmaker :)

Posted (edited)
On 6/10/2020 at 2:17 PM, JohnR725 said:

I don't suppose you have a picture of the dial side showing the setting parts?

Then the website below you can enter in dimensions see if anything matches or if anything's really close because then you can just modify it. Like very first one on the list Buren (BAA) Looked relatively close. Another place to look is the bestfit book Which also has a listing of balance staffs by size.

 

https://www.balancestaffs.com/product.php?dim_A=580

Neither I nor Daniel have lathe to do the modification. he can modify J & G with a broach and I haven't come across anything suitable yet, begining to look into other options.

Edited by Nucejoe
balance staff let you enter A & B only.
  • Thanks 1
Posted

Not sure if this helps but I've been doing research and the movement is a IWC Swiss made and imported to USA not sure how it then ended up in Wales but it must have had an interesting history. :)

Posted
1 hour ago, Daniel123 said:

Not sure if this helps but I've been doing research and the movement is a IWC Swiss made and imported to USA not sure how it then ended up in Wales but it must have had an interesting history. :)

Weren't IWC movements made in-house? Did IWC source staffs from Ronda?  I think I should have found an exact matching one by now. 

Posted

ok it looks like IWC made the case and Droz & Perret made the movement, a few people are suggesting that Droz & Perret was part of Longines? the movement has St Imier on it. Ive been looking on balancestaffs.com and there are some very close matches on the Longines list.

Posted
On 6/11/2020 at 9:26 PM, Daniel123 said:

Yeah it’s a bit frustrating you can only search by A & B then you hit return. The list should show up below then it’s a case of clicking on each of them to find the best match. 

Thank you Daniel, I tried that, worked. 

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Tool for removing or pressing the bezel? Most likely you have to remove the bezel (with a knife) before removing old crystal or inserting a new one. You can press the bezel with the crystal press if you have a suitable die with straight walls or otherwise a die that has enough clearance that it doesn't touch the crystal when pressing the bezel.
    • This will be my first crystal replacement, I have a press, but looking at the watch I wonder if I might need a bezel tool also. Any and all help appreciated. 
    • I'm not entirely sure you fully understand what he's doing in the video. For one thing he's giving examples of things like about 16 minutes he talks about opening up the regulator just a little bit. Opening up the regulator slows the watch down to compensate for that he moves the regulator fast and now it's keeping time again but the regulator pins are too far apart. I have an image down below on top of it shows the effect of regulator pins and amplitude. If the regulator pins are farther apart than the example down below then at a higher amplitude timekeeping will be much worse. Why the regulator pins are supposed to be adjusted as an average rule approximately twice the thickness of the mainspring itself. In other words if you look at the spacing it have one half of the hairspring thickness on either side of the hairspring itself. There is like he talks about the video a little bit of adjustment here and there. So in his example where he opened them up it will really dramatically screw up timekeeping based on amplitude. Then when you get to the 20 some minutes like you say he is adjusting the regulator pins closer together to get a more even timekeeping based on amplitude and amplitude changes are caused by going to various positions. Then and the other example of the image down below regulator pins too far apart and they hairspring is not centered and look what that does the timekeeping. So hairspring is supposed to be centered regulator pins are supposed to properly spaced. Then you get reasonably even timekeeping like it shows in the upper image. It's not like we're regulating out positional errors like poising errors because that's something entirely different.   In the part number above and in the video both of you left off details. I which version of either of your watches I will just make you's timing specifications for your watch down below may specify how you're supposed to do it other words you wind up the watch fully wound up you wait 10 to 60 minutes in the four positions it should be within 60 seconds. Yes it can be closer but you may not actually get zero.     Now let's compare with the 2892 and see where we might have a discrepancy. First off we have a problem of which one is a using did he use the chronometer grade 1 or the top grade or what?  None is basically just much tighter timing tolerances. So when he's using an example watch conceivably might be a chronometer grade watch then things are going to be much more  perfect than what you're going to see.       NH35_TG.pdf ETA 2892-A2 Manufacturing info.pdf
    • Note the 8992 is 850 pounds for a liter. I think this is really for industrial settings like they say, where it would be used as a final bath in a 20,000 buck cleaning machine. I use the 8981.   That is excellent- I don't often get to see a serviced watch 5 years later, but when I do I expect to see pretty much the same oiling on the balance jewels as when it went out. I think at that area, being essentially sealed, it really should remain fairly pristine for likely 10 years. It's why some makers go to the trouble to use cap jewels on the escape wheel as well- not so much for friction reduction, but to keep the oil longer where it really counts.
×
×
  • Create New...