Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I should have know this could happen, but I went into the project with blinders.

I was almost finished putting together my Seiko 7S26-02F0. I could see it on my wrist within minutes. Then I found out how plastic parts hold up over time. I picked up the Day Date Corrector Wheel and notice one of the teeth was not level with the rest. I bring it in for a closer look... a crack from top to bottom. And as I'm looking at it, the tooth falls off completely. I picked up the tooth and it crumbled in my fingers. I found the same thing happening with the other plastic parts within the watch. Is this common for Seiko parts? I got is from someone who only got it serviced as a Seiko shop, so this kind of baffles me.

Posted

Not common, maybe it took extreme heat, or was  faulty batch. You should be happy as you're working on mov't that cost new $25 in an improved version that hacks and manually winds, everything is easy to get, imagine if it was 100 times as much and virtually impossible to find.

Posted

Hi Definitly not common but I have had it happen where teeth have broken, although I have had it happen with quartz clock movements where the plastic wheels crumble, probably old age and drying out.

Posted
9 minutes ago, jdm said:

Not common, maybe it took extreme heat, or was  faulty batch.

That is good to know. And yes, I am thankful that I need a $5 part rather than a $100 one. One of the reasons I started on a Seiko.

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • I own too many WW lathes, as well as two sherline lathes and a sherline mill with a cnc indexing rotary table. The majority of my experience is using the WW lathes to make staffs, screws, and stems. Recently, I have been experimenting making a pinion on the mill using the indexing table. It works. So, if you want to cut wheels, get the Sherline mill and indexing table...imho
    • That's strange. I re-serviced a couple of watches after about 4-5 years and there looked to be no loss of oil. These are watches I very rarely wear, and I probably over-oiled a bit back then. 
×
×
  • Create New...