My first adventures in swiss watches. My gramp's old eta 2451 probably from the late 1950's

[JohnR725]

5 hours ago, Birbdad said:

special lube for them called lubeta

if you look hard enough there's probably a special lubrication for just about everything. And attaching a PDF on page 19 a talk about lubricating the reverser wheels. If you manage to ever find the original service guide though this is not what they used as this is a modern product. So they probably will do just use some 9010 possibly.

5 hours ago, Birbdad said:

I'm assuming stems for these are still readily available cuz this was the closest to a crown match i could get and it's clearly too long. 

 usually for more modern like wristwatches common parts like stems, mainsprings and balance staffs are readily available because there are made by secondary sources.

oh? I have a link below where you can look up cross reference of parts and for we get to why taking you there there is a minor little concerned? One of the problems for the watch like this is it looks like it was probably made over time and that means there will be variations conceivably lots of them. for instance how many balance completes can you get for this watch? Or how many different staffs all with interesting differences. 

and for the stem is why brought you here you click on the stem itself as you want just the basic one you'll see that it fits a whole bunch of other watches which is good because it means that there'd be way more chance of getting a replacement it was made for more than just one which is common with these.

http://cgi.julesborel.com/cgi-bin/matcgi2?ref=ETA_2451

 

11 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

Problem is with YouTube its full of folk that don't have a clue trying to make some money by spouting bullshit

oh dear bad attitude. I remember somebody scolded not sure who but seem to think that the his YouTube gods did more for watch repair then well anybody in the universe. But it does bring up the problem of today have any idea what they're doing at all and often times none at all. Plus being a YouTube God has gone to their head.

13 hours ago, Birbdad said:

Would you guys be happy with this on a 70 year old watch?

one of the problems is you don't have timing specifications. If you compare it to a modern ETA watch your just fine. Unless of course this was a chronometer grade movement then you're not find. the other thing happens if you're really getting obsessed and think this is a Rolex watch for instance and went much better timing you should probably change the balance staff. Because after 70 years of running it should be changed. I was at a lecture where someone was commenting about the shop they ran weather service primarily Rolex watches and number one reason change a balance staff would be for timing reasons. They just don't last forever except your timing is fine so I would leave the watch alone

 

8645_WI_40_rules for lubrication cousins.pdf

[Neverenoughwatches]

35 minutes ago, JohnR725 said:

12 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

 

oh dear bad attitude. I remember somebody scolded not sure who but seem to think that the his YouTube gods did more for watch repair then well anybody in the universe. But it does bring up the problem of today have any idea what they're doing at all and often times none at all. Plus being a YouTube God has gone to their head

I'm quite sure there are more bad instructors than good youtube people.

[JohnR725]

2 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

I'm quite sure there are more bad instructors than good youtube people.

unfortunately I have to agree with you on this one there are lots of? I suppose we can break the watch repair videos into entertaining videos that are not necessarily right but we will put them a entertainment category. Very light on technical information that isn't necessarily right. But  not actually trying to teach watch repair just trying to show watch repair is fun and in their case entertaining.

then let's expand this not just YouTube I remember a particular website of amusement and conceivably books. Of people who hopefully mean well but well I'll go with your wording bad instructors and we'll just leave it at that.

 

[Birbdad]

7 hours ago, JohnR725 said:

 

one of the problems is you don't have timing specifications. If you compare it to a modern ETA watch your just fine. Unless of course this was a chronometer grade movement then you're not find. the other thing happens if you're really getting obsessed and think this is a Rolex watch for instance and went much better timing you should probably change the balance staff. Because after 70 years of running it should be changed. I was at a lecture where someone was commenting about the shop they ran weather service primarily Rolex watches and number one reason change a balance staff would be for timing reasons. They just don't last forever except your timing is fine so I would leave the watch alone

 

8645_WI_40_rules for lubrication cousins.pdf 1.28 MB · 0 download

Not sure what you mean? I included the timing results by position a couple hours from full wind that clearly shows there's a heavy deviation in only one position and a minor one in an adjacent one which to me indicates a poise issue likely. 

I guess i should have been more clear on what i'm curious about. How accurate was a base eta movement in the 1950's compared to now? I assume as manufacturing has improved things have gotten more precision. From what i've read about the 2824 if I got one in good shape it probably shouldn't leave the bench till it's got a delta of about five. This one has a pretty good delta in four positions but there's those two that throw it off. 

I basically have never worked on a watch this old and really just don't know what to expect. 

 

 

6 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

I'm quite sure there are more bad instructors than good youtube people.

This goes with basically any subject on youtube. I don't blame people for being skeptical especially since THE biggest watch repair youtuber is NOT a professional and is so incompetent he's kindof a meme with professional watchmakers online. 

The channels i actually trust on advice are people who are known quantities in the industry, they work professionally, are educated and certified and are very active in public education on the subject. Probably the only one who's work history i'm unaware of is Marks, he just seems to mostly know what he's talking about. 

Of course then us new people run into the issue where everybody does a lot of things differently and a lot of them think everybody else has no idea what they're talking about when they do something a bit differently. I've laid out pretty much step by step everything i've done. If I did anything incorrectly I hope people will chime in but for a standard service i pretty much use what appear to be standard best practices for lubrication choices and points and quantities. 

7 hours ago, JohnR725 said:

 

oh? I have a link below where you can look up cross reference of parts and for we get to why taking you there there is a minor little concerned? One of the problems for the watch like this is it looks like it was probably made over time and that means there will be variations conceivably lots of them. for instance how many balance completes can you get for this watch? Or how many different staffs all with interesting differences. 

 

Yeah, this is why with my current knowledge level and experience I'm sorta content to leave it with the 1ms beat error and poise error...for now. Eta 2451's are cheap and not uncommon on ebay so i could probably scavenge a balance wheel off one or get spare parts. What i've NEVER seen though is one like this one. Decorated, gilded and with a timing screw balance wheel. I'd feel REALLY stupid if i tried some new adjustment or repair and trashed the hairspring on a one off watch that's been in my family for 70 years. I will return to those adjustments when i'm more confident and have done those adjustments on less important watches to me. 

I appreciate the document though, saved!

 

 

Edited September 17, 2024 by Birbdad

[nevenbekriev]

@Birbdad, I guess I get what You are asking and will try to answer.

First, the results You have shown are not bad, and it is possible that the watch has left the factory like that. But nobody is able to say if it was so or not.  The timekeeping standards have not changed last 100 years. There is no matter how old You watch is, it is not old, it is rather modern and contemporary as nothing general has changed in watchmaking last 100 years.

The position errors is something that can change easy in the years. It generally changes when the watch is serviced and no mater if it before servicing has been certified chronometer or not, the certificate is not valid any more after service and new certification procedure is needed if it is needed to to prove the quality of service and adjustment. The other way position errors appear is when the watch is dropped or hit strong enough to bend balance pivots.

If You are happy with the result You show, then enjoy the watch. If not, then learn how to adjust or give it to somebody who will be able to do it better. Adjustment is possible by balance screws as well as by hairspring alignment.

[Birbdad]

16 minutes ago, nevenbekriev said:

@Birbdad, I guess I get what You are asking and will try to answer.

First, the results You have shown are not bad, and it is possible that the watch has left the factory like that. But nobody is able to say if it was so or not.  The timekeeping standards have not changed last 100 years. There is no matter how old You watch is, it is not old, it is rather modern and contemporary as nothing general has changed in watchmaking last 100 years.

The position errors is something that can change easy in the years. It generally changes when the watch is serviced and no mater if it before servicing has been certified chronometer or not, the certificate is not valid any more after service and new certification procedure is needed if it is needed to to prove the quality of service and adjustment. The other way position errors appear is when the watch is dropped or hit strong enough to bend balance pivots.

If You are happy with the result You show, then enjoy the watch. If not, then learn how to adjust or give it to somebody who will be able to do it better. Adjustment is possible by balance screws as well as by hairspring alignment.

I'm happy with it...for now. Since there's no rotatable stud i'd have to bed the hair spring to center it in the regulator pins to count out that positional error being a poise issue (Everybody else in my other spaces seems to agree it's a poise issue) and this is something i've not done yet. 

I don't feel comfortable doing either currently on a watch that i can't easily replace that's been in my family for so long. I have no real attachment to my grandfather but my mom really appreciates that i'm keeping his beloved watch going and she'd be pretty upset if i did something to it.

I"m fairly certain it's not a chronometer or even super high grade movement. I noticed most 2451's say unadjusted on them. This one does not but it definitely seems like a nicer one compared to most of the ones i see out in the wild and on ebay.

I'll probably come back to it soon and at least correct the beat error. I"ll mess with the rest at a later date when i have a bit more experience under my belt.

[JohnR725]

 

4 hours ago, Birbdad said:

I noticed most 2451's say unadjusted on them.

the reason for the unadjusted is officially on paper it's unadjusted. In real life it is adjusted to certain specifications. The reason for this is watches imported into the US were at one time subject to a tariff tax based on a variety of parameters like how expensive the watch is, number of jewels things like timing specifications. So to get around this it says unadjusted.  but of course it was adjusted.

9 hours ago, Birbdad said:

I guess i should have been more clear on what i'm curious about. How accurate was a base eta movement in the 1950's compared to now? I assume as manufacturing has improved things have gotten more precision. From what i've read about the 2824 if I got one in good shape it probably shouldn't leave the bench till it's got a delta of about five. This one has a pretty good delta in four positions but there's those two that throw it off. 

the problem with timing specifications is typically there were never scanned. Technical documentation appears to have only been scanned typically for parts. Which is why we typically do not see the servicing information. Then even harder to find is all the bonus documentation the various interesting stuff the various watch companies had. Specifications of things upgrades new tools whatever. Which also means timing specifications for the most part do not exist sort of. At one time when ETA which share the documentation you would typically have a technical communication for servicing and the manufacturing information with all the nifty movement specifications including timing.

Another way you might find timing would be as if you had access to Swatch group perhaps the various watch companies would list the various watches they had that they were using and they might list their timing specifications all in one place which would be really useful for us right now. Except I'm going to have to make a minor modification through a number as 2824 is too old we need to add a number to make it a 2824 – two. So basically were comparing to a modern watch with screwless balance. Or basically less things for watchmakers to screw up as soon as you add things like movable screws or timing they can play with their going to play with the watch. But still we get modern timing specifications

so I like that Delta five seconds I assume and six positions and your watch totally sucks with the Delta in four positions I can see why you're very concerned. Now that my amusement is out of the way let's look at timing specifications.

two separate companies conveniently I did not copy who they are. The first one only has one 2824 and the second image has more of them in the various grades. Plus minor technical amusements of how average rating is expressed. I've actually seen it expressed one other way not listed below. So in the first one it's given as zero seconds with a plus number. The second snippets is a plus and minus number. Then the third method I saw of was basically the same as the second except it wasn't zero that you're aiming for you had a target rate with a plus and minus error basically.

then testing of watches always good the test and six positions avoid surprises. But official timing specifications as you can see from the two snippets below three is the most common and I do see on the second image a couple of just two positions. Then obviously the more positions you add the harder it is to get within the specifications. Rolex typically times in five positions although that six position isn't going to change very much. Omega does do their master chronometer in six positions. But even Omega other typical wristwatches are three positions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Geotex]

Going back to your comment about the strange alignment between the pallets and the teeth of the escape wheel, did you have the cap jewel in place on the escape wheel when you noticed that during lubrication? You will have misalignment in some positions if that isn’t yet replaced. You also asked about that jewel not having the same oil sink profile as the other train wheels, which is also explained by recognizing it as a capped jewel and lubricating it accordingly. 

If you thought this was a tough train bridge to work with, don’t try an ETA 2370! That’s an earlier generation with a longer bridge that really covers things up and makes it difficult to manipulate the wheels. ETA movements seem to me to get easier to work on each successive generation up through the 2750 family, so those are nice learning movements that are usually cheaper to obtain than later generations and generally don’t lead to cursing when putting together the dial side components. 

[Birbdad]

11 hours ago, Geotex said:

Going back to your comment about the strange alignment between the pallets and the teeth of the escape wheel, did you have the cap jewel in place on the escape wheel when you noticed that during lubrication? You will have misalignment in some positions if that isn’t yet replaced. You also asked about that jewel not having the same oil sink profile as the other train wheels, which is also explained by recognizing it as a capped jewel and lubricating it accordingly. 

If you thought this was a tough train bridge to work with, don’t try an ETA 2370! That’s an earlier generation with a longer bridge that really covers things up and makes it difficult to manipulate the wheels. ETA movements seem to me to get easier to work on each successive generation up through the 2750 family, so those are nice learning movements that are usually cheaper to obtain than later generations and generally don’t lead to cursing when putting together the dial side components. 

Yeah, i'm so used to seeing cap jewels as shock settings in seikos i feel dumb i didn't lubricate it accordingly. I only realized it had to be lubricated with my auto oiler from the other side and ij ust lubricated it like the other train jewels. It's probably sufficient for the moment but i'm going to go back in and oil it correctly. I just know if i remove the bridge to oil it correctly all my other train oiling will be compromised and then i'll have to clean and redo the whole thing. 

And yeah the balance jewels were in. 

It appears to be a purposeful design as when i got a closer look at the escape wheel the actual escape wheel teeth have a facet carved into them in the bottom instead of it just being a flat wheel. The bottom surface of each tooth is pulled in a bit giving their actual contact point with the pallet fork a very narrow surface. 

It seems to just be designed to hit near the bottom of the pallet stone instead of the middle. I really can't think of any other reason they would have that alignment otherwise, especially since the thing seems to be running quite healthy.

18 hours ago, JohnR725 said:

 

the reason for the unadjusted is officially on paper it's unadjusted. In real life it is adjusted to certain specifications. The reason for this is watches imported into the US were at one time subject to a tariff tax based on a variety of parameters like how expensive the watch is, number of jewels things like timing specifications. So to get around this it says unadjusted.  but of course it was adjusted.

the problem with timing specifications is typically there were never scanned. Technical documentation appears to have only been scanned typically for parts. Which is why we typically do not see the servicing information. Then even harder to find is all the bonus documentation the various interesting stuff the various watch companies had. Specifications of things upgrades new tools whatever. Which also means timing specifications for the most part do not exist sort of. At one time when ETA which share the documentation you would typically have a technical communication for servicing and the manufacturing information with all the nifty movement specifications including timing.

Another way you might find timing would be as if you had access to Swatch group perhaps the various watch companies would list the various watches they had that they were using and they might list their timing specifications all in one place which would be really useful for us right now. Except I'm going to have to make a minor modification through a number as 2824 is too old we need to add a number to make it a 2824 – two. So basically were comparing to a modern watch with screwless balance. Or basically less things for watchmakers to screw up as soon as you add things like movable screws or timing they can play with their going to play with the watch. But still we get modern timing specifications

so I like that Delta five seconds I assume and six positions and your watch totally sucks with the Delta in four positions I can see why you're very concerned. Now that my amusement is out of the way let's look at timing specifications.

two separate companies conveniently I did not copy who they are. The first one only has one 2824 and the second image has more of them in the various grades. Plus minor technical amusements of how average rating is expressed. I've actually seen it expressed one other way not listed below. So in the first one it's given as zero seconds with a plus number. The second snippets is a plus and minus number. Then the third method I saw of was basically the same as the second except it wasn't zero that you're aiming for you had a target rate with a plus and minus error basically.

then testing of watches always good the test and six positions avoid surprises. But official timing specifications as you can see from the two snippets below three is the most common and I do see on the second image a couple of just two positions. Then obviously the more positions you add the harder it is to get within the specifications. Rolex typically times in five positions although that six position isn't going to change very much. Omega does do their master chronometer in six positions. But even Omega other typical wristwatches are three positions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah. WIthout those two positions this thing would have a 4 position delta of 8, which i'd be content with. I will definitely be returning to it to try to fix the poise issue and get the beat error down and maybe do a little hairspring work. I feel like if i did that this thing is in such good condition i could probably get a six position delta of 5 give or take. 

I know a bit about this. The main movemetns i work on are seikos cheap stuff. Since i really learned a lot about hairsprings and the etachron system I've managed to get both my last two 7s26's i worked on to have six position deltas of 6 and 5 seconds respectively which is phenomenal for those movements. 

I know it might seem silly here but when i talk about "old" watches, basically anything pre etachron is ancient to me I'ts gotta be the greatest invention in mechanical watches since the incabloc. I love working with them. 

The idea of bending the actual hairspring at the stud to center it in the regulator pins just seems like a very unrealistic level of precision with a high risk and i know that's how it's done on these old watches to correct hairspring centering but i'm terrified to try it on this watch!

I have a seiko 7006 that currently has a pretty awful delta of 30 or so that i plan to work on which will be my crash test dummy for hairspring work on a non rotatable stud. I have two NOS balances for it incase i cock it up. 

That said. Looking at those spec sheets, this is a 70 year old watch with a six position delta of 25 and a four position delta of 8. I don't think that's too bad for the moment! I will totally come back to this guy when i have done these adjustments on less important watches to me. It just sucks that the worst position is crown down which is a pretty common position to hold. 

I timed it to run a bit fast in the other positions so that hopefully the rate loss in crown down evens out a bit. So far it's keeping great time!

Edited September 18, 2024 by Birbdad

[Razz]

On 9/16/2024 at 3:55 AM, Birbdad said:

Bleh, warning. The screw that goes into that annoying setting lever goes UNDER the barrel bridge. It didn't look like there was room for it so i assumed it went on top of it, which actually worked but then i was confused why i couldn't get the stem out. I unscrewed it a little too much and lost the setting lever.

Annoying design but i do appreciate having a separate bridge for the barrel as i didn't compromise my oiling on the rest of the train like i would have with a seiko when i had to remove the bridge barrel to get to the setting lever. 

Putting together the automatic works. I got no frame of reference for lubrication so just using my head. Doing the center posts with hp1300 and a tiny dot of molykote on the areas where i can clearly see the wheels make contact with other metal parts. 

So i had no idea what to do with the reverer wheels. PUt a little hp1300 on the posts they go around. After doing a little research there's a special lube for them called lubeta, which was surprisingly cheap so i ordered some but i want to wear the thing now.

Apparently this is the lubrication point if you don't use lubeta. So i hit it with a tiny bit of 9010 and when the other stuff arrives ill clean and use that.


Now, gonna put the dial and hands on and get it back together and get it on the wrist finally!

 

Aand pretty much done. I"ll shorten the stem tomorrow. I'm assuming stems for these are still readily available cuz this was the closest to a crown match i could get and it's clearly too long. 

 

On reverser wheels there is something called lubeta that you need. Shouldn't use anything else or try to take apart! I see you knew that and you found out about the setting lever screw the hard way, you won't likely make that mistake again soon!

Edited September 19, 2024 by Razz

[Birbdad]

11 hours ago, Razz said:

On reverser wheels there is something called lubeta that you need. Shouldn't use anything else or try to take apart! I see you knew that and you found out about the setting lever screw the hard way, you won't likely make that mistake again soon!

While i'm sorta skeptical that lubeta is the ONLY solution as it seems many just use a tiny bit of 9010 on the pawls inside the wheels i am trying to stick to best practices and those parts already have a lot of wear inside i noticed. (I'm prettys ure this watch predates the existence of lubeta by many decades but don't quote me on that.). The lubeta was delivered and i'll be applying it this weekend. 

 

Also despite the 1ms beat error and poise issue the watch has only lost 8 seconds total since i got it together. Very pleased with that!

[JohnR725]

19 hours ago, Birbdad said:

While i'm sorta skeptical that lubeta is the ONLY solution as it seems many just use a tiny bit of 9010

The problem with horological literature like service documents are they occur over a large time span. Problem with watch repair and very long time spans are conceivably possibly may be perhaps something's been upgraded and changed but unfortunately technical documents do not change once their printed so we're stuck with whatever they have in the past. So the problem becomes is the new method better than the old can we still use the old and we really care at all?

So for instance this comes out of a 2600 series ETA Basically the same type wheels and notice the recommendation is a tiny bit of 9010.

Then here's a snippet out of a magazine talks about the nifty modern replacement stuff notice who invented it it was the company who made the movements.

20 hours ago, Birbdad said:

have a lot of wear inside i noticed. (I'm prettys ure this watch predates the existence of lubeta by many decades but don't quote me on that.). The lubeta was delivered and i'll be applying it this weekend. 

Yes the reason for things wearing out can be the lack of proper lubrication and or lubrication procedures. Like you didn't have the service document may be would not lubricate at all. The yes the watch predates the modern stuff by quite a few years. I'm also attaching the technical document for the  lubrication.

 

tinf_v105_en.pdf

[Birbdad]

On 9/20/2024 at 4:33 PM, JohnR725 said:

The problem with horological literature like service documents are they occur over a large time span. Problem with watch repair and very long time spans are conceivably possibly may be perhaps something's been upgraded and changed but unfortunately technical documents do not change once their printed so we're stuck with whatever they have in the past. So the problem becomes is the new method better than the old can we still use the old and we really care at all?

So for instance this comes out of a 2600 series ETA Basically the same type wheels and notice the recommendation is a tiny bit of 9010.

Then here's a snippet out of a magazine talks about the nifty modern replacement stuff notice who invented it it was the company who made the movements.

Yes the reason for things wearing out can be the lack of proper lubrication and or lubrication procedures. Like you didn't have the service document may be would not lubricate at all. The yes the watch predates the modern stuff by quite a few years. I'm also attaching the technical document for the  lubrication.

 

tinf_v105_en.pdf 440.36 kB · 1 download

One thing that cracked me up was the eta 2824 service doc i used which is a modern one and it said don't clean OR lubricate the wheels at all, don't even use them unless it's a brand new factory straight from the eta factory if they need lubricant.  That seems like a great way to sell new parts even though the old ones appear to last almost a century with probably only various degrees of competency in their lubrication.

So looking at modern reverser wheels they appear to be identical to the ancient ones in this 2451 only they have jeweled pivots (Honestly i'm not even sure how these things work and why there are jewels in them.) while the 2451 wheels have just brass and steel where the jewels are in the modern version. These things have probably been lubricated with regular old 9010 for 50 years straight and while the pawls on the inside show noticeable wear they clearly work and have held up great for that long. 

That said. I got the lubeta now. Instead of getting the v106 for ball bearings for my bellmatic i'm gonna try just making my own as others have recommended when i work on that next. Some use 9010, some use hp1300 but in another space i'm at, most of the professionals actually just make their own lubeta and it works fine.

Edited September 23, 2024 by Birbdad