I've heard so many alleged professionals say "Oh, a watch must be serviced every year because the lubricants dry out..."

And I resist the temptation to ask them what Congestoga wagon wheel bearing grease they are still using. I'm not up to speed on horological specialty lubes, but I do know that "modern" lubricants do not oxidize. Do not dry out. Do not evaporate, migrate, or turn to pudding. Especially in the near-hermetic sealed space of a modern waterproofed watch case.

Yes, there's lots of delicate moving parts and some dust must also have been sealed in since the watchmaker wasn't running a clean room, but honestly? Lubricants that go bad every year?

Is there such a big problem with repairmen simply being too cheap to buy the good stuff? Are they trying to use bad lubes, in order to make more business? Or is this all just ignorance from bad grease monkeys?

Any particular brand or line of lubricants that is generally recognized as being top-shelf across their line?

--Red

 

This one is for Al! @Archer ..stay tuned for his answer and everyone will learn about lubricants in watch movements!

 

Hello Red,

Well your post is quite strange to be honest, and I have no idea where you are getting this information from, but as you say, you are certainly not up to speed on lubricants for watchmaking.

First off, if your watchmaker is saying your watch needs to be serviced every year, then you most certainly need to find another watchmaker!

Second, although lubricants do last more than a year for sure, you are incorrect in assuming they do not dry up, etc. Even the best modern synthetic lubricants will break down over time, and I see completely dry jewels in watches every day. Quite a few today as a matter of fact!

Many different lubricants have been used for watchmaking over the decades. Back many decades when whale oil and porpoise jaw bone oils, etc. were being used, they would break down very quickly, and combine that with a barely dust proof pocket watch case, and you did need to have your watch serviced yearly. When oils not sourced from animals came along (natural petroleum based oils) they lasted longer, but tended to gum things up quite a bit as they lubricants failed. So coupled with better casing, watches could go for much longer between services.

Modern synthetic lubricants, which most professional watchmakers I know use (there are still some who swear by the older stuff out there) last longer still, but their life is not indefinite. Each brand has it's own required lubricants, but in some cases the differences are just to be different or not use a competitor's product, and there is very little between the top tier of lubricants. Moebius is probably the biggest lubricant brand out there, and that is what many people use, including me for the most part (there are some specific things I use other brands for).

Most brands insist that your bottles of oil are no more than 2 years old when you use them, and most brands recommend a 5 year service interval. So they expect that the lubricants inside a watch will last at least 7 years. Depending on how the watch is used (or abused) these lubricants can fail earlier, or go much longer. I serviced an Omega co-axial watch (2500C) last year that was only 5 years old from brand new, and it was trashed inside and out. Many parts were completely worn out, and had to be replaced. I was actually a bit surprised at just how bad it was inside being a newer watch (QOS model).

Note that these modern oils will dry up even if the watch is not being used.

Now you speak of watchmakers being cheap in what they buy, so here's just one example. I use Moebius 9104 (HP1300) for many train wheel pivots, and this is a fully synthetic oil (replaces D5). This oil, if bought by the gallon, would cost over $24,000 per US gallon. I don't think that's cheap by anyone's standards mate.

I hope this helps dispel some myths.

Cheers, Al

 

Al, any insights of the "usage" profile on this particular watch? a daily wearer? remained w/o use frequently? When you say trashed in and out, I imagine a watch that looks hard-driven... just curious as to why the movement of a five-year watch would be in such trashed shape.

 

That's very informative. On a related topic, I've heard it discussed that an owner of a new warrantied watch should get a "free" service toward the end of the warranty period. It sounds logical as many watches are on the shelf for a year, or 2 or 3 and then have a warranty of perhaps 2-4 years.

I guess my question is if this is enough of a reason for a warranty service or do you have to be more inventive in what you tell the warranty office or the dealer when you drop the watch off.

 

You will have to pay a manufacturer for your watch to be serviced if nothing is wrong with it while under warranty. Warranties do not cover a disassembling, cleaning, and oiling of your watch just because it is close to the warranty expiring.

 

No warranty would. But if in 2016, let's say that a 2 year old Omega is not keep time within standards and a check of production records shows that your ref 3570.50 purchased in 2014 was actually produced in 2011, shouldn't a service be insisted upon by the customer. I would think this argument would work best with the selling AD.

 

Sure, you can always ask. Most high quality watches come with 3 or 4 year warranties. Most recommend 5 year service intervals. If the watch were vastly underperforming while under warranty, a service might be warranted. But, it could be a myriad of other things that the manufacturer determines and fixes without completing a cleaning and oiling that doesn't get you an extended 5 years of not having to get it serviced and oiled.

 

Thanks for your insight.

 

The warranty is from the selling date, not the production date. If your watch is out of specs then it should be repaired under warranty, if the warranty is still in effect. Once it is out of warranty, there is no obligation to repair it for free, however if it is not too far out of the warranty period, they may do something for you as a courtesy.

Cheers, Al

 

It was a daily wearer - the owner ran a woodworking company, so it wasn't a desk job for sure.

Here are some case condition photos before I refinished it:













Looking at the movement, it was pretty obvious when I opened the case it was in rough shape, as there was debris all over the place:



This is brass dust from movement wear:







You can see the underside of the barrel bridge had some damage where the steel pinion simply tore out of the brass wheel:



In addition to replacing some wheels, I had to replace the entire brigde since the post that one damaged wheel rides on fell out:



I was going to try staking it back in place, but knowing it has to be absolutely perpendicular, I didn't want this to cause problems, so replaced it.

So where was all that brass dust coming from? Well some from the automatic winding system - one wheel riding on a brass post had worn the post quite a lot:



Side view shows the extent of the wear:



Even the teeth on the co-axial wheel (the one that people say has no friction!) were worn pretty badly. The teeth on the upper wheel from the watch are quite a bit shorter than those on the new wheel that I have placed below it:



So as I've said, how the watch is worn makes a difference with regards to service intervals. There is a big difference from a watch worn 5 years by someone working at a desk job, then someone who does any sort of manual labour.

Cheers, Al

 

Thanks Al! damn! they don't make co-axial movements as they used to!

 

Wow. <Searches frantically for a DON'T LIKE button>

I used to have a sense that these little guys were hermetically sealed machines and always wondered how, outside of a shock, movement damage could even occur. New appreciation. Thanks for the great pics.

 

I'm truly shocked at the condition of that watch. To think that In this day and age Omega produce something that costs so much and can't survive every day use in a working environment.

I have been servicing a Constellation 561 movement this week that dates from 1966 and has only been serviced five time going by the inscriptions on the back. The build quality is truly magnificent and there was no perceptible signs of wear or damage. The automatic gear mechanism is true work of art and is still working perfectly.

This watch was worn every day by a friend of mine who had his own garage business. Whether working on the mechanics or washing vehicles it was always on his wrist. Yes, the 18kt gold case and strap have suffered a bit, but not the movement.

I thought that the co-axial was meant to be an improvement, but having seen the post by Al, I would rather have an old Constellation with 561 any day.

 

Go for it, I always like to see pictures, it helps with the life long learning curve.

 

Could just imagine the guys lungs if hes watch has that much dust in it !?

 

It's meant to be a waterproof watch, so I presume the rubbish inside was due to self destruction of the movement rather than the ingress of sawdust.

 

Disimpan

 

That last part is interesting as I have been working on some of these calibres. It looks to me as if not everyone has been opening up the reversing mechanism and oiling it as I have had two with a lot of wear here.

I follow this document, which as usual, is something that Al has shared (Al, if you have a better scan of that and are happy to share it, I am sure various people would be interested).

http://forums.watchuseek.com/f6/ome...er-360870.html#/forumsite/20758/topics/360870

I would have thought that this was an area where wear is common because they don't get properly oiled so, would be interested to hear thoughts from the people with experience. These are a real pain to strip in my opinion (worse on a 684 which is about 2/3 of the size) Does anyone have the original tool?

Cheers, Chris