[Need help] Omega constellation Deluxe calendar

When I was at Omega in NJ for training on co-axials, two of the employees there were discussing the 550-560 series movements (so even newer than the 500's) and they were saying that Omega should really stop supplying parts for these movements. This wasn't an official announcement of anything, just two of their watchmakers talking about it in general. I piped up and said that this would be a big mistake, since I service a ton of these, and their response was that they are in the business of selling new watches....

Unfortunately this is the reality we will be faced with at some point in time. Just like many parts for a Cal. 321 are no longer available from Omega, we will be in the same boat with other movements as time goes on. Omega will not support these forever....

Cheers, Al

The bushing in the oscillating weight is made of brass, and the post is made of steel - the bushing will wear faster than the post will. I see worn bushings on these often...that's why Omega originally designed the bushing as a replacement part. Sure the axle can snap off with a large shock, but that is pretty rare when compared to worn bushings.

The wall thickness has no bearing on the wear - when a certain amount of wear happens, the weight will get sloppy - doesn't matter if the wall thickness of the bushing is .1 mm or 1 mm, or 10 mm, the same amount of wear (a small amount) on the bushing will cause what you see in the photos above.

Certainly if there was a jewel in the weight then the axle would be the point of wear, but in this case and that of the 550 series, it's the bushing that wears.

Cheers, Al

Have seen the change in the supply situation over the past 2-3 years and agree with Al fully that the parts supplies from omega will only go down in the coming years and may eventually dry up completely. That's why I keep a lot of spare movements and parts for this exact reason. The cal. 321 movement is a particularly challenging one for me and I just hope I have enough parts for the coming years.

AFAIK the Calibre 601 and family are just that

The trouble is the slippery slope, I have some re-fabricated pushers in my Calibre 320 as originals are both impossible to buy and poorly made. Here's my personal take on it, we should not be reproducing vintage parts per se. We should be training more talented watchmakers.

Al Archer is almost perpetually swamped such is his reputation, Steve from here is swamped too. My favourite local guy is superb but he's in his late 60s and probably doesn't have a huge span left working with small parts. He machined those replacement pushers out of 316L stainless and did so from scratch for $120 installed, including making a 0.7mm retaining screw and re-boring its hole to replace the 0.6mm that had stripped its thread.

That's what we need, guys that can do more than follow a service manual, guys who understand the movement, where it wears, where its weaknesses are, small things that can be done to improve its service life.

Simply put, as serious as the lack of parts is going to be over time, the lack of watchmakers, and particularly young ones coming up scares me more. That's another thing Patek seems to get, they'll service any watch, and they can do that not because of their parts stockpile, but because they have the people that know how.

Not quite as easy as you make it sound...not picking on you but I see this sort of thought put out on forums occasionally, and it really isn't all that practical, so if you will allow me to expand on this idea for a few minutes...

Some parts could easily be reproduced using CNC (you don't say if he has a CNC lathe, mill, or both). Some parts would be much more difficult to reproduce using CNC machines, and some impossible (for example a balance spring).

Also, working on the scale of watches is a bit different than working on the scale of normal engines, etc. For example cutting gear teeth for train wheels - the size of the cutters needed are not what you find in gears in the transmission of a car for example. Now you can make cutters using your CNC, machinery, but still you have to know the correct tooth forms.

One other thing with say a simple train wheel - although if I buy a new one is it considered one part, it's actually an assembly of two parts. Here is an example - this photo is of the automatic winding system from a Cal. 552.



You can see 4 gears or wheels there. The two very small ones would be relatively easy to reproduce if you had the right tools, because they are one piece, made of steel, etc.

The 2 larger gears are a little bit more complicated - the one on the right, which is under the one on the left, is a typical wheel with a steel pinion and brass wheel staked to it, so 2 pieces are needed to make this wheel. This is what most train wheels look like, and they are quite simple compared to others parts, like that wheel on the left that looks "solid". That wheel is the winding wheel, or what today would be called a reversing wheel. It is a complex assembly of parts that looks simple, but really isn't.

Here is a photo of that wheel (or one like it) disassembled:



As you can see it is made of several small parts. So let's look at what it would take to make this part:

1 - You would need one as an example (one that is not worn out ideally), measurements would have to be taken and drawing with tolerances generated for each of the 7 parts in this wheel.

2 - To do the above, you need a full understanding of how the part works, and what the limitations of each part would be in terms of tolerances.

3 - You would have to identify the materials used with some degree of accuracy - this seems simple, but there are many types of steel and brass available, and choosing the wrong type could affect the function and lifespan of your reproduced part. In addition, you would have to determine if any post processing is needed such as thermal treatment - hardening of the steel parts for example, which I can tell you has been done on these pieces.

4 - Generate code for the CNC machine from your drawing/3D model, or do it the old fashioned way that I learned using G-codes.

5 - Make the part and try a trial fit, adjust from there, maybe run one in a watch for a year to see if it actually performs and holds up.

This is just for one single part of one watch....

Now try to make this reversing wheel:



Can you get the jewels from someone, or are you going to make those too? Okay this one is a modern one and readily available, so it's maybe an unfair example, but I think the point is that there is a lot more to some of these parts than meets the eye.

Even a simple part like a winding pinion has a lot going on:



It has complex teeth on the face and more teeth on the diameter. Also this thing is maybe 3 mm in diameter total. Your average machine shop is not equipped to make parts at this scale.

Or how about this chronograph runner with vertical clutch:



There is a lot going on here in this single part...

Now just before you say I'm stacking the deck with parts that are from automatic watches, here is a part from the Cal. 321 you mentioned in your post - this is the main chronograph runner that the chronograph seconds hand mounts to:







Once again it is an assembly, made up of the main post or shaft, the large wheel (when I say large it's 6 mm in diameter, and as you can maybe see has very fine teeth on it), the dart or finger that trips the minute counter, the cam, and then the screw holding the cam on, so 5 individual parts.

I know from my former life as a project engineer, and have worked with some very talented machinists, tool and die makers, EDM people, etc. over the years - even the simple parts are not something you can get done without specialized machinery.

There has been a lot of talk on some forums about 3D printing, but as you can for complex assemblies, that also has some serious limitations.

Not saying it can't be done, but the money invested to make one part would be huge, and may well exceed the value of the watch you are making it for - machine shop time is expensive.

Anyway, not to be the doom and gloom guy, but just showing the realities of doing this.

Cheers, Al

Stuff this small definitely requires some very precise machines or the work of delicate hands. I have neither lol

I'm not sure what cutting of supply you are referring to. In some markets Swatch required people to go through training to maintain their parts accounts, and if you did not, you lost your account. I'm sure there were stubborn people out there that didn't take the training, and lost their accounts.

If you are referring to the wider issue of Swatch cutting back on sales of ETA movements and some components, then I doubt it will affect the current vintage market.

Cheers, Al

Australian Watch maker's Blog

Worth a read

http://nickhacko.blogspot.com.au/2012/05/preserving-our-dignity.html

I can only speak as a collector regarding the parts situation - some parts for cal. 321 or 381 movements that I ordered 2-3 years ago were immediately filled by either ofrei.com or julesborel.com and over the past 18 months or so these same parts are now backordered and aren't filled for many months (if they are filled at all). And for some of the old movements - like a cal. 33.3 chronograph, you can forget about getting parts at all. I stock spare movements - bumpers and full rotor vintage omega movements - my motto is it's always better to have an excess of parts than not.