Hi everybody,

I have received good advices (thanks to Archer and Chris!) lately and wanted to show some amateur watchmaking.

https://omegaforums.net/threads/watchmaking-with-the-bhi.39076/page-3

I am trying to improve, but just for fun and for my personal enlightenment. I am looking forward for having your advices, criticisms and comments! Since I have a timegrapher, I do no longer have any wathmaking ego, so you can be harsh!

I have to post some pictures of hairsprings I corrected, but I will do that later - I am not satisfied with my current pictures and will try to do better ones. For the moment, I would like to show the results (with the watches of course!) of three services I did the past few month. Interestingly, the calibers are almost the same (30 series), the "watchmaker" is the same (even if he is sometimes worse - when he play around with watches by night after diner and some wine...), but the results are very different!

Al gave us a fex days ago the specs for the 30 cal. I quote:

"Omega specs for the 30T2 family are generous, reflecting the likely worn out condition and lack of parts availability.

Lift angle 49 degrees, 3 test positions, minimum amplitude 24 hours after full wind is 190, max beat error is 0.8 ms.

Delta allowed at full wind is 40 seconds, and at 24 hours after full wind is 50 seconds. Average rate range is between -1 and +16 seconds per day, with the target rate being +8.

Now having said all that, I finished one very recently where I had to polish a few pivots as new parts were not available, and with some work was able to get the Delta down to about 16 seconds over 6 positions at full wind. Company specs are good to shoot for, but I am typically not very satisfied with them personally, in particular when they are as large as these are. But again it can reflect the realities of the parts you are dealing with..."

I would like to compare my results with these specs and try to understand how to improve them if possible. I will only give the 0h resultats for now - and the 24h results later in another post.


1) 283
First, I will start with a 283, with a very nice 18K French case (large amount of gold, good condition). Service history unknown, but the movement looked pretty good as well when I bought the watch 6 month ago.

"Voici la bête":












I serviced the movement (with a new mainspring) about 6 months ago, but at that time I did not have a timegrapher. When I bought one a few months ago, I saw some issues. I had to adjust the beat error and to tried to reduce the delta between the positions. I adjusted the hairspring (but it was not bad at the first place) but no poising for this one.

Here is what I currently have:

Dial up: rate - 14 amplitude 279 beat error 0.1
Dial down: -5 269 0
12 up: 16 239 0.2
3 up: 4 236 0.4
6 up: 2 239 0.1
9 up : 12 224 0

So it gives a delta of 30 seconds over 6 positions. If I consider only 3 positions as Omega asks, I have delta of 26 secs (DU, 3U and 9U). So it's within the specs. The beat error looks good as well - to my amateur eyes at least! The amplitude may be a little low and I may have some trouble at full wind + 24 (will tell you tomorow!).

But looking at the 6 positions variations, I am a bit worried by two points. First, I would like to reduce the difference between the horizontal and vertical positions. With a flat hairspring, I could have increased the gap between the pins, but it is not advisable with a Breguet hairspring - at least according to Jendritski. Actually, I tried! But not with good results...

Second, I have a difference between DU and DD that I would prefer to be less important. It is a problem I have in several movements!

How could I do to solve these two issues?


2) 267

Now a Swiss case. It is a "Tresor", so solid gold, ref. 2685. Everything looks original to me - except the glass. I like the way it looks, but I have a the inverse of the usual issue with "size" : it is too big! The case is a bit too large for me (35,5) as I am not a "jumbo" guy and prefer 30-35 cm cases...

I serviced this watch about 3 months ago - I have been very carefull with the radium... Service history unknown, but again the movement looked good.











I did not change the mainspring for this one because it looked still good (but of course I removed, cleaned and oiled the old one). After the service, the timegrapher showed an issue: I had correct rates over 6 positions, but a very low amplitude for DD (about 200 at full wind!). So I had to think what could be the causes. First, I tried a tip I read elsewhere for other purposes (the aim was to increase the accuracy of a watch): removing the balance, cleaning the pivots and the "cheminées" of the incablocs. I did it and my problem was solved (partially)! I had probably over oiled the balance cap jewel of the dial side.

I also adjusted the hairspring (but it was not bad) and the beat error (which were pretty huge!). Here are where I am now:

DU: 0 rate 273 amplitude 0.3 beat error
DD: 11 251 0.3
12U: 7 223 0.6
3h: -4 210 0.6
6h: -14 224 0.2
9h: 11 224 0.3

So a delta of 25 over 6 positions, which I am very happy with (I am far from having that with all the vintages I service!), and 11 over 3 positions. But again some issues!

First, I still have a difference between DU and DD. I guess my tip is not enough and I will have to clean and oil again the balance jewels dial side. I would have already done that if the dial and the hands were not full of radium (I do not like to work on that!). Maybe later...

Second, I have a rather low amplitude. So I guess I will eventually change the mainspring!


3) 30T2SC
Last, a strange watch I like a lot even if it is clearly not a collectioner grail (well, there have been many grails lately here, so not so bad after all!). Too big for my wrist again (36 cm), but for once I am OK with that.

As far as I know, the watch used to have a solid gold band (which I do not have) and have been first bought in 1952 at the frontier between France and Switzerland. A bad redial for sure (the omega and the fab suisse are not aligned!) but I like the lugs and it was not expansive... I am still trying to find a proper vintage dial, but it is not easy.











I serviced this watch 6 months ago, but I still have several issues! Obviously the movement is worn. I only changed the mainspring and the hairspring, but other parts may probably actually need replacing. And I will certainly have to give it a full service again. When I saw the poor results, I tried some adjustments and poised the balance, but it was just slightly better. I got a better delta over 6 positions (actually a less bad one), but the beat error increased (I will have to adjust that again) and the amplitude did not!

Here where I am:

DU: 12 rate 235 amplitude 0.6 beat error
DD: 27 232 0.7
12U: - 18 191 1.1
3U: - 11 204 1.1
6U: - 12 196 0.9
9U: - 4 186 0.8

So it is not so good! The amplitude is really low and it will never be withing the specs after 24h (actually it is already below the 190 limit at full wind!). The delta is rather big, even over 3 positions. Actually, it is withing the Omega specs (40) but as Al explaned, it is rather generous. And I have again this difference between DU and DD... Chris gave me tips about that issue and I will try that.

I will have to poise again the balance. As it is a compensate balance, I was afraid to damage the arms and probably stopped the poising before having something really good. I have since then seen technics to poise those balance in Jendritski book about regulation, and will try.

Well, that's it for now!

Regards,
François

 

Hello,

Here are the results for the full wind + 24h. I add again the results for the 0h - it will be easier to read the whole tests.

Omega 283

0h Rate amplitude beat error +24 R A BE
DU: - 14 279 0.1 13 248 0.3
DD: -5 269 0 18 240 0.1
12 up: 16 239 0.2 27 207 0.2
3 up: 4 236 0.4 17 209 0.4
6 up: 2 239 0.1 3 205 0.3
9 up: 12 224 0 -3 207 0.4

Delta 6 pos: 30 D 3 pos: 24 Delta 6 pos: 41 D 3 pos: 30


So this watch is within the specs. As far as I can tell, the results look rather good. But maybe I could reduce the delta over 6 positions.
I notice that the watch gains some sec when not fully winded. In my record, it happens rather often with a Breguet hairspring. It would more strange for a flat hairspring as the rate is lower when the amplitude is lower (because of the escapement).Though there are solutions to that (proper inner curve, proper "point d'attache à la virole", etc.).


Omega 267

0h Rate amplitude beat error +24 R A BE
DU: 0 251 0.3 16 240 0.4
DD: 7 223 0.6 18 223 0.4
12 up: 7 223 0.6 18 206 0.6
3 up: -4 210 0.6 4 196 0.8
6 up: -14 224 0.2 8 200 0.3
9 up: 11 224 0.3 -3 207 0.4

Delta 6 pos: 25 D 3 pos: 15 Delta 6 pos: 20 D 3 pos : 12

(EDIT: my tables are hard to read with the forum layout, so I add a picture below)

Within the specs again! It is close concerning the amplitude at full wind +24h, so I may change the mainspring at some point. The delta over 6 or 3 positions is better at +24, which I did not expect.

As I do no longer have an important difference between DU and DD (at +24), I have been wondering if it was still the case at full wind. Well, it is no longer the case as well! I think it is because I tried again, yesterday just before I took the mesures, the tip I have talked about above (cleaning the pivot and the "cheminées" of the incaboc dial side). I think it needed some time to show it full effect on the timegrapher.

So I have happy with that one too. But I may have to correct the beat error (it is just below the limit). And I will regulate the watch because like the 283 it gains some time when not at full wind.



30T2SC

0h Rate amplitude beat error +24 R A BE
DU: 12 235 0.6 10 206 0.7
DD: 27 232 0.7 -16 197 0.9
12up: -18 191 1.1 -42 165 1.5
3 up: -11 204 1.1 -13 170 1.3
6 up: -12 196 0.9 -50 165 1
9 up: -4 186 0.8 -32 166 0.9

Delta 6 pos: 45 D 3 pos: 23 Delta 6 pos: 60 (!) D 3 pos : 42

So not within the specs and not good at all! It was to be excpeted: I have to find why there is such a low amplitude and service the watch again. Maybe some jewels has still dirt of some worn pivot, etc.

François

 

Hi François

There's a lot of data here and I'd think it best to concentrate on one of these only. You do seem to be doing a lot of static poising which is unusual and you've not chosen the easiest, or likely best condition movements as they're all pretty old. I'll try to give you some feedback.

The 283 looks to be running best so, what about that one? Firstly, the movement looks clean in your photos. As this has a two piece regulator, I always try and time them leaving the pointer in the middle as it looks neater.

The beat error is fine at under 0.4ms - does it vary as you adjust the rate? This can indicate that your hairspring curve is not right.

The amplitude is not bad if you've not replaced any items. What oils are you using in the train? I typically use HP1300 for barrel arbor, 2nd and 3rd wheels with 9010 on 4th, escape and balance cap jewels. Nothing on the fork and 9415 (after Epilame) on the pallet jewels. I'm sure you know this but the amount of oil should be very little and anything on the top of the jewel is far too much and definitely not acceptable.

A lot of things affect amplitude, after 24 hours especially. Do you check end shake of the arbor in the barrel? Also, you may find wear in the barrel upper bearing under the ratchet wheel and this can hurt you. I don't think these ones are bushed so not a simple fix.

Do you set them up before fitting the central seconds pinion and the wheel over the third wheel? Best to get the basic train running well before fitting these complications as these affect many things. Certainly worth trying without those as you may localise any problems.

It's funny but it's quite hard to try and tell you much without the movement in front of me even though you've given all the details. I'll have a think about your readings though and I hope my general comments are of some use. You may be expecting more from the 283 than is easily possible as it's pretty old and will certainly have some wear.

Cheers, Chris

 

Nice of you to contribute, Chris!

We are all fascinated by the mechanics but are at very different points on the path to watchmaking.

Cordial, informative guidance is such a blessing!

I want to be a watchmaker but I still struggle getting my foot into the leg hole of my underwear!

Well done, Francois!

 

Very interesting to see somebody else has problems with hairsprings.

I've got a box of old balances I practice with and all I can say is I admire anybody who can get the perfect curves.

 

I hope you never got that chainsaw to run UncleBuck otherwise legs in underwear are the least of your problems (yes, it took me a while to find that but it's stuck in my memory... or is it nightmares?)

Cheers, Chris

 

Thanks a lot Chris for your message and your advices! And thank you too guys for your messages.

I will try to follow your advices. But I will concentrate on another movement than the 283, because I have just serviced it again!

First, some comment or answers concerning your remarks.

It is not a 2 pieces regulator, but a one piece regulator with a gap so that you can snap it in the cock.
The beat error does not change on that one. But it did on the 30T2. Thanks for the tip! I already saw the overcoil was not perfect in the 30t, but your advice helped me to correct that.
Concerning lubrication, I still use Moebius non synthetic oils and grease, for instance 8000 instead of 9010. I will change for the synthetic ones as soon as my current botles are empty! I try to put the right amount of oil, but I think I am doing a correct job only untill a few weeks concerning the escape wheel. And I am sure I still need to improve!

Usually, I do not check end shakes with a tool. I only check them by looking how the wheels rotate and, if I have a doubt, by moving up and down a wheel or the barel in their jewlers. I surely can improve in that field...

I did check the movement without the SC in my 30t2. But it was not really better...


So I have made some adjustements on the 283 and the 267. But it did not get really better. Though, they are woking fine to my opinion: at full wind, I have now a delta over 6 positions of 26 sec for the 267 and of 22 for the 283.

But even after some similar adjustements (mainly fine corrections of the hairsring, and for that one adjusting the beat error), the 30t2 was still not working great. So I serviced it again today. And it is a lot better! As far as I can tell, there were several issues: jewels not perfectly clean, still a poising error, and maybe too much oil at the escapement and one balance jewel. Now I can tell the movement is really clean and, as far as I can tell, correctly oiled. I even tried some dynamic poising... I know it is still not at my level, but after Al's and yours explanations, and after reading the pages related to that topic in Jendritski, I wanted to try!

Here are the results:

At full wind plus 30 min:
.........rate.......amplitude....beat error
DU :..12 ........259........0
DD:...18.........244........0
12U:...6..........193........0.2
3H:....12.........199........0.3
6h.... -5..........195........0
9H:....5...........187........0

Delta over 6 positions: 23, over 3 positions: 5

I still have an amplitude issue. And it will be worse at full winf plus 24h. But it is better and for the moment I am OK with that.

 

Hi,

I have played a little bit more with my watches...

The JLC 481 powermatic I talked about in Chris' very intersting thread (https://omegaforums.net/threads/watchmaking-with-the-bhi.39076/page-4) was not working great enough for me. I know it could not be a chronometer since the hairspring had been shortened, but I was thing that a 40 sec delta was too much for a JLC in overall pretty good condition.

Here is where I was (I quote myseld from Chris' thread):

So I did some work, following Al's and Chris' advices, and not following their advice not to do yet dynamic posing - well they did not said not to! Obviously, I am still not mastering this technic, but it helped me improving my delta over 6 positions.

First, I cleaned and oiled again the balance jewels. I pegged them to be sure they are perfelctly clean. Well I think now they are! At that point, my amplitude was good for a vintage, even if the difference between horizontal and vertical positions was and still is probablyl a little bit too important (more that 300 in horizontal positions and that 240 in vertical ones).

Second, I corrected the pin in order to make it parallel to the boot. That plus the balance jewels cleaning solved my issue with the rate difference between Dial Up and Dial Down positions. It is still not perfect concerning the amplitude difference, but I guess it remains OK.

Third, I tightened again the pin - checking it was still parallel to the boot - to reduce the H and V positions rate difference. At that point I was happy with a delta of 25 over 6 positions at full wind.

Then, I eventually did some dynamic posing. I was very caution not to do any damage and added some weigh rather that removing some. To do the finest adjustements, I only screwed or unscrewed the balance screws. As they are not regulating screws but weight one (not sure of the English words here), they are supposed to by fully screwed. So my poising may not be long standing. But that was an interesting try!

Now I have a delta over 6 positions of 15 at full wind!


Positions......Rate......Amplitude.......Beat error
DU................6............317.................0
DD................4............295.................0.1
12U...............-5...........246.................0.5
3U..................2...........243.................0.4
6U..................-3..........247.................0.2
9U..................10.........243.................0.1


By the way, here are some pics of the watch:

 

A few more pics.

 

Hi Francois

I've been away and just got home so have only seen these threads this morning. It certainly seems like you're making inroads and improving different aspects. It's all those little things that give you the small improvements. I like the way you're working through each aspect and trying to improve. It can be frustrating and there's always the desire to get it running again... Here's a picture of a dirty jewel, with staff still fitted:

And after pegging and cleaning - just so everyone can see what we're talking about:


I'd say that JLC is running well at full wind although that big beat error variation in some positions is not ideal (all within a typical spec though) - now, how do the 24H figures look? You have to try dynamic poising to see what it does but, a very wise man once said to me, more or less, "it's not the be all and end all. Don't try and resolve other issues with it. If the only tool in your toolbox is a hammer, then everything soon starts to look like a nail..". And yes, it was Al.

Did JLC put one bumper spring on the fixed part and one on the rotor like you have? Seems a bit odd but lots of people did odd things.

Oil amounts are difficult to say but a well about half full is one criteria, certainly never on the top of the pivot or on the top of the jewel. Types of oil are even more controversial but, the BHI use (for your sort of calibre size):
8300 for keyless works
HP1300 as typical default for pivots larger than the 4th wheel.
9010 for 4th, escape and balance cap jewels.
Fork pivots are dry.
9415 for pallet jewels after epilame (typically).

To be able to see if your pivots are good, for me, your next step would be a 40x microscope as any wear here will, obviously, hurt you later. Something like this - 40x minimum, upper and lower lights plus a good space to work. Mine also has a port for a USB camera (trinoculaire). I'm doing a lot of work under it now but, it's taken me ages to work with that rather than an eyeglass. I would say that you can be very confident in the amount of oil and that everything is properly clean. Here's a pivot.

You'll also start to see little bits of corrosion that are easy to miss otherwise...

Here's a picture of a balance pivot (not cleaned) and then you start thinking about 80x... On mine, you need to change the eyepieces to get to that but 40x works really well for virtually everything..

Keep at it.

Cheers, Chris

 

Hi Chris,

Thanks a lot for your message!

Yes, I am trying to improve different aspects. "Petit à petit" I am getting better - at least I get better results!

I have been working again lately on two of the watches above.

(Concerning the JLC, I remember the results after 24h were still decent but the amplitude was not so great, probably because I did not change the mainspring. But I do not find my notes, so I will have to check that again. And yes, the bumper spring you see is attached to the rotor. Maybe a little odd and I cannot see any reason why doing that, but not so unusual.).


Omega 30 t2

I still was not happy with the Omega 30t2. I know I sometimes want to much of the watches I service (actually, it is true of everyting I do!), but I could not help trying to do a little better.

So I cleaned again the balance jewels, the ancor and its plate. It did not improve anything. Then I had the idea to change the second hand by a genuine one (I always thought the previous one was not). It gave me about plus 10° of amplitude. I think the previous one was exercing some slight pressure where it should not. Eventually, I decided to work on the balance : adjusting the hairspring and doing (again, I know!) some dynamic poising.

Actually, I started the dynamic poising from new and did various tests. It seeems pretty odd to me, but I have gotten a better amplitude when the regulator ( this version of the 30 caliber has a one piece regulator) is off center on the "low" side (so with less washers added to the screws). It gave me a much better amplitude and a lower delta over 6 positions than when I did the contrary (more washers and relgulator on the "fast" side). I do not know why...

Here are the new results. Still some issues (better amplitude but still not very good, and a huge difference between dial up and dial down), but is far better and I am happy with that (at least for the moment!):

+0h45
Dial up:.........10......248.....0.4
Dialp down:..30......244.....0.2
12 up: ..........-24.....202....0.2
3 up:.............-12.....210.....0.3
6 up:..............6.......199.....0.3
9 up:.............-3.......200.....0.6

Delta over 6 positions: 54


(I do not have yet the +24h results for the final state of my "work").

The 12 up position is not so good and gives a pretty huge delta over 6 positions, but I did that on purpose (I followed Jendritzski's advice : as this position does not occur often in real life, one can put all the issues on it!).


Omega 266

(I am currently trying to sell this wath, but as it is still mine, I guess I can give some fresh news!).

After the last adjustements I have talked about above, I decided to change the mainspring. One thing leading to another, I made some subbtle adjustments on the hairspring and did (again, I know!) some dynamic poising.

It is now much better! Actually, this watch is one of the best working 30 caliber I have owned. Too bad it is too large for me (35,5 cm and it wears larger).

+0h30
Dial up:...... - 10......288.....0.3
Dialp down:.- 14.......287....0.2
12 up: ...........12.......248....0.3
3 up:..............0........244.....0.1
6 up:..............-7.......245.....0.3
9 up:..............-4.......249.....0.6

Delta over 6 positions: 26

+24h
DU: .....2....252.....0.4
DD:....-3.....243.....0.2
12:......26....213.....0.3
3:.......-2......211.....0.1
6:.........3.....213....0.4
9:.........24...214....0.7

Delta over 6 positions: 30

I could probably reduce the delta over 6 positions, but I guess it is OK.

That's all for now! (Well, I have serviced other watches but as you said, it is probably better to focus on some watches!).

 

In classic Rocky & Bullwinkle fashion, I suggest an alternate title to this thread:

"Playing watchmakers"

< OR >

"How to ruin a perfectly fine watch"

..... because that's what's going to happen if a bunch of Average Joes attempt to service their own watches. There's nothing that can't be made worse with some tinkering by an amateur.

Francois, see if you can get into a school or become a part time apprentice.

 

Hello Ulackfocus,

Maybe I shall give some precisions about what I am doing here. Well, basically it is having fun and learning interesting stuff!

I do not pretend or intend to be a watchmaker. I have a job I like and plating watchmakers is a hobby, a very time consuming one, but just a hobby!

Of course, anyone reading this thread must do a clear distinction between what I am talking about and Chris or Al ´s posts. I am only an amateur! They are (or are going to be) professional watchmakers, I am having fun.

But I shall put forward another statement. Even if I am only an amateur, what I am doing here yet implyes a lot of knowledge and practice, and cannot be done by the first guy opening his watch. I have serviced more than 100 watches before trying to service an Omega. Of course, the first ones are no longer working! And I have read a lot about he history and the theory of watchmaking. So I am far far far from being half a watchmaker, but my small knowledge yet costed me hours and hours.

Let put it this way: if you have not destroyed tens of watches, do not even try to regulate your nice Omégas!

I hope this way I will not mislead anyone and be responsible of some desaster...

 

Hi everyone,

During the holidays, I took the opportunity to do new wathmaking things: I replaced my first balance staffs. That was something I wanted to try for a long time, but I did not have the tools. And, to be honest, I dreaded doing that a little! But, even if I cannot use the balance with the new staff for the watch it was supposed to go into - I will explain that later - I think it was a good experience!

So I had this 30T2 with a brocken balance staff:


Do not be surprised to see a non bimetallic balance instead of a cut bimetallic one - I will explain that later.

First, I had to remove the old staff. Actually, I had three balances: the one that were in this watch when I bought it, another one with also a brocken staff, and a third one with the staff already removed - it comes from a donor movement and as the staff was very loose and it was easy to remove. I tried first to fit a new staff on the one with no staff. I knew the theory and had seen how to do, but that was my first time!

Actually, I found that refitting a staff was not as hard that I feared and I really enjoyed that! Of course, the proof is in the pudding, so I had to test the balance. As I wanted tobe sure it worked before spending time to poise it, I did not poise it right away. So I put together the complete balance (with the roller and the hairspring), then put the balance on the balance cock and replaced it on the movement. Arggh! Something was wrong because the balance was always stopping at the same point. Something was touching something...

After a lot of observation and after testing the balance whithout serveral parts, I found that the bottom of some balance screws was touching the top of the escape wheel. I must aknowledge that I did not expect that at all! I tried to remove some material to the screws to see what happened, but it did help much.

So I thought I did not do a proper job. My balance was not rotating perfectly parrallel to the cock and the plate, but at first I thought it could do the job.

So back to business. I tried to correct this balance by using again my staking tool with a flat stake. But did not help much. So I tried to fit a new staff to another balance. But, this time I had to remove the old staff! I was not very optimistic... in particular because I do not have a leathe or a platax tool, but only some little tool that nobody seems to use! It is called a "Dynamic balance staff remover", but it is simply some kind of abrasive wheel - used to cut half of the staff - plus a small punch - used to break the rivert and punch the remaining staff out of the balance.

Here are some pictures of this 4-5 cm tool:

Well, I was suprised, but it did the job! Actually, the abrasive wheel is really... abrasive, and I went a little to far on the first balance. So I damaged tha balance a little - clearly enough to have issues concerning the truth of the balance and the poising. So I tried with the last one. This time everything went well. I cannot say the balance is perfecly true, but it was good enough for me. But, again, the proof is in the pudding.

So I put together the balance complete, and tried on the movement. Arrgggggg! Still the same issue! At that point I was thinking it way be due to some issue with the new staff, as it seems to have shorter pivot than the old ones. To be sure, I tried the balance on another 30 caliber: a 30t2 with central second and incablocs. And it worked, with a decent amplitude for a non serviced movement (around 250 for horizontal positions).

I guess I have staffs that are only suitable for 30 movements with incablocs. I was surprised as I would have thought that a staff for an incabloc version would be longer than the one for a movement without shock protection. But it seems that the issue concerns only the distance between the bottom balance jewel (dial side) and the bottom of the balance screws. Any thought?

At last I chose a temporary solution: using a non cut monometallic balance (with a proper hairspring). Obviously, not a perfect solution, but it will do the job while I try to find correct staffs (if that is actually the problem) and then fit them to the correct bimetallic balance. Now the watch is working nicely - but there were another step, of which I will talk later!

 

Hi Francois - as soon as I read that you were staffing a 30T2, I thought "I hope he has the right kind of staff!" There are all kinds of little "gotcha" things hiding in watch movements that most people don't have any idea of, so at least you recognize that there is a difference between an Inca, and non-Inca staff. The Inca staffs are far easier to source in my experience, which I guess makes sense since the non shock style are more likely to get broken.

If I can provide some constructive criticism here...I am not a fan of removing a staff by punching it out. I am not familiar with the little tool you have there, but reading the instructions it is sort of a highbred way of punching out a staff. So when you say above that it is breaking the rivet, it isn't really. The rivet is on the side that you didn't cut off, and they illustrate it quite well in the diagram in their instructions on the left side of the last page. This tool at least takes the right approach to remove the hub (not the rivet) but IMO this is better done on a lathe with a sharp graver, which of course requires both a lathe and the skill to use it. This tool would require you to go deep enough to ideally just break through the hub so there isn't anything to break off when you knock the staff out - you are just left with a ring from a slight undercut of the staff when the hub is removed. You will get a similar result when you cut out a staff on the lathe if it's done properly:



In school when you turn in your work, including the small ring is required usually - at least in any course I've seen or taken on this.

Many watchmakers say it's okay to punch out a staff, but even if the rivet mostly shears off in the process, not all of it does. The portion that remains will enlarge the hole in the balance, and make fitting a new staff require more spreading of the new rivet. By the way, if the balance is made of the correct material (has no steel in it) you can remove the balance spring, the roller table, and soak the remainder in alum to dissolve the staff out. This is very good for newer watches with nickel gilt or Glucydur balances.

Just to cover some staffing basics, when staking the new staff in, first spread the rivet with a round nose punch, then flatten it with a flat punch - light taps only, and rotate the punch as you tap. Smacking the punch too hard is a major cause of the balance going out of true. I would then suggest firmly gripping the staff in a pin vice, placing a small piece of cylindrical rodico on the exposed pivot of the staff, and then hold the balance with your fingers, and try to turn the staff using the pin vice. You need to make sure the staff does not rotate in the balance. Then move on to true the wheel (or at least check it), then static poise, and then mount the roller table and balance spring.

I would also suggest that if you find interference like you did here with the escape wheel, that removing material is not the first step to try. If something has changed, there's a reason for it, so stopping and investigating is always the first step when you run into such difficulties. I know it can be difficult to do this in the heat of the moment, but patience is your biggest asset here - take time and think it through before taking any drastic steps like this.

Hope this helps.

Cheers, Al

 

Nice of you to help, Al!
Good luck, Francois.

 

Thanks a lot Al!

Your criticisms and advices will help me to do a better job next time. I think I will try again with my little tool - sorry for my mistakes when I tried to explain how it works. I understand that it is clearly not as good as a lathe, but at the moment I do not own one and I think my next buy will rather be a microscope.

I think the part I did best (or less bad!) was fitting the staff. I tried to do the way you explained - I have read your advices elsewhere! But it is not easy to put the correct force when punching. I have already experienced that I did a better job in my third attempt because I punched with less force.

Concerning the removing of material, of course you are absolutly right. I was in the hear of the moment, as you said, and quickly understood I would go nowhere like that. But I should have stopped and investigate immediatly!

One thing is sure: I will try again very soon!


EDIT: I already bought another staff, and if I am not mistaking, this one seems to be for non inca movements. So I probably will try again very very soon!

 

I have to say that Al's advices are very precious, and that I find really nice from him to help people on the net like he does. Great watchmaker and great man!

 

To follow up my previous message, I shall explain what I did afterwards concerning this 30t2.

After putting a monometallic balance, I saw that the amplitude was very low. I noticed, when I looked at the parts (I do that all the time now since I read Al's and Chris' comments) that there were wear on the wheels pivots. Currently, I only have a good x 15 eyeglass (and a crapy chinese x 20 with which I cannot see anything!), but it was enough to see that the 4th wheel was particularly worn. But at that time I did not have another one left.

But after the service and the replacement of the balance, I saw I could not keep that wheel. So I bought a new one - which surprisingly was not so expansive - and serviced the watch again. It works now a lot better! I now understand better the importance of that sort to things. I had only about 210 degrees of amplitude in horizontal positions, and I have now 250 (at full wind). Of course it is not perfect, and to (try to) do a good job I should probably replace other parts - I have seen that the 3th wheel have also worn pivots even if they are not as bad as the 4th wheel's ones. Maybe I will do that later. But on the other hand, I remember a remark ChrisN made in his wonderfull thread about his courses: we could change all the parts that can wear, but that is a strange way of servicing a watch! Concerning that particular watch, I think I will probably change the 3th wheel, but that will be all.

 

The 3 R's - reuse, replace, or repair. You have to decide what category each part falls into, and part of that will come with experiences like the one above - seeing the amplitude jump 40 degrees is significant. If the pivot wear is severe, then replacing or repivoting are your options, and at this stage that means replacement for you. If there is only light scoring, you may get away with polishing or burnishing, but of course you have to be equipped for that:



If you can get rid of the defect without creating too much side shake, then sometimes polishing/burnishing can be a good option. You just have to make sure that the wheel doesn't tilt too much in the jewels or bushings, as this can cause more friction and anything you saved at the pivot is now wasted.

In my experience vintage parts are more conducive to this kind of repair. I find that modern parts seem to wear incredibly fast once the initial wear starts - possibly due to materials being different or differences in thermal treatments.

Cheers, Al