- Posts
- 1,454
- Likes
- 2,054
Rasputin
·Is there a difference between the balance wheel of the chronometer vs non chronometer version of the 30t2? I understand neither are shock protected but are they interchangeable?
Question re Omega 30t2 RG SC balance wheel
- Posts
- 3,742
- Likes
- 6,360
hoipolloi
·What does the 30 mm chronometer book say? Yes or No?
- Posts
- 1,454
- Likes
- 2,054
- Posts
- 3,554
- Likes
- 7,591
- Posts
- 3,554
- Likes
- 7,591
mac_omega
·Is there a difference between the balance wheel of the chronometer vs non chronometer version of the 30t2? I understand neither are shock protected but are they interchangeable?
the balance wheel must be bimetallic and cut - then it is legitimate for a swap/replacement. Later monometallic balances are interchangeable as well but are not correct for the chronometer movement. A bimetallic balance is a must
- Posts
- 1,454
- Likes
- 2,054
Rasputin
·From what I gather the
Do you know what is the part number for the correct bimetallic balance?
the balance wheel must be bimetallic and cut - then it is legitimate for a swap/replacement. Later monometallic balances are interchangeable as well but are not correct for the chronometer movement. A bimetallic balance is a must
- Posts
- 3,554
- Likes
- 7,591
mac_omega
·Part number is 100 but you will not find any in the original packing I suppose.
Cal 262 is the later name of cal. 30 T2 Rg and cal. 281 for the 30 T2 SC Rg - both share the same balance.
But be carefull: if you buy a part number 262.1327 you will not receive a correct part for your movement. This original replacement part from Omega has been modified and is a monometallic balance similar to later monometallic balances but with larger scews - it may be a correct replacement and it will work properly but it does not look right!
You need to find a vintage cut bimetallic balance - this is the only route to go... or buy a donor 30 T2 movement (I would recommend this as you may be able to use additional parts if needed later).
And you definitely need my book 😉
Cal 262 is the later name of cal. 30 T2 Rg and cal. 281 for the 30 T2 SC Rg - both share the same balance.
But be carefull: if you buy a part number 262.1327 you will not receive a correct part for your movement. This original replacement part from Omega has been modified and is a monometallic balance similar to later monometallic balances but with larger scews - it may be a correct replacement and it will work properly but it does not look right!
You need to find a vintage cut bimetallic balance - this is the only route to go... or buy a donor 30 T2 movement (I would recommend this as you may be able to use additional parts if needed later).
And you definitely need my book 😉
- Posts
- 7,651
- Likes
- 21,950
Syrte
·we’re getting super technical, but the balance in the 30T2SC that’s housed in the RAF Air Ministry Omega is also a bimetallic cut balance.
the pictures of the British contract specifications posted on line on another very good forum (Military Watch Ressource forum) indicate that the RAF watch was supposed to be chronometer grade in terms of performance.
Would someone be kind enough to explain to this Omega newbie what the key differences are with the RG? (Sorry I don’t have your book— everyone says it’s great).
the pictures of the British contract specifications posted on line on another very good forum (Military Watch Ressource forum) indicate that the RAF watch was supposed to be chronometer grade in terms of performance.
Would someone be kind enough to explain to this Omega newbie what the key differences are with the RG? (Sorry I don’t have your book— everyone says it’s great).
- Posts
- 3,742
- Likes
- 6,360
- Posts
- 3,742
- Likes
- 6,360
hoipolloi
·we’re getting super technical, but the balance in the 30T2SC that’s housed in the RAF Air Ministry Omega is also a bimetallic cut balance.
the pictures of the British contract specifications posted on line on another very good forum (Military Watch Ressource forum) indicate that the RAF watch was supposed to be chronometer grade in terms of performance.
Would someone be kind enough to explain to this Omega newbie what the key differences are with the RG? (Sorry I don’t have your book— everyone says it’s great).
- Posts
- 7,651
- Likes
- 21,950
Syrte
·I have the answer but I prefer to let you buy the book.
Well @mac_omega I will let your book enjoy the benefit of exclusivity.
- Posts
- 15,474
- Likes
- 45,799
Canuck
·My guess would be that the chronometer balance wheel and hairspring would likely be tuned for a higher degree of isochronism than a non-chronometer balance and hairspring. And the chronometer would likely have a Breguet hairspring, but I don’t know about the non-chronometer. .
- Posts
- 7,651
- Likes
- 21,950
Syrte
·My guess would be that the chronometer balance wheel and hairspring would likely be tuned for a higher degree of isochronism than a non-chronometer balance and hairspring. And the chronometer would likely have a Breguet hairspring, but I don’t know about the non-chronometer. .
So for the record, the 30T2SC that’s on the RAF reference (also called CK2292 IIRC) also has a blued Breguet hairspring.
- Posts
- 3,554
- Likes
- 7,591
- Posts
- 4,629
- Likes
- 9,346
Bill Sohne
··Bill @ ΩFthe balance wheel must be bimetallic and cut - then it is legitimate for a swap/replacement. Later monometallic balances are interchangeable as well but are not correct for the chronometer movement. A bimetallic balance is a must
I agree a proper 30T2Rg or 30T2SCRg should have a bimatellic and cut balance. , ( also dont forget the Rg also has a deluxe finished balance staff ) .
What I disagree with is your statement "Later monometallic balances are interchangeable as well but are not correct for the chronometer movement." The manufacture makes the decision on replacement parts and from Omega as you stated later 262-1327 ( balance complete) you might get a "smooth" balance wheel ( non cut monomatellic balance) . The part is correct as it will fit and work in the watch , by the way would keep incredible time. I have seen this myself... And I agreed its original to the model but the manufacture blessed the later replacement parts.. I am not saying it will have the same value as a watch with the bimatellic and cut balance , but saying its not correct replacement part for the watch is what I disagree with Omega says it ok.... so when you have a watch that runs or not. I would rather have a running watch personally .
Let say you do go an source a used balance from a 30T2 / 30T2SC . ( non shock proof). Should you then get it restaffed with a 30T2Rg staff? or just use the entire balance assembly? ....
Eric, Again I prefer a 30T2SCRg / 30T2Rg to have bimatellic and cut.
Good Hunting
Bill
- Posts
- 4,629
- Likes
- 9,346
Bill Sohne
··Bill @ ΩFwe’re getting super technical, but the balance in the 30T2SC that’s housed in the RAF Air Ministry Omega is also a bimetallic cut balance.
the pictures of the British contract specifications posted on line on another very good forum (Military Watch Ressource forum) indicate that the RAF watch was supposed to be chronometer grade in terms of performance.
Would someone be kind enough to explain to this Omega newbie what the key differences are with the RG? (Sorry I don’t have your book— everyone says it’s great).
HI @Syrte
The real secret is that just about ANY 30 mm Omega movement is capable to achieve chronometre time keeping... IF it was not abused when it left the factory... ( as long as a "shoemaker" did not get into the watch ).
The contract for the MoD specified timing standard for the military watches... When you pull the specs up from Omega they refer to it as 30T2 " RS" for special regulation..... I forget the specs but its basically to chronometre standards.
The 30T2Rg has " deluxe finished parts and the drive train wheels are also specific to the Rg models... its truly stunning to look at under a loupe. But a " good old" 30 mm will keep great time.... as well...
The simplest way to compare the versions is to look Omega material list of the 30T2 and the 30T2Rg ... the Rg list will show what parts are different from the base model. Some parts are just visual ( like the winding wheels) and all the drive train and balance were also made to a higher spec.
I will see if i can find the pages... and post..
here are the pages...
here is the first page from the 260 material list showing all the parts...
and here is the 262 ( 30T2Rg) showing all parts that are different from the base caliber 260 ( 30T2) .
and the part and descriptions that are different from the base caliber.
Good Hunting
Bill
Edited:
- Posts
- 3,554
- Likes
- 7,591
mac_omega
·Hi @mac_omega
I agree a proper 30T2Rg or 30T2SCRg should have a bimatellic and cut balance. , ( also dont forget the Rg also has a deluxe finished balance staff ) .
What I disagree with is your statement "Later monometallic balances are interchangeable as well but are not correct for the chronometer movement." The manufacture makes the decision on replacement parts and from Omega as you stated later 262-1327 ( balance complete) you might get a "smooth" balance wheel ( non cut monomatellic balance) . The part is correct as it will fit and work in the watch , by the way would keep incredible time. I have seen this myself... And I agreed its original to the model but the manufacture blessed the later replacement parts.. I am not saying it will have the same value as a watch with the bimatellic and cut balance , but saying its not correct replacement part for the watch is what I disagree with Omega says it ok.... so when you have a watch that runs or not. I would rather have a running watch personally .
Let say you do go an source a used balance from a 30T2 / 30T2SC . ( non shock proof). Should you then get it restaffed with a 30T2Rg staff? or just use the entire balance assembly? ....
Eric, Again I prefer a 30T2SCRg / 30T2Rg to have bimatellic and cut.
Good Hunting
Bill
Bill, you are splitting hairs. If you cite my comment you should do it in its entirety.
You have missed an important part: "it may be a correct replacement and it will work properly but it does not look right!"
- Posts
- 7,175
- Likes
- 23,246
M'Bob
·What I disagree with is your statement "Later monometallic balances are interchangeable as well but are not correct for the chronometer movement." The manufacture makes the decision on replacement parts and from Omega as you stated later 262-1327 ( balance complete) you might get a "smooth" balance wheel ( non cut monomatellic
I'm struggling, I guess, with your use of the term "correct." I think there is a difference between what the company deems as a correct replacement part, and what a purist feels is correct for a particular caliber or reference. My sense is that Eric was referring to the latter.
To wit: the flat-end chrono hand is deemed the correct replacement part for an Ed White that's missing that hand, but no collector would consider that "correct."
- Posts
- 4,629
- Likes
- 9,346
Bill Sohne
··Bill @ ΩFBill, you are splitting hairs. If you cite my comment you should do it in its entirety.
You have missed an important part: "it may be a correct replacement and it will work properly but it does not look right!"
Hi @mac_omega
Your saying both way...
from a previous post
quote #1 "the balance wheel must be bimetallic and cut - then it is legitimate for a swap/replacement. Later monometallic balances are interchangeable as well but are not correct for the chronometer movement. A bimetallic balance is a must"
and you posted this in a later reply.
quote #2 ""it may be a correct replacement and it will work properly but it does not look right!""
Please keep in mind your held to a higher standard.... your first quote is your opinion. My point is the manufacture says it will work and keep great time. You can disagree with them but they are the manufacture and you can choose only to collect "bimatellic and cut balance " in your watches.. that fine too....
Quote #2 I totally agree with you..... Heck I told that to Franco many many years ago when we met in the Uk. He showed me his latest chronometre .. I told him " its stunning except for the later monometallic balance".
As I mentioned before... if you were to salvage a balance from a non Rg shockproof watch ... would you have your watchmaker restaff it with a Rg balance staff? I curious how far would you go... is the only a visual thing? There is no right or wrong answer .... it just get into what one collects and to what level?
Good Hunting
Bill
PS I saw a copy of your book yesterday being sold at a auction. 299 plus a 25% premium ! 373.75 ! I think that is great !!! congrats !
Edited:
- Posts
- 4,629
- Likes
- 9,346
Bill Sohne
··Bill @ ΩFI'm struggling, I guess, with your use of the term "correct." I think there is a difference between what the company deems as a correct replacement part, and what a purist feels is correct for a particular caliber or reference. My sense is that Eric was referring to the latter.
To wit: the flat-end chrono hand is deemed the correct replacement part for an Ed White that's missing that hand, but no collector would consider that "correct."
Hi @M'Bob
Difference is in this case , a running watch vs a non runner.. and I also mention that it could affect the value of the watch as well....
Bill
Similar threads
- Posts
- 16
- Views
- 2K
- Posts
- 33
- Views
- 7K
- Posts
- 0
- Views
- 4K
- Posts
- 25
- Views
- 4K
