Hi all,
So, I went and bought a new timeograph, and am now trying it out on various watches. Tried it out on my practically new Seamaster Pro with a cal2500D. Practically perfect. +/-0-5 sec in most postions, around 300 degrees of amplitude.

Second, my speedy from 2006. No idea of service history. Amplitude strong (250-270) and keeping good time, between 0 and 10 sec in various positions. Good enough to decide I wont service it now.

So, then I tested the two watches that I have just had serviced, but haven't been happy with the time-keeping performance.
Dial up


Crown down


And similar in other positions. My other newly serviced watch is even worse - lower amplitude and worse accuracy. Are there any reasons why low amplitude is acceptable? Or is he just not a good watchmaker?

 

See. That's why they said not to get one of those things.

 

This is probably going to be a long thread

I use my machine (same as yours) to check various parameters of newly serviced, old watches etc.

I have found it to be "generally" accurate, and for my "watch tinkerer" capabilities, it's adequate.

It meets my needs but if I was a "watchmaker" (as opposed to a watch tinkerer) I would use a better machine of professional quality.

However, as Al has explained, these entry level machines have limitations and unless you know exactly what you have done to the movement, and exactly how to use the machine correctly, you will end up with an ulcer.

Maybe Al can give us a run down on how to use a basic timegrapher and what to expect from its output.

 

Obviously I will be talking to the watch maker first, but I had identified that both of these watches had poor performance based on more conventional timechecking methods (comparing it to the radio news beeps, etc), with one losing 2 minutes a day within a few weeks of being serviced.

 

A wise decision.

now this is as far as I go as I'd like to avoid ulcers

 

Well, remember I knew the watch wasnt working well, and I had noticed it was already consistently running +2min/day. And this apparently confirmed that finding. I am not going solely off the machine's reading.

 

Must be a good feeling too. To move into that phase of collecting vintage watches. Well done. I'll be on the lookout for your further observations!! Pretty cool

 

There is a difference between your two sets of readings. The first two are of new movements with very few hours of use on them. You do not specify exactly what models are the two with the poor results, but I assume that they are vintage pieces with many hours of use on them. The movements on these are likely to be not just old, but worn at all sorts of critical points. If you just asked your watch maker to clean and lubricate them, that is exactly what he or she will have done. All the wear on the components will still be there. So it would hardly be surprising if they return poorer measurements from a timing machine than the newer examples.

P.S. Even after a service (or perhaps especially after a service) I would expect to have to spend a few days regulating one of my old Omegas to get its timekeeping in the ballpark. If I can get a 1950s movement to within 10 or 15 seconds a day I'm pretty happy.

 

x2

 

buying one of these is like looking at your face, in a truckstop bathroom, under fluorescent light, at 2am. You're gonna see flaws you don't even have yet.

 

As far as I can see, your measurements only confirm what you already noticed before regarding accuracy of the watch.
Regarding the amplitude, I wonder whether the hints given in your original thread (regarding lift angle) have been observed?

 

I would say that the Timegrapher is the best investment I have done (apart from the watches itself) for my collecting hobby.
An amplitude of about 200 degrees or less is not impressive! Some old Seiko watches will have this, but none of my swiss watches is that bad after a proper service. Some I send to service has better curves than the one you show.

Normally I would expect an amplitude in the region of 260-310 degrees on a freshly serviced watch if all else is ok.
Seems to me that your watchmaker has not bothered to do much with the movements?
Before concluding I would prefer to see a picture of each movement, and of course information on what watches they are.

 

Started out thinking..."Here we go again!" but just ended up laughing at some of the responses. Great thread guys - very entertaining indeed.

Cheers, Al

 

Awwwww come on Al... master of the tease response? Fire it up, I would love to know what you really think on this one.

 

Drawing a conclusions that your watchmaker is "just not good" based on the information you have given, is a big stretch. Without knowing the movements involved, if you are using the machine correctly or not (big if), and what the expectations were when the service was done, it's not really my place to comment.

Some movements don't have great amplitude, no matter what you do. But to start with have you looked up the lift angle for each movement you have tested, and made sure the machine was set to that lift angle? If not, then your amplitude readings are pretty meaningless. And just a note that a cheap machine like this will not measure co-axial movements properly. The rate information will be correct, but the amplitude readings require a specific program in order to measure it on the machine, and these cheap machines don't have that program (or the second program for the newer AP "Robin" type escapement).

Cheers, Al

 

Your watchmaker may have done the best he could with the movements. What if the escape wheel is out of round? What if the balance wheel isn't balanced? What if the wrong hairspring was installed long ago? Would you want to know this and go crazy finding parts? Most collectors want the watch completely original, and that means no major replacement parts.

There's just not enough details in this thread to make a conclusion that the watchmaker is at fault.