Post pics of your watches Part II
Comments
-
Not worn this since prob November. I am often an “out of sight out of mind” and pretty much decide I don’t like the watch.
The minute I put it on then I am reminded of how amazing a watch it is. It oozes class from every single angle and it is the only watch in my 6 watch collection (including the watch I have on order and is not too far away hopefully) that I have the option of a steel strap.
14 -
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,159 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 59087
And harkens back to how two piece cases were first secured way back at the start of wristwatches and how their very first Oyster case looked.
Which is a cool nod to the past.
Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
5 -
-
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,159 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 59087
I'm always in traffic. 😁 Earlier today at more feckin' roadworks.
I've had trouble with the crown on this popping out which is sphincter tightening. So I figured feck it, put on big boy pants and fix it myself. I bought a few spare parts years ago when they weren't pricey unobtanium(there are wrecked dials for these going for 500+ quid on ebay. Daft), dug out the tools and got to work.
Though these were in service with the German military until the 90's(and there are still some out there in service today), the case design harkens back to the 1930's as a way to build in water resistance(specced to 10bar with new seals). The case is more like a retainer ring and the movement sits in another case within it. Held into the main case with four screws. This requires a split stem setup, like this old Longines one from the interwebs:
So you have to pull at the crown with surprising force to separate things, which is very counterintuative(not an issue for me as the stem being loose was the problem). Four screws out and the movement is free. Then handset removal. The main hands are easy, the little chrono hands are fiddly feckers. And you really don't want to scratch the dial...
It's a Valjoux 23/72 calibre which has its origins back in 1916, evolving into pretty much its final form in the late 30's, so even getting the dial off is very old fashioned. The dial screws aren't in the perimeter like normal, but are mounted in the main plate, like pocket watches. The Valjoux 23/72 in its various incarnations was fitted to many different brands including Patek(early Rolex Daytonas also used this movement). The 230 fitting in this watch is the flyback type which was invented by Longines. This means instead of top button starts and stops and bottom resets after you stop, you can hit the bottom reset on the fly without stopping and the counter keeps running to allow for more precise interval timing, which was important for pilots(It was also used as part of navigation by radio signal). By world war two Hanhart and Tutima were also using this for pilot's watches(maybe they paid Longines for the rights?). Post world war two pretty much all proper military pilots chronographs were of the two register flyback type, the French Type XX, the various German Bunds, Italian Zeniths and Leonidas. Heuer bought Leonidas and inherited this design and produced it for the Germans and Norwegian military and a few ended up in other airforces too like Yugoslavia. They never showed up in any public Heuer catalogues. This wasn't an in house Heuer design, so I suspect that's why it's almost never mentioned in their official history and Jack Heuer's extensive book never mentions it at all. Odd given these would have generated consistent gov contract cash which Heuer was usually short of. Later Sinn took over the maintenence contract and sold off a load of their stock as military surplus in the late 80's early 90's.
Because these were military tools parts were replaced as they went. There are a bewildering number of dials out there for them. The most sought after(other than the very rare siderial time examples for artillery types) are the ones with (3H) in a red circle above the six. Many of which where the paint is still wet... The earliest are the small T above the six examples, later get non radioactive luminova on the dial and hands. There are even some with Sinn on the dial.
My example is not military issued, which is uncommon to see as these were not officially available to the bod on the street. no NATO/Bund stamp on back. Small T. It's also a very early one with a low three digit sub 1000 serial number, so from 1967. The vast majority that come up for sale are four and five number serials and mostly five. They produced a lot of them, or more likely produced a lot of replacement cases for service. Time was you could buy all the bits to make a complete NOS watch and I suspect many watches out there are new assemblies from parts. Heuer's records are appallingly bad pre TAG so...
But I digress, as is my wont..
Dial side keyless works. As I suspected the set lever and screw were worn, but I had new ones and while I was at it I replaced the detent spring thingie. Tiny screws, fiddly as expletives deleted. Tested it and it all worked. 👍️ Dial back on, then the hands. The minute counter went on good as gold, the small subseconds was a right piglet. The hour and minute were a doddle, then came the chronograph hand. These are on tight, tighter than a gnats bottom, for one simple reason; no other hand type is under so much stress. Example in slo mo of a chrono hand resetting:
High speed flapping back and forth until it resets to 0. So that took some time, with my tongue stuck out of the corner of my mouth and regular expletives. Did a bit of regulation while I was feckin' about. It's now losing 5 seconds a day and I can live with that. Power reserve on a wind is about 40 hours.
Values? Dealers look for anything from 5-8 grand(if they're drunk). Those now rare ebay auctions? More like 4-5. Given they're a Heuer chrono, with one of the finest chronograph movements ever and with flyback and hacking, specced to take high G, with loads of military history, big size(43mm, but wears smaller) an 'iconic' design and so legible even Stevie Wonder could read it, they are surpisingly 'cheap'. Then again the Heuer vintage end of things has stagnated quite a bit in the last few years from a major peak around six to ten years ago. If I were buying one today I'd do what I did then, look for a civvie one with the small T dial. The most likely to be an honest one.
Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
18 -
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,159 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 59087
Not quite NJ, they're a three piece case. Screw back and screw front. It was an early method of securing a watch against dust and water. Basically in Trench watches it went pocketwatch style press fit double back, then screw back and front came along shortly after, with others like the Borgel style which was like what you described, a front loader(and the best of the bunch). Then came watches with the entire case and crown surrounded by an outer case with a screwdown front. The crown was always the weak point. The first "waterproof" watch the Tavannes 'Submarine' from 1917 used a series of gaskets and internal dead ends in the crown. This also meant unlike screwdown crowns you could wind and adjust the watch without compromising water resistance. Others like the Fortis 'Aquatic' also from 1917 had a similar set up to the much later Panerai with the lever holding the crown down. Pretty much the first where it all came together, screwback, front and crown was the Depollier case design from 1918 used by Waltham in the US.
These were even advertised as "gas proof" which is a hint of the horrors some faced in trenches. They also had pics of it submerged in a goldfish bowl, which Rolex later "borrowed" for their Oyster ads. I reckon they didn't take off more widely as they came out just as the Great War ended and men came home, stuck their wristlets in drawers and went back to civillian pocketwatches(especially in the US) and so the market wasn't there for them. Yet. Watch companies and retailers were left with a lot of unsold stock after that war ended.
Fast forward to the mid 1920's and a much happier time and the wristwatch was gaining favour with men, Rolex looked at a marketing angle, bought in an existing screwdown crown patent and improved it with the slipping clutch. This was the game changer. Still, they weren't great sellers at first because the daily need to unscrew and wind it caused fast wear on the screwdown crown(the above Depollier used a bayonet fitting which was much better in this regard). Then looking at the Harwood innovation in automatic watches a lightbulb moment happened. Rolex took that idea and improved it radically. The single biggest and about the only innovation Rolex made was the half moon style swinging automatic movement we all know today. And that was a huge innovation. They fitted that to their Oyster case and called it the "Perpetual" and crown wear was pretty much a thing of the past. So the "Oyster Perpetual" on a Rolex dial has a lot of history behind it.
Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
3 -
Advertisement
-
I built this last night and I'm absolutely delighted with it. This was supposed to be released as a limited edition but the Vostok factory couldn't fulfill the order so the parts were sold off... There's plenty of drama that went with it that I won't get into.
I was lucky enough to get the parts before they sold out.
I filmed the whole build and I'm hoping to have the video up this Friday
20 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
So 8 year old me used to think that this watch was the coolest most advanced watch in the world.I was endlessly jealous of this one kid in my class called Scott that had one ( Mad how I can remember that name but occasionally forget my wife’s) . Just the idea of a calculator on a watch screamed futuristic to me then.Finally have it and my fingers are to fat to push the buttons.
12 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,159 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 59087
Feeling emboldened by fiddling about with the Heuer I decided to tackle another problem watch I had and one where I was more than a little filled with blind fear...
A Tron dial GP quartz from 1972. Around half a dozen are known to exist. Rocking horse droppings isn't in it. The movement was always a bit twitchy and I had sourced another working one to swap bits and bobs. Someday. I really didn't relish going next nor near that dial, what with the detail going right up to the hands and in relief. One slip... Anyway loins were girded over the weekend.
These were designed by Girard Perregaux and Jaeger LeCoultre in a joint venture. GP did the electronic bits, JLC the mechanical. It was designed to be modular and easy to pick up for existing watchmakers. Unlike other quartz like the Beta21 which were a total nightmare by comparison(the Longines UltraQuartz was worse again. In trade catalogs of the time the only 'spare part' was the entire movement). On the left is the mechanical part, The entire train lives under the triangylarish bit in the middle, using teflon bearings instead of jewels, so no oiling ever required.
On the reverse is the date mech and this is were things go south. It's incredibly finicky and delicate with wafer thin workings and absolutely teeny springed steel tensioners. They make a blonde one look like a tree trunk. I can only assume it's because they were concerned that because quartz has far less torque than mechanical everything had to be very light for the date to move forward instantly? I have noticed in other early quartz the date mech moves progressively from 11pm to 1am. JLC wanted instant. And it is, when it works. It was also designed as never needing oiling either so that probably played into things too.
The joke being that GP's internally developed in the 60's stepping motor, the squarish thingie in the middle, had significantly more torque than other types and unlike others could easily drive normal sized hands. Most quartz watches then and often nowadays had very thin and light handsets because of this. The GP stepping motor was of a different type and more efficient. Note too, no exposed coils or any of that stuff. They improved it slightly in their next in house quartz but it was expensive so that's where it ended. It was the superior Betamax, but VHS won out. The white nylon gear transfers the power to the going train.
In this case some muppet along the way had oiled the feckin thing...😡 Even so it was still trying to run, but was really struggling. They'd also oiled the teflon bearings. 🤦♂️ DOH! That's where the spares came in.
Here's one that avoided muppets. That bit at the top right is a toothpick which gives some idea of scale.
Then the leccy parts. Again all in one module with the Motorola chip that the dial references(gold, later ones were black). The circular trimmer on the left so you can tweak the accuracy. The quartz can at the back(later versions were turned on their side to allow for thinner cases), where GP introduced 32,768 Hz which was to become the standard in quartz frequencies. So if that blows you can at least solder in a brand new one. If that happens to a Beta21, Ultraquartz, Seiko Astron and a few Omega oddballs it's game over and you're wearing a 70's bracelet that tells the time twice a day.
So I used a spare main plate, only to realise that I needed to swap the date ring as the spare came from a watch with a date at 6 rather than 3. Expletive time. I reused the original leccy bits(the one pictured is a slightly later one). Now all these bits and bobs worked I'd tested them so put the movement back together and... nada. WTF sez me. Couldn't figure it out. Sat down, had tea. Contemplated alcoholism. Cried. Looked again. You see the main plate, near the top where the crown stem/keyless works are? That little copper bent U shaped wire? That's part of the hacking mechanism. When you pull the crown levers are thrown and one copper part near the centre touches the nylon wheel to stop the hands, while at the same time that U wire pulls away from the post which carries the electrons to the circuit. Well it wasn't touching enough when the crown was back in. Bent it carefully with tweezers and voila! It worked!! 😀 And the date changed both manual quickset and at midnight. Then came putting the hands and dial back on. I left that until yesterday evening as my nerves were on edge. I was shaking like a pooing dog, which was not ideal. Found out I can hold my breath for five minutes at a time. 😁 But finallly.
😁 I'm glad to get this mad rare watch running again. It was a 'grail' of mine for years.
Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
19 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
Great work there Wibbs on the Tron. I've learned a bit more about the cal 350.
I've had this Seiko 5 sportsmatic for a while now, I bought it as a non runner, well it would run for a while then stop. It's in for service at the minute and it needs a new balance wheel for its 7019 movement. A new in box balance wheel was found in Thailand on ebay and is in the post. Hopefully this will clean up well. Bracelet is original and fits, bezel is internal with 2 o click crown.
7 -
Intercepted the postman today & got a sneak peak at my birthday present. 60s/70s from Germany. Its powered by a PUW 1664. The nice thing (for me anyway) is its a movement from a city I used to live in. Pforzheimer Uhren Roh-Werke (PUW) being from Pforzheim. Next pics will have cake in the background 🥳
12 -
-
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,159 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 59087
Well what with all the talk of 70's steel bracelet watches with hexagonals going on, here's a more extreme version of that bandwagon from back in the day.
1974, so not quite disco. 😁 But definitely of that decade.
It was Omega's first inhouse quartz movement and in common with vintage Omega movements, very nicely built*. Even has an index system to make sure the seconds hand lines up precisely with the indices. Though in common with most quartz the hands are very small, light and thin as unlike the GP 350 series they just didn't have the torque. Part of the promotions campaign for this Seamaster was to strap two of them to a transatlantic racing yacht, one on the mast, one on the keel. To show off it's ruggedness and that. And they arrived in New York safe and sound and still precisely on time. Interesting it has a press fit caseback, but it seems to be enough. There are also two buttons on the crown side. One advances the date with a press, the other avdances the time by 10 seconds for some reason? They must be pretty well sealed too. It's also has a quickset hour hand function, so you can change the timezone and date without stopping the watch.
These seem to have been very popular in Germany as a very large percentage come with German day wheels. Italian, French and Spanish behind them. English examples are the rarest by some margin. They seem to have had a good run on the shelves, from 74 to circa 79.
Time was you could pick these up for a couple of hundred quid or less if lucky, now they hover between a 1000 and 1200, more with box of course. Though values have softened a little from a high of circa 1500.
*save for one thing. Exposed coil, but it has a plate to protect it when changing batteries. That you have to remove to change batteries... 🤦♂️😁
Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
14 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
When I got the ST1903 powered Alpha, I wore it for a month and fully wound it every night during that time.
Only then did I put it on the timegrapher to see about regulating it, as it was running 10-15s+ per day.
With the timegrapher, I was able to get it more or less bang on, and it runs pretty much accurate when worn for a week at a time. I prefer a +1 or 2s per day, if it is going to vary, to I erred on that side, but when the grapher says +0s/d, after a week or so, the variance is usually on the plus side. I'm happy with that.
3
