Crystal Fitting - Page 2 - Seiko & Citizen Watch Forum Japanese Watch Reviews, Discussion & Trading
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 03-07-2019, 01:16 PM   #26 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
zeke441's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Tennessee USA
Posts: 2,978
Points: 262 (+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Jones View Post
You don't know if he's even a doctor at all!

...

I would love to refinish some crystals on my mini-lathe, but the fixation of the crystal to the spindle is what kept me from doing it. Contact cement seems a good solution, but how do you center the crystal reliably?
It's not, but doing it by hand allows to follow the wobble evenly.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
__________________
"A man that wears a watch shows that being on time is important"
Pops - 1979 when he gave me my 1st real watch.

Seiko Saviors
zeke441 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 03-07-2019, 01:21 PM   #27 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
rob3rto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,031
Points: 33 (+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zeke441 View Post
Thanks fellas, I've done this on a couple of crystals and took some pics this time.



Thanks Mike, I did the brushing using the same method, bolted the case in between 2 dies and spun it with the drill. It does produce nice even curved lines.

Attachment 405015
Exactly how I do mine
rob3rto is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
The Following Member Awarded A Point to rob3rto For This Useful Post:
Old 03-07-2019, 01:56 PM   #28 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Mr.Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 4,446
Points: 246 (+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheTigerUK View Post
How about getting some material like acetal, turn a recess in it the size of the crystal you want to polish and thats it ?
That's a clever idea. I think I could get it to 1/10th mm no problem and use the cement to hold it. The last bit of wobble should be no problem, as one would not use high speeds and it won't be visible to the human eye (at least not more visible than the imperfections from sanding the edge...)
Mr.Jones is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 03-07-2019, 11:35 PM   #29 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 2,555
Points: 37 (+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheTigerUK View Post
I can't decide whether your kidding us with your repair "methods" or you really do these things





I really do them


I got some parts off a 74 year of ex Pom watchmaker today (he's only ever done watch and clock repairs for a job and incredibly skilled) and asked him about refitting a snap on bezel on a '60s Citizen Parawater (internal rotating bezel) I was replacing the glass on for a customer (I got the glass from him).

He said (what I was thinking) to be safe glue it on.



Glue!! Oh, no, pragmatism over pendantism!!
__________________
Paul ;-)
nzwatchdoctor is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-08-2019, 12:42 AM   #30 (permalink)
Super Moderator
 
rileynp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,839
Points: 22 (+)
Default

This concerns the ensuing discussion more so than the original post (though it too handily and admirably follows the creed), but it warms my heart to see so many of you take up the hard-won mantle of the conscientious watchmaker: Alter the part to fit the watch, not the watch to fit the part.

Too often excuses are made for not doing something the right and respectful way (They'll never see! Only you will know! It's only a $xx watch! It's hard and takes too long to do it any other way!). But that is not what we are here for on this forum- we are a light in the darkness, a testament to what can and should be, and ultimately a best practices-compendium instead of a crude collection of admitting how low we stoop in the name of expediency or carelessness.

While learning can only happen in an open environment, I hope that you all will continue to call out shoddy practices when you see them. Not to excoriate the culprit (for they indeed may be beyond saving it seems, despite our long-suffering patience and grace), but to make sure that the less experienced and more impressionable among us and especially the same who come after us and read the echoes of our words will not fall into poor habits due to our unwillingness to speak up when bad advice is slung 'round.

The respect and passion that we all share for our corner of the watch-loving world should clearly extend to the maintenance of the objects for which we have respect and passion. We do a disservice to the community when we fail to consider the long-term consequences of our actions when servicing any timepiece, no matter the worth it currently enjoys or how little we think of the next person tasked with its future repairs (who may be ourselves!).

I really don't know that there is or should be a place here for a wolf in sheep's clothing who continually, tirelessly tries to lead us astray from living out this respect and passion. This is the downside to an open and tolerant social group- there will be those who come along seemingly only for the self-serving impish pleasure of stretching that openness and tolerance as far as it may go.
__________________
--Noah R.
rileynp is online now   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-08-2019, 03:50 AM   #31 (permalink)
Moderator
 
TheTigerUK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: I want to be a Pedant :)
Posts: 26,775
Points: 483 (+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rileynp View Post
This concerns the ensuing discussion more so than the original post (though it too handily and admirably follows the creed), but it warms my heart to see so many of you take up the hard-won mantle of the conscientious watchmaker: Alter the part to fit the watch, not the watch to fit the part.

Too often excuses are made for not doing something the right and respectful way (They'll never see! Only you will know! It's only a $xx watch! It's hard and takes too long to do it any other way!). But that is not what we are here for on this forum- we are a light in the darkness, a testament to what can and should be, and ultimately a best practices-compendium instead of a crude collection of admitting how low we stoop in the name of expediency or carelessness.

While learning can only happen in an open environment, I hope that you all will continue to call out shoddy practices when you see them. Not to excoriate the culprit (for they indeed may be beyond saving it seems, despite our long-suffering patience and grace), but to make sure that the less experienced and more impressionable among us and especially the same who come after us and read the echoes of our words will not fall into poor habits due to our unwillingness to speak up when bad advice is slung 'round.

The respect and passion that we all share for our corner of the watch-loving world should clearly extend to the maintenance of the objects for which we have respect and passion. We do a disservice to the community when we fail to consider the long-term consequences of our actions when servicing any timepiece, no matter the worth it currently enjoys or how little we think of the next person tasked with its future repairs (who may be ourselves!).

I really don't know that there is or should be a place here for a wolf in sheep's clothing who continually, tirelessly tries to lead us astray from living out this respect and passion. This is the downside to an open and tolerant social group- there will be those who come along seemingly only for the self-serving impish pleasure of stretching that openness and tolerance as far as it may go.
Eloquently put Noah
__________________

"You haven't failed until you quit trying"

"You don't make mistakes, mistakes make you "
TheTigerUK is online now   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-08-2019, 02:44 PM   #32 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 2,555
Points: 37 (+)
Default

[QUOTE=rileynp;2735041]"This concerns the ensuing discussion more so than the original post (though it too handily and admirably follows the creed), but it warms my heart to see so many of you take up the hard-won mantle of the conscientious watchmaker: Alter the part to fit the watch, not the watch to fit the part.

Too often excuses are made for not doing something the right and respectful way (They'll never see! Only you will know! It's only a $xx watch! It's hard and takes too long to do it any other way!). But that is not what we are here for on this forum- we are a light in the darkness, a testament to what can and should be, and ultimately a best practices-compendium instead of a crude collection of admitting how low we stoop in the name of expediency or carelessness.

While learning can only happen in an open environment, I hope that you all will continue to call out shoddy practices when you see them. Not to excoriate the culprit (for they indeed may be beyond saving it seems, despite our long-suffering patience and grace), but to make sure that the less experienced and more impressionable among us and especially the same who come after us and read the echoes of our words will not fall into poor habits due to our unwillingness to speak up when bad advice is slung 'round.

The respect and passion that we all share for our corner of the watch-loving world should clearly extend to the maintenance of the objects for which we have respect and passion. We do a disservice to the community when we fail to consider the long-term consequences of our actions when servicing any timepiece, no matter the worth it currently enjoys or how little we think of the next person tasked with its future repairs (who may be ourselves!)."


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


What is wrong with what I did c.f. what the OP did?
__________________
Paul ;-)
nzwatchdoctor is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-09-2019, 12:44 AM   #33 (permalink)
Super Moderator
 
rileynp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,839
Points: 22 (+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nzwatchdoctor View Post
What is wrong with what I did c.f. what the OP did?
Hi Paul,
I'm glad you asked. This is a good discussion to have and perhaps what I take as writ is not known by all members here. I'll say it again, the watchmaker's creed should be to alter the new part to fit the watch, not the watch to fit the new part. In Jerry's case, he had a watch that needed a crystal. The generic that he sourced did not fit in its original configuration (not a sufficient bevel to allow proper clearance and sealing of the friction-fit retaining ring). Thus, he altered the new part to fit the watch. This allows future watchmakers (or he himself even down the road) to install another, more correct (maybe even a genuine) crystal without having to change the bezel for one with the factory surfaces intact.

Had he altered the bezel (which by the way is not a commonly replaced part compared to a crystal and thus far harder to find a replacement for), no one could ever fit a new, properly shaped crystal in the now-altered bezel. To do a good job, they'd have to source a new, unaltered bezel along with the replacement crystal, costing them more time and the watch owner more money.

Let's take a different example that might highlight the sense behind the creed. Suppose one needs to replace a shouldered screw in a mechanical chronograph, which holds in place the brake for chronograph wheel. The new screw binds upon the brake, not allowing its proper movement. It may be easier to thin the brake lever as you'd *only* need to hand-stone it, but now you're changing the strength of the brake, and also altering the original surface finish, and maybe even now causing other issues between it and the other parts it interacts with. The more acceptable solution is to turn away a small amount of the bottom of the new screw's head, to give the needed clearance. This requires more skill and tools (lathe, screw-chucks, graver), but it is the better and more elegant approach for the entire system of the movement, and respects what was there.

Perhaps an example that is seen more often is a pallet bridge that has been stoned or filed thinner to allow more clearance for the rotating balance arms and balance rim above it. The obvious cause of this was some one installing a balance staff that did not have the correct dimensions, or when they installed a correct staff they neglected to correct balance arms that had become bent downward. To compensate, they've ruined the appearance of another part (the pallet bridge that is now devoid of its original surface finish and plating). Had they kept the creed in mind, this may have helped them do a better repair that didn't ruin the appearance of a completely innocent part that was not causing the problem in the first place.

There is an underlying issue here related to craft and pride in workmanship. In wanting to do the best job, we aim to leave the world a better place than we found it. Even if that world is contained in a few cubic centimeters' space.
__________________
--Noah R.
rileynp is online now   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-09-2019, 04:49 PM   #34 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 538
Points: 32 (+)
Default

Hear hear to Noah's intervention in defense of sanity and competence, as always. Paul, I don't know you well, and I am an amateur collector/hobbyist rather than a watchmaker, but I can say confidently that whenever you advise someone on her how to do something, I make sure I never do that thing, because I have seen you consistently participate in threads to advise posters to approach a problem in a way that I know, with my meager skills, is incorrect and destructive to the originality/continued viability of the piece being worked on. This is as good an example as any, for the reasons Noah relays.

But what you do with your own watches is not what bothers me about your posts in general - there are plenty of folks butchering watches. It's that you so consistently insist that your way is right, relying on your years of experience as a watchmaker with Citizen, or other pleads to authority. Just a few days ago, I cringed to read you suggesting someone glue a chapter ring down to a dial, and then, when roundly called out on that hair-pullingly-obviously bad advice, you demanded people provide reasons that your "pragmatism" was objectionable. When they did, you stopped responding. Here, the part that kills me in your response is this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by nzwatchdoctor View Post
I got some parts off a 74 year of ex Pom watchmaker today (he's only ever done watch and clock repairs for a job and incredibly skilled) and asked him about refitting a snap on bezel on a '60s Citizen Parawater (internal rotating bezel) I was replacing the glass on for a customer (I got the glass from him).

He said (what I was thinking) to be safe glue it on.

Glue!! Oh, no, pragmatism over pendantism!!
That "incredibly skilled" watchmaker may or may not actually do that (shame on him if he does), but that's not really the point - you are insisting, arguing, attempting to convince the readers here that "incredibly skilled" people would do it your way. That your way is the "norm," the "better way," the "state of the art." But deep down you must know that's not true, because this devoted community of collectors is constantly appalled at your advice.

Similarly, in response to Zeke gently suggesting your advice was ill-advised, this is just awful:

Quote:
Originally Posted by nzwatchdoctor View Post

You can sleep easy tonight - your concern is unfounded
Zeke is of course right to be concerned, and you are of course wrong to dismiss his concern as "unfounded," as any half-decent watchmaker would know. But again, you tout your experience - hell, your handle says you're a watchmaker - and you try to browbeat/mock others into thinking they are wrong and you are right. I've no doubt Zeke is unconvinced, or anyone else participating on this thread. But how many people read these threads compared to how many participate? It's shameful (and seemingly pointless) behavior, and you do it constantly. I honestly can't fathom your goal - perhaps to assuage a guilty conscience from butchering hundreds of watches, to insist that it's just "pragmatism" and we're all a bunch of nitpicky pedants. But no matter how many times you insist on doing this - and I've seen dozens - it isn't making you look any more "right," or any less obnoxious.

My $.02. And p.s., since you already think we're all pedants, I might as well meet your expectations - a pendant is a piece of jewelry.
bbilford83 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-10-2019, 12:05 AM   #35 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 2,555
Points: 37 (+)
Default

In all your words you haven't answered my question; "What is wrong with what I did c.f. what the OP did?"


Try in practice not in philosophy (which in this case is in your opinion).
__________________
Paul ;-)
nzwatchdoctor is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-10-2019, 01:00 AM   #36 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 538
Points: 32 (+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nzwatchdoctor View Post
In all your words you haven't answered my question; "What is wrong with what I did c.f. what the OP did?"

Try in practice not in philosophy (which in this case is in your opinion).
Sigh. I fear you are trolling, as maybe you've always been, since Noah very clearly addressed what you did wrong compared to the OP "in practice" and not just "in philosophy." But here goes, as short and sweet as I can make it (which I admit is not so short, and certainly not sweet).

The OP noted that generic crystals (easily-obtainable, plentiful, modern and still-produced) often aren't perfect replacements for original OEM Seiko crystals because the latter have a beveled edge that leaves room for OEM Seiko bezels to snap on. So he grinds the aftermarket crystals to correctly fit the original Seikos we are all here to collect (often difficult to obtain, getting rarer by the day, and produced decades ago).

You, in contrast, repeatedly advocate that people should do the opposite - use whatever inexpensive aftermarket part you have on hand (in this case, the crystal), and permanently alter the original Seikos to allow for use of that part. In doing so, you not only alter the original Seiko so that it might never be used with the correct part in the future, but you fundamentally make the Seiko less authentic.

I know you don't care about this - you've said so many times - so that's the "philosophical" disagreement. But you're just wrong in denying it has no practical effect, because you're not taking the long view. Yes, many of these watches are not particularly rare or valuable, but with every watch you work on you're narrowing that pool of original, unmolested watches that the rest of us on this forum are trying to collect. Again, compared to what the OP did - I don't want to buy or own a watch that won't work with Seiko original parts, but if I can't source an original crystal no matter what, I just want an aftermarket one that looks and works as close as possible to the original. If you can't see the difference - practically or philosophically - you're willfully avoiding it.

Last thought, in the form of an analogy. You see these watches as pieces of machinery, which they of course are. But they're also collectibles, and (to some of us) pieces of historical art. If instead of a watchmaker you were, say, a restorer of literal art - paintings - would you alter the painting to match your available, modern tools? If you didn't have the right shade of brown to fix a worn-off patch of the Mona Lisa's hair, would you make her blonde because it "works" and "looks fine"? That's your approach, whereas the OP is just trying to alter his not-quite-right paint to match the painting.

I can already envision you saying the analogy is ridiculous - that a vintage Seiko isn't art, is meant to just "work," etc. But I don't look at my collection of 500+ vintage Seikos and Citizens that way - if I did, I would just buy a single cheap quartz watch with which I could tell the time. And I would certainly hope that you wouldn't approach, say, a 6215 or 5718 that way. But that's the common approach - philosophically and practically - that you have taken to all your advice on this forum. It's inexplicable to me and many others, and I really wish you'd stop.
bbilford83 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-10-2019, 01:31 AM   #37 (permalink)
Super Moderator
 
rileynp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,839
Points: 22 (+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nzwatchdoctor View Post
In all your words you haven't answered my question; "What is wrong with what I did c.f. what the OP did?"


Try in practice not in philosophy (which in this case is in your opinion).
I did, you just didn't want to hear it: You altered the watch to fit the part, and not the part to fit the watch. I then used several additional words to explain why this is a bad thing, and why there is a consensus on it being a bad thing. For you to ignore that makes me think you aren't ready to listen.

If you are willfully unethical in your business, we cannot stop you. But we can make sure that you don't poison the minds or practices of others who look up to you here as an authority.

I give a hearty salute to your contrarian attitude in all things- I have a strong streak of that myself so I sympathize in the impulse. But please realize that constantly waving that banner in a public setting does not create an environment of mutual respect and congeniality when you tell everyone they are all doing it wrong, whether it be their mode of transportation, their carnivorous eating habits, or their abhorrence of non-approved adhesives inside their watches, off the top of my head.

This type of behavior for years now on your part makes it seem like you are here solely for attention (negative or positive, you apparently delight in both), and not for genuinely sharing in the passion that otherwise unites us. I am beginning to suspect I've given you the benefit of the doubt far too long on this.
__________________
--Noah R.
rileynp is online now   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Seiko & Citizen Watch Forum Japanese Watch Reviews, Discussion & Trading forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Help! Fitting a new seiko crystal with a tension ring younoowho THE JAPANESE WATCH DISCUSSION FORUM 4 04-19-2016 10:10 AM
Crystal gasket fitting sliding head WATCHMAKING & TINKERING 3 02-04-2014 02:05 PM
Fitting new crystal on my SBBN007 - a step by step guide searat WATCHMAKING & TINKERING 7 06-01-2013 06:46 AM
Fitting a crystal with a tension ring? WhiteChristmas THE JAPANESE WATCH DISCUSSION FORUM 3 10-30-2012 01:55 PM
What tool to use for fitting 6309 crystal retaining ring? otherjohnuk THE JAPANESE WATCH DISCUSSION FORUM 3 07-21-2011 11:14 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:34 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.