The Watch Site banner
1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,578 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I've just serviced a 6139 movement, in good general condition, but the timegrapher showed it running 10mins/day slow. Too slow to be fixed by adjusting the balance. I tried a spare balance assembly from a another movement but got a similar result. The spare balance was from a movement in poor, worn condition, so I wasn't certain my freshly serviced movement had a problem. To be sure, I tried a third balance from a watch I knew to be working well (I checked the watch on the timegrapher before removing the balance). I was happy to find that with the third balance my movement ran OK, spot on.

The first two balances look OK, no visible damage to the hairspring, and the diashocks are clean. Is this issue caused by the springs just weakening with age, or something else?

Cheers, Sam.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
912 Posts
Are you sure the coils of those hairsprings weren't rubbing on the balance or the cock? - they often do.


Did you clean the hairsprings? I dip them in horosolve and swish around a bit, then hang up to dry and blow off a bit. Polish the pivots off a bit too in the pith wood if I think they need it.

Not sure about them weaking but I guess they could, keen to hear what others think...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,578 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
The hairsprings had been cleaned by fitting the balance assembly to a bare mainplate, then into the ultrasonic, followed by a gentle rinse in lighter fluid.

It's hard to get a good view of the spring in action due to the large balance bridge of the 6139, but I will take another look. At rest the coils look evenly spaced and level.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,630 Posts
While no expert on hairsprings it seems to make sense that and film or residue on the hairspring will impede it in is proper smooth function. When I disassemble a movement for service I like to keep the complete balance assemble separate and it is own separate little container. The spring has to be clean of any substance is what I was always told. Solvents that work on oil and dry with no residue are the best if you do need to clean one. As mentioned in the earlier post lighter fluid works good just don't lite up a smoke at the bench while cleaning! Acetone is another good solvent for cleaning them.

Michael
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
912 Posts
Agreed Melt...but the third balance worked better than the first two...so I guess his was ok.

I do find lighter fluid leaves a slight film - which is why I stopped using it and switched to horosolve - initially brought for degreasing the hairspring but now find it as useful elsewhere. Anyone else use this as a simple cleaner?

What amplitude are getting now Sam? What are you hoping to get!!?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,578 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Tom - I use a PC program, Biburo, for regulating. It's fine for setting the beat and rate but pretty hopeless for measuring the amplitude. The developer said they were going to improve this but I don't think they ever got round to it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
912 Posts
Tom - I use a PC program, Biburo, for regulating. It's fine for setting the beat and rate but pretty hopeless for measuring the amplitude. The developer said they were going to improve this but I don't think they ever got round to it.
Ah! I tried something similar I think, tried making my own microphone for it etc (should be easy for a Controls and automation engineer right?! - pah, gave up with that).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
912 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,973 Posts
I tried Biburo a while back when you did your piece but after a lot of faffing around lost confidence in my ability to get a consistent result from it. I am not an electronics or computer expert which is a disadvantage.

Sorry to go on but eventually I bought a Timegrapher, its quick easy and confidence inspiring in the way it gives results.

I was thinking along the same lines as Tom, amplitude is a prerequisite along with beat error and frequency to enable troubleshooting. It can also be depressing when you see your freshly serviced movement has a crap amplitude:biggrin:
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
33,994 Posts
:67:

What do you mean Mike - we're all awesome at it right!
....over 200 I'm happy...190 I still convince myself I'm happy. 170 I get a little annoyed with myself. Would love to know how others look at it.
Exactly my thoughts, imo one of the best things about having a Timegrapher is you can see all these figures, but imo one of the worst things about having a Timegrapher is you can see all these figures :)

Is ignorance bliss some times ? :)

ps: Why is it that a 6139 which has the same barrel and mainspring has the 6105 always seems to have a higher amplitude ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
912 Posts
Exactly my thoughts, imo one of the best things about having a Timegrapher is you can see all these figures, but imo one of the worst things about having a Timegrapher is you can see all these figures :)

Is ignorance bliss some times ? :)
Yeah I agree there!

ps: Why is it that a 6139 which has the same barrel and mainspring has the 6105 always seems to have a higher amplitude ?
Becasue chronographs are better than divers?? :biggrin:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,578 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
I think there could be something in what John says, does the performance of a chronograph deteriorate faster when there are minor issues - wear, 'weak springs' etc, than a regular movement?
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
33,994 Posts
They don't: 6139A/B mainspring= #401616. 6105A/B mainspring= #401615.
Ages ago i saw that both movements took part #205613, complete barrel and arbor and i just assumed that the 6139 took the same main spring as the 6105, just goes to show you can't assume anything :)

Is there any difference in the main spring ? or is it just a number thing with Seiko ?

I do have a oem 6105 main spring that i bought from Stefan.


 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top