Interesting Observation. Never noticed. Thanks for Sharing
Alex

Gesendet von meinem Mi 9 Lite mit Tapatalk

 

I have noticed this slight difference as well.

 

Same variation also exist in the longer ones used in 600x and few more models.

I noticed the one without the extra groove (left) is mostly on earlier model, 6139A have them. Not sure when the cutoff is done but I’ve seen resist model with them as well.

 

Thanks. I just opened and checked my JDM Speed-Timer 6139A 21J and another international market 6139A 17J PROOF. They are all type A (without groove). So I agree with you the type A is from early examples and type B (with groove) came later.

 

Great thread, Indera -
Confirming all four of my 6139A movement chronographs have type A pushers also, while my 6139B have type B pushers.

6139A - my examples (JDM and International 600X/601X) from May 1969 - March 1970 all look like this

6139B (600X) from Dec 1977

 

Great thread, Indera -
Confirming all four of my 6139A movement chronographs had type A pushers also, while my 6139B had type B pushers.

6139A - my examples (JDM and International 600X/601X) from May 1969 - March 1970
View attachment 496777

6139B (600X) from Dec 1977
View attachment 496778

Thanks for confirming. Now I need to decide where to put this pusher issue in my list of things that I can and cannot accept in my 6139.

Acceptable list:

1. A good aftermarket crystal
2. Not having CRC crystal in early 6139
3. Not having matte H/M hands in early 6139

Not acceptable list:

1. Not having two-piece sweep hand in 6139A PROOF

 

Great … now I have a couple early Pogues that have been carefully restored with NOS @#$&*%! incorrect pushers ;-)

 

I'll never tell..............

 

^ ^ ^ This is the BEST explanation of what a true Seiko WIS is that I have ever read ^ ^ ^

IMO the pursuit of truly correct vs just looking close enough is one of the most rewarding adventures in the Seiko watch world.

 

Hrrrmmmm, damn, I have to check now. LOL. I'll wait until servicing time. ugh.

<* shark >>><

 

Having just finished your (and I hate to even use this nickname) "true Pogue", it has style "A".

Now you'll be able to sleep tonight Larry!

 

Not sure I can get upset if I found any of my 6139As had 6139B pushers if they are NOS OEM. I'd consider it like a service part. They are indistinguishable when assembled and pure genuine Seiko.

 

Not sure I can get upset if I found any of my 6139As had 6139B pushers if they are NOS OEM. I'd consider it like a service part. They are indistinguishable when assembled and pure genuine Seiko.

My thoughts, exactly. If that makes me less of a Seiko WIS, oh well….

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Truth be told, I don’t think I‘m likely to lose too much sleep over it. It wasn’t easy to find NOS pushers, even if it turns out they were period incorrect. And I’ve probably unbent enough Pogue pushers — or asked John to do it for me — that I’ve started to think of them as a wear item.

 

I bet if any of these early 6139A watches came into Seiko Service Center later in life with bent pushers as many of these develop over time, they were replaced with the later B style version pushers. Just look at their practice with two part sweep hands replaced with one part sweep. Maybe Seiko add that extra ridge for greater strength of the component.

 

Looking closer at A and B Seiko must have made the change for a reason. I am certainly not an engineer or product designer and have very little knowledge of physics but here is what I see:

Type A have more support at the top - toward the pusher end
Type B have more support in the middle section with added horizontal disc

Depending on where there is more force the design would make a difference in the wear and bending of the part. When engaging the pusher is there more force at the top (pusher button) or bottom (chronograph lever in the movement)???

To my eye the weakness lies in the lower section which is the same in both A and B.

 

Personally, either original pusher works for me. My WISness is mellowing out a bit and I'm not as persnickety as I use to be. Lifes too Short............

 

Because the pusher stems are in the case and not visible then they become unimportant to some people. This makes sense. Only the pusher tops with beveled edges are seen so that is what matters to some people.

 

I normally buy almost all of my vintage Seiko parts online - YJ, IG, and Ebay. But about 3 months ago I stumbled on to a local watch repair shop and the owner has been fixing Seiko watches for over 30 years. Owner's name is Wat - Great guy and he sold me almost all of the decent 6139 pushers. Many were in very rough condition and I simply picked those in the best condition. After cleaning, straightening, and installing new O-ring gaskets and new springs, I installed 2 sets that were immediately needed in project watches and kept the rest as spares. I randomly installed pushers not knowing there was a difference in A and B.

Thank You Indera for the great thread . . . Now I know better