Comments for Tick Talk http://watchmakingblog.com A mechanical watchmaker in a digital world Sat, 05 Jul 2008 16:20:33 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 Comment on Milgauss on a Zulu by Speedmaster http://watchmakingblog.com/2008/07/03/milgauss-on-a-zulu/#comment-500 Speedmaster Fri, 04 Jul 2008 12:48:36 +0000 http://watchmakingblog.com/2008/07/03/milgauss-on-a-zulu/#comment-500 Not a bad combo! ;-) Not a bad combo! ;-)

]]> Comment on Tuesday Tools - Roller Jewel Setting Tweezers by Sven http://watchmakingblog.com/2008/07/02/roller-tweezers/#comment-492 Sven Thu, 03 Jul 2008 10:47:00 +0000 http://watchmakingblog.com/2008/07/02/roller-tweezers/#comment-492 I read this post and was reminded for no good reason of a clock-punk adaptation of the 1995 film 'Hackers'. Does anyone here know of a watchmaking correspondence course worth looking in to? I live in the DFW area in north Texas, and except for rumours of a Cartier school near the airport there don't seem to be any commutable options. You can read the 'Hackers' adaptation, titled 'Clockers' at http://www.xorph.com/clockers/clockers.html . It is highly entertaining. I read this post and was reminded for no good reason of a clock-punk adaptation of the 1995 film ‘Hackers’.

Does anyone here know of a watchmaking correspondence course worth looking in to? I live in the DFW area in north Texas, and except for rumours of a Cartier school near the airport there don’t seem to be any commutable options.

You can read the ‘Hackers’ adaptation, titled ‘Clockers’ at http://www.xorph.com/clockers/clockers.html . It is highly entertaining.

]]> Comment on What you get from a counterfeit by Yossarian http://watchmakingblog.com/2008/02/22/what-you-get-from-a-counterfeit/#comment-480 Yossarian Mon, 30 Jun 2008 21:26:27 +0000 http://watchmakingblog.com/2008/02/22/what-you-get-from-a-counterfeit/#comment-480 My dad once bought a fake Rolex Submariner while we were on vacation. It only cost 50$ or so, but it actually went quite well. Today, 18 years later, it is still ticking away. I have never timed it, but my guess is that its time-keeping is lousy. Also, the whole case and "crystal" glass is covered in scratches. However, it was this watch that made me go out and buy a real Submariner for myself after all these years. I guess something good came out of it. You keep a very nice blog by the way, thanks! My dad once bought a fake Rolex Submariner while we were on vacation. It only cost 50$ or so, but it actually went quite well. Today, 18 years later, it is still ticking away. I have never timed it, but my guess is that its time-keeping is lousy. Also, the whole case and “crystal” glass is covered in scratches.

However, it was this watch that made me go out and buy a real Submariner for myself after all these years. I guess something good came out of it.

You keep a very nice blog by the way, thanks!

]]> Comment on The Parts Issue Continues by Prem http://watchmakingblog.com/2008/06/25/the-parts-issue-continues/#comment-469 Prem Fri, 27 Jun 2008 17:45:28 +0000 http://watchmakingblog.com/2008/06/25/the-parts-issue-continues/#comment-469 Hi Jp, Making common sense of it all, is the challenge s faced by watchmakers in the 21st century! Maurice Lacroix use, to their own advantage of course, modified ETA movements. These, as you are well aware of, are practically the same as other ETA movements- except when you get to parts like the main plates, or bridges, and ornamental designs. In every likelihood, one never needs parts such as these- but when it happens the manufacturer will take stock of the situation, and probably would want 'in' on the repair prices charged. The possibilities are limited, when you repair, and as my old Boss always said, 'Let common sense prevail' I'd always say Amen to that...LOL Prem Hi Jp,
Making common sense of it all, is the challenge s faced by watchmakers in the 21st century! Maurice Lacroix use, to their own advantage of course, modified ETA movements. These, as you are well aware of, are practically the same as other ETA movements- except when you get to parts like the main plates, or bridges, and ornamental designs. In every likelihood, one never needs parts such as these- but when it happens the manufacturer will take stock of the situation, and probably would want ‘in’ on the repair prices charged. The possibilities are limited, when you repair, and as my old Boss always said, ‘Let common sense prevail’
I’d always say Amen to that…LOL
Prem

]]> Comment on The Parts Issue Continues by Greg http://watchmakingblog.com/2008/06/25/the-parts-issue-continues/#comment-465 Greg Fri, 27 Jun 2008 07:06:20 +0000 http://watchmakingblog.com/2008/06/25/the-parts-issue-continues/#comment-465 I often see broken "parts only" movements on eBay. I guess the stuff you're referring too is unlikely to turn up in such a state, but you never know. At the watchmaking club/school I attend we have a massive collection of broken bits collected over the years - it's not often you can't find a suitable bit. :-) I often see broken “parts only” movements on eBay. I guess the stuff you’re referring too is unlikely to turn up in such a state, but you never know. At the watchmaking club/school I attend we have a massive collection of broken bits collected over the years - it’s not often you can’t find a suitable bit. :-)

]]> Comment on Water Resistance Explained by Prem http://watchmakingblog.com/2008/06/18/water-resistance-explained/#comment-452 Prem Fri, 20 Jun 2008 17:03:19 +0000 http://watchmakingblog.com/2008/06/18/water-resistance-explained/#comment-452 Great issue this one! Hi Jp, I just thought that it would be great to make a comment on this one....cheers! Prem ....... Most services/repairs should be deemed water-resistant to at least three atmospheres (ATM), which is equivalent to the pressure of water up to a depth of 30 metres. Sporty watch cases can resist moisture intrusion to a pressure of 5 or 20 ATM or higher. These are clearly marked on the outside case back of your watch. A wristwatch may only be designated as water-resistant if it is able to resist sweat, water drops as well as rain and does not allow any water to penetrate when held under water for 30 minutes at a depth of 1 metre. All of the watches carrying the label “water-resistant” or “water-resistant 30 m” meet these specifications. Since water pressure and temperatures can vary greatly while swimming or diving, such watches are not suitable for this activity even though they are water-resistant. Such watches are intended solely for normal everyday use. When pressures above 4 atmospheres (e.g. 5, 10, or 20 ATM) are indicated, wristwatches must be resistant against diving and vigorous movement in the water – in other words, a watch suitable for swimming must be tested to at least 10 ATM and thus will be water-resistant to a pressure equivalent to 100 metres. How long a wristwatch remains water-proof depends very much on how the watch is treated. A water-proof designation only refers to the watch at the time the test is conducted. Through aging, wear and tear, or damage, the state of the watch can change at any time. The more carefully a watch is handled, the longer it will retain its water-tight seals. Precise statements about duration are therefore not possible here. In theory, a watch can lose its water-resistance in a very short time – for example through a blow to the crown, massive impact to the case, a broken crystal, or through strong temperature changes (sauna, hot showers, cold, etc.). Every watch has maximum tolerances, and if these are exceeded, damage will occur. Watches built to a higher standard can endure greater loads, but even these have their limits. Therefore, every watch should be checked for water-resistance by a qualified professional as often as possible. The basic rule is: Water-resistance is not a permanent characteristic. At the latest, when condensation appears inside the crystal, it is time to have your watch inspected by a qualified watchmaker. Great issue this one!
Hi Jp, I just thought that it would be great to make a comment on this one….cheers! Prem ……. Most services/repairs should be deemed water-resistant to at least three atmospheres (ATM), which is equivalent to the pressure of water up to a depth of 30 metres. Sporty watch cases can resist moisture intrusion to a pressure of 5 or 20 ATM or higher. These are clearly marked on the outside case back of your watch.

A wristwatch may only be designated as water-resistant if it is able to resist sweat, water drops as well as rain and does not allow any water to penetrate when held under water for 30 minutes at a depth of 1 metre. All of the watches carrying the label “water-resistant” or “water-resistant 30 m” meet these specifications.

Since water pressure and temperatures can vary greatly while swimming or diving, such watches are not suitable for this activity even though they are water-resistant. Such watches are intended solely for normal everyday use. When pressures above 4 atmospheres (e.g. 5, 10, or 20 ATM) are indicated, wristwatches must be resistant against diving and vigorous movement in the water – in other words, a watch suitable for swimming must be tested to at least 10 ATM and thus will be water-resistant to a pressure equivalent to 100 metres.

How long a wristwatch remains water-proof depends very much on how the watch is treated. A water-proof designation only refers to the watch at the time the test is conducted. Through aging, wear and tear, or damage, the state of the watch can change at any time. The more carefully a watch is handled, the longer it will retain its water-tight seals. Precise statements about duration are therefore not possible here. In theory, a watch can lose its water-resistance in a very short time – for example through a blow to the crown, massive impact to the case, a broken crystal, or through strong temperature changes (sauna, hot showers, cold, etc.). Every watch has maximum tolerances, and if these are exceeded, damage will occur. Watches built to a higher standard can endure greater loads, but even these have their limits. Therefore, every watch should be checked for water-resistance by a qualified professional as often as possible. The basic rule is: Water-resistance is not a permanent characteristic. At the latest, when condensation appears inside the crystal, it is time to have your watch inspected by a qualified watchmaker.

]]> Comment on Cyclops Removal by Fr. John Shinall http://watchmakingblog.com/2008/04/23/cyclops-removal/#comment-450 Fr. John Shinall Thu, 19 Jun 2008 15:28:48 +0000 http://watchmakingblog.com/2008/04/23/cyclops-removal/#comment-450 I was contemplating a Rolex Explorer II but was turned off by the horrid Cyclops. I found this post and with it, hope. I took the acetone route soaking a new Rolex crystal in a glass of acetone for a couple of days. The bubble then popped off with my thumbnail. My watchmaker installed the "bubbleless" crystal and returned the original crystal along with my watch. The dial is beautiful and the date is now visible from wider angles rather than looking down through the magnifier. Thanks for the info. I was contemplating a Rolex Explorer II but was turned off by the horrid Cyclops. I found this post and with it, hope.

I took the acetone route soaking a new Rolex crystal in a glass of acetone for a couple of days. The bubble then popped off with my thumbnail.

My watchmaker installed the “bubbleless” crystal and returned the original crystal along with my watch.

The dial is beautiful and the date is now visible from wider angles rather than looking down through the magnifier.

Thanks for the info.

]]> Comment on Basel Update by Tick Talk » Water Resistance Explained http://watchmakingblog.com/2008/04/03/basel-update/#comment-444 Tick Talk » Water Resistance Explained Thu, 19 Jun 2008 03:28:58 +0000 http://watchmakingblog.com/2008/04/03/basel-update/#comment-444 [...] is a powerful substance. At the depth of the Titanic shipwreck most watches would be crushed by the force of the water (as would all people not enclosed in a specially [...] […] is a powerful substance. At the depth of the Titanic shipwreck most watches would be crushed by the force of the water (as would all people not enclosed in a specially […]

]]> Comment on The Lititz Watch Technicum by Zachary Hanson http://watchmakingblog.com/2008/01/15/the-lititz-watch-technicum/#comment-443 Zachary Hanson Thu, 19 Jun 2008 02:10:27 +0000 http://watchmakingblog.com/2008/01/15/the-lititz-watch-technicum/#comment-443 I was wondering if you could give me any information on applying to the LWT? I am a junior in High School, and I would love to persue my hobby as a profession. I am undergoing an appretniceship with a local watchmaker in a few months, but I think that training at the LWT would be amazing. Thanks! I was wondering if you could give me any information on applying to the LWT? I am a junior in High School, and I would love to persue my hobby as a profession. I am undergoing an appretniceship with a local watchmaker in a few months, but I think that training at the LWT would be amazing. Thanks!

]]> Comment on Parts Availability by The Other Me » The right to choose your customers. http://watchmakingblog.com/2008/01/31/parts-availability/#comment-436 The Other Me » The right to choose your customers. Wed, 18 Jun 2008 04:05:38 +0000 http://watchmakingblog.com/2008/01/31/parts-availability/#comment-436 [...] the other side of the equation, as a watchmaker many watch companies refuse to do business with me (sell me parts) because I don’t sell their watches, or because [...] […] the other side of the equation, as a watchmaker many watch companies refuse to do business with me (sell me parts) because I don’t sell their watches, or because […]

]]>