1931 Perry

Life is fully of ironies and watch collecting is no different.  My favorite models tend to be from the 1930s but they are also my least favorite to work on.

Well, that's not entirely true.  My absolute least favorite are the silver-colored microrotor movements from the TM-line... the 628 and it's kin.  They have a knack for loose cannon pinions where the movement runs fine but the hands don't keep up.  Parts are nonexistent.  I don't even bother working on them anymore.

But, back to my original thought, I hate that I love the 1930s models.  They're the best the world had to offer at the time but, like cars or planes, watches from this era are much less robust than watches made 15 to 20 years later.  Technology and materials improved quickly over the 1930s and 40s and, compounded by decades of use, early Hamilton watches can be extremely temperamental.

Don't get me wrong... they're excellent time pieces and when properly maintained they are stunning.  It's just that use and abuse or even one false step can make them untrustworthy time pieces.  

I always think about how many old black and white movies from the day had a scene where someone asks, "Do you have the time? My watch has stopped".  In the 1930s, there was a watchmaker in every jewelry store.

My latest project is a good example of this paradox - its a beautiful 1931 Perry.  The 1931 Perry was the first of three models to be called Perry.  It was produced for four years.  It was offered in white or yellow 14K gold filled.  It's barrel-shaped case is accented by six ridges or bands around it's middle.  It was offered with a luminous dial, a black enamel dial, or a dial with applied gold numerals (or raised gold figures as it was marketed at the time).

It's interesting to note that the price for the Perry decreased slightly over it's production run - considering it was the height of the Great Depression.  $55 in 1933 was roughly $1,300 by today's standards, so the Perry was not an inexpensive watch.  I think the white Perry is a little more scarce than the yellow.  When paired with the black enamel dial, I think the white Perry is my favorite option.

My project watch is the luminous version and it's missing a little of the luminous paint from the hour hand.  This case is in remarkable condition.  It doesn't show the typical wear through on the corners of the bezel that most Perry's will show after decades of shirt cuffs rubbing across it.  The crown is considerably more worn than the rest of the watch.

It's not unusual for the case back to show a lot of wear around the perimeter and, like the bezel, this back is in great shape.

Uh oh... here we go.  The movement is fairly clean.  I can see there's an incorrect screw holding the barrel bridge near the crown.  What's more concerning is the regulator is set to "super slow" and, if you look closely, the hairspring is not centered, it's shifted down and to the left in the photo below.

I usually don't test watches before I service them because it's like measuring how dirty you are before you take a shower... it doesn't usually matter.  What matters is how clean you are when you're finished.  In this case my senses tell me this watch has some issues beyond just being dirty, so a baseline can confirm my suspicions. 

Sure enough, it's running extremely fast - so fast that my timer thinks its well beyond the 18000 beat per hour rate that is expected.  I guess that's why the regulator is set to super slow.  

Oh well, it doesn't really change the path I have to take.  It just tells me what to expect along the way.

After disassembling the movement, I can see the mainspring is already a "lifetime" white alloy design.  That's good.  It's very dirty but it can be cleaned up and reused.

Everything is cleaned and dried.  The bezel and crystal are sitting outside in the sunshine.  The crystal was loose and I had to reglue it with UV glue - the sunshine will secure it in place.

The movement is almost reassembled.  I wound the mainspring up and it's now the moment of truth.  Will the balance run?

It's ticking away, so that's a good sign.  There's a huge difference between ticking and keeping accurate time.  You really need a timer to listen to the ticking and provide an assessment.  In fact, you and I just hear "tick tick tick tick" but there are actually several noises in the watch that are used to determine how it's running.  I set the regulator to the center to see how things are as a baseline.

Well... it's running about 10 minutes fast per day.  That's a brisk pace, for sure.  I'll move the regulator to slow and see what happens.

At full slow, the beat rate drops to about 6 minutes fast per day.

Balances from this era are very complex.  Keeping accurate time is more difficult than you might think... things like temperature, air pressure, position (dial up, dial down, etc), and mainspring tension can all impact the beat rate of the movement.  Eventually changes in materials would provide improvements but at this point in time, the balance had several design aspects to help.  One of them are the timing screws at the end of the balance arms.  If you screw them inward, the watch will run faster.  This is not unlike a spinning figure skater... when the draw their arms in, the spin quickly and when they push there hands outward they stop spinning.  The timing screws need to be adjusted the same (in or out) but they can slow or speed up the beat rate quite a bit.

This balance already has the timing screws all the way out.  So I'm walking in someone's footsteps here - as the regulator set to super slow attests.  The next option is to add weight to the balance wheel.  That's done by adding tiny discs to the various screws on the balance wheel.  The weights come in various sizes.  This is very tricky business though - you need to add the same weight on opposing sides of the wheel so that it stays balanced.  Since I'm running 6 minutes fast, I'll start with adding two 2 minute weights and see where I wind up.

Well, as expected, the movement is running roughly two minutes fast per day now.  Another issue with this balance is the off-center hairspring.  The hair spring is very precise coil that it bound on two ends... at the center (balance staff) and the outside end (the balance cock).  Ideally it will coil evenly from the outside to the inside, centered around the balance staff.  When properly centered, the hairspring will "breath" open and closed as it rotates back and forth. 

Since this hairspring is obviously not centered, it's "breathing" can be constrained, especially if the movement is on it's side.  There's always a little more friction with a movement on it's side so a little variation is anticipated but in this case, the variation could be a lot more than the +/- 30 seconds per day that Hamilton originally specified.

At this point, it's hard to say what to do next.  There are several options.  First, I could try to adjust the hairspring - which is easier said than done.  Not only does it need to be centered, it also has to be perfectly level.  A second option would be to replace the hairspring with a different hairspring and hope they are close to the same length - as the hairspring is matched to the mass of the balance.  A third thing is to replace the balance wheel as an assembly.  That would require having a good balance wheel to use, which after almost 100 years they are getting hard to find.

I thought this would be an interesting project to share.  Readers of the blog might presume that every project goes smoothly and restoring watches is "easy".  The reality is this type of work can be tricky business and, although it's straightforward, there can be a lot of curves that have to be navigated.  Projects like this remind me that I also enjoy fishing... maybe I should do that instead.

1953 Lindsay

Change is hard, as they say.  Like old soldiers who never die, when it comes to watch styles they just fade away.

If you step back and look at the various models in Hamilton's lineup you can almost see points in time when design aesthetics changed.  I guess that's why a lot of collectors tend to gravitate toward a favorite decade.

For example - the earliest men's models were fairly straightforward geometric shapes with three piece cases and only a handful of choices.  They were moderately large, by vintage standards, and the variety came in terms of different case materials and dial variations.

Then "this was in" and watches became sleeker, smaller, and often "long and lean"... curved to fit the wrist.  Some watches became small enough you could argue they were intended for women.  In fact, some models were offered in both the men's and women's line.

Soon after watches started to get some added flair with intricately flowing case shapes and complex surfaces.  The addition of specially paired bracelets echoed the case design.

That led to futuristic design with a modern interpretation that echoed the countries interest in space and the beyond.

In the 1960s it "was the sky's the limit" and there was a little something for everyone... with literally over 100 unique models in the men's lineup.  You could develop an impressive Hamilton collection by focusing solely on the 1960s.

Design influences didn't neatly evolve at specific time intervals.  There were external factors at play.  For instance, several watch manufacturers offered rose gold models in 1940 and they were universally disrupted by WWII.  After the war, rose gold apparently wasn't in vogue.  Some design aspects persisted and others eventually faded away.

I find "one year wonder" models to be interesting mileposts of design watershed moments.  It's as if they are the last hurrah that marked the end of one era and the start of something new.

Take, for example, the 1953 Lindsay.  It was produced for only a single year.

The Lindsay looks like a lot of other models, like the Grover  or the Medford, for instance.  Why was it only offered for a single year?  Perhaps the design was simply played out, and it was time for something new.  Starting in 1954 all sorts of new things would be introduced... automatics, calendar complications, even Electrics were right around the corner.

Although the Lindsay was produced for just a year, it's not an uncommon model.  I've seen quite a few but I always have to look it up because the ubiquitous design is so similar to other models.

The catalog doesn't go into much detail about the Lindsay's features.  The 17 jewel movement would indicate that it has 12/0 sized 752 movement inside.  The natural gold filled case would likely be 10K gold filled, as 14K gold filled cases typically received a 19 jewel movement.  The dial is a butler-finished sterling silver design with solid 18K gold numerals - a hallmark of Hamilton quality.

My project watch arrived in serious need of some TLC.  It's crystal and minute hand are missing in action and a fair degree of "dial rash" has started to develop.  It does seem to tick - so that's a promising sign.

The gold filled case back shows stripes from what was probably a one piece nylon strap threaded through the lugs.  I should be able to clean this up nicely.

The inside of the case back makes identifying the model easy.  The 12/0 sized 752 movement is very similar to the 770 movement that would replace it in 1955.  Most of the parts are interchangeable.  It's interesting that the serial number on the barrel bridge still has black enamel while all the other bridges have lost their enameling.

While all the parts are being cleaned I will install a new glass crystal in the bezel.  Glass crystals typically require a little shaping with 600 grit wet sandpaper and are held in place with UV glue.  It can take quite a while to get them to fit properly and if you're not careful, you can chip them and have to start over with a new crystal.

All of the parts are now cleaned and ready to be reassembled.  The bezel is outside sitting in the sun so the glue will cure.

I got everything back together and the movement would not run.  The balance swung nicely but nothing happened.  It didn't take long to realize there was no impulse jewel on the balance!  It must have fallen out somewhere along the way.  It's held in place with shellac.  Without the impulse jewel there's nothing for the pallet fork to drive.   I looked in my cleaning jars and it wasn't there - it's so tiny that it could be anywhere and I'd never see it.

I have found that new hobbyists commonly think isopropyl alcohol would be a good liquid to clean watch parts with... it's readily available, it dries quickly, it's a solvent, etc.  Although that's all true, it also dissolves shellac.  So if you're thinking about cleaning your watch, don't use alcohol, as you will likely lose the glue that holds the jewels in the pallet fork and balance roller table.

Of course, the impulse jewel may have come loose from being 73 years old as well.  So who knows why it's missing?  Regardless, at this point I can install another roller table from another balance or I can use another balance assembly - assuming I have one (which, fortunately, I do).

A replacement balance gets the movement back in functioning order.  Based on the time grapher,  only a slight tweak is needed to bring the beat rate in line.  Everything else is looking good.

The new glass crystal, replacement minute hand, and a fresh black strap complete the restoration of this fine 1953 Lindsay.  I was able to clean the dial up nicely - it's not perfect but people tend to have spots when they're 73 years old too - so we can afford to give this little watch some grace.  It's a nice watch and now ready for wrist time.

1965 Accumatic A-506

I think if you were to imagine in your mind's eye what a 1960s watch would look like, you'd probably get pretty close to the design for the 1965 Accumatic A-506.  You'd probably imagine something very sleek, perhaps a little unusual, likely on a metal bracelet, arguably with luminous hands. 

That pretty much sums up the A-506.  It was introduced in 1965 and produced into the early 1970s.  Originally it was offered with a silver-colored textured dial as well as a black dial.  I'm not sure if the black dial was textured though.

In 1968 the bracelet design was changed and it appears, at least from the catalog, that the dial was changed to white and lost the texture.  The dial kept the distinctive angular font for the numerals though.

in 1972 the black dialed version was dropped and the priced increased a little to the equivalent of about $550 in today's currency.

I've seen quite a few A-506's in my travels and I would say that almost every one of them had the silver textured dial with the same moisture-related issues on the crown side.  My latest project watch is no exception.  However, it's not the worst I've seen.

As received, it features a well-worn crystal and the crown has an unfamiliar logo that looks like a U but is definitely not an Omega.  The dial looks okay but there's a little green toning around the 3 - clearly indicating moisture intrusion.  The finish on this dial is very susceptible to moisture and it would be impossible to refinish without losing the original textured details.   If you ever get moisture in your watch you want to open it up to dry out or get it serviced right away.

Without the crystal in the way you can see the toning on the right side of the dial more clearly.  It's not horrible but it is what it is, at this point.

The female side of the two piece stem is a bit rusted.  I'll replace that as rusted stems will eventually fail to hold the male side and the crown will disappear.  The movement is dirty and I didn't try to wind it so hopefully there are no lurking issues.  It's interesting that this movement has a 689 movement but a rotor framework from a 689A.  The framework for a 689 extends over the balance and you can see this one does not.  I recently learned the A in 689A is because the barrel in the 689A is anodized - that's a protective coating.  I've often wondered what made a 689A different from the 689 - other than the shape of the framework.  All of the other parts are identical - other than the barrel. 

Well, I did find one issue.  The ratchet wheel that winds the mainspring is missing several teeth.  The pinion on the wheel from the automatic framework is also missing a few teeth.  So there's no way this movement would be able to wind itself.  Both of these parts will need to be replaced.  I suspect the other wheels in the framework are bad as something caused these two parts to get jammed together and fail.

Everything is disassembled and cleaned before going back together with fresh lubricants.  You can't see well in the photo but the barrel is not the anodized version, it's bright and shiny.

With a replacement ratchet wheel, the movement is now wound up and ticking away with a brisk motion.

Looking good... just a couple of tweaks to reduce the beat error is needed... well, not so much necessary but it's so easy to do that I'd feel guilty not fine tuning it.

It doesn't take much of an adjustment to dial in the timing.

I replaced the framework with a proper 689 style and this watch is now winding as smoothly as it should.  Paired with a nice leather strap, this 60 year old A-506 is looking fantastic and ready for some wrist time.