1956 Automatic K-455

The Automatic K-455 is an interesting watch. It was introduced in 1956 and produced for three years.

  

As you can see in the catalog, it came with two dial patterns, all numerals or with numerals and luminous dots.  Both dials have a pearled minute track to match.

The case is 10K yellow gold filled and one of the interesting facts about the watch is it shares a case with another model - the Transcontinental A.  In fact, Hamilton didn't have enough K-455 case backs (or they had too many Transcontinental A backs) because you will find the K-455 often has Transcontinental A stamped into the case back.

Inside you'll find the 17 jewel Hamilton 661 movement - a very popular KF movement used in lots of Hamilton automatic models in the 1950's.

I recently picked up a K-455 project watch.  As received it had a serious case of "dial rash" which means this watch must not have had a crystal for quite some time.  The crystal on it was very nice so it must have been a recent replacement.

I'm a sucker for Christmas watches and I will usually make a run at one like a trout goes after a mealworm.

The 661 movement is a big and chunky movement - it requires a deep case so most automatics from the 1950s are fairly thick.  That's probably why the Thin-o-matics were introduced soon after.

Here's a better shot at the dial.  It's funny how the grime doesn't tend to form around the numbers… ever notice that?  I'll try to clean it but I don't want to loose the printing as getting a pearled track dial redone doesn't always work out well.

As you can see below, the inside of the case back is stamped Transcontinental "A".

And here's the finished product.  The dial cleaned up okay but not great.  It looks better than my light box makes it out to be.  I also relumed the hands so they will glow in the dark again (when charged by light first).  There's a case ding just above the 12 - this watch must have had a rough life and it's showing it's age a little.   The slightly dingy dial fits right in.

The K-455 is a nice looking watch.  You don't tend to see them very often though so if they're not considered to be rare, they are definitely uncommon.

UPDATE:   I decided to get this dial redone and I sent it to Eagle Dial (google them for contact info).  I had never used them before and they did a decent job.  The only thing I would improve if I could was the font used is a serif font and should be sans-serif.  But other than that, they did a great job.

UPDATE to the Update:  The green hands were a bit of a distraction so I redid them with white lume.  I think it looks much better now.

UPDATE Dec 2015:

I happened upon a K-455 project watch with the other dial option, and it came with it's original Kreisler bracelet to boot!

1962 Gary - Beat Error Adjustment

I learned something new this week.  I bought what I thought was one model and it turns out it's another model that is virtually identical to the one I thought it was.  Sound confusing?  It was.

There are a handful of models that were made in different years but share common features.  For example, there's the 1936 Morley and the 1941 Douglas - they share the same case but have different dials.  Then there's the 1939 Bowman and the 1940 Emerson - they share the same dials and crystals but the case features are different.

My most recent example is a 1962 Gary.  It was made through 1967 and in 1968 Hamilton introduced the Thinline 6500.

Both models were made in yellow rolled gold plate cases as well as white rolled gold plate cases.  Both cases have stainless steel backs. The only thing that really seems to differentiate the models is the fine details of the bracelet - and I mean really fine details - as you can see the two catalog images are very close to each other.  The Thinline 6500 adds additional texture to the flat areas of the case and bracelet.  If you had them side by side in person you would also see the hour markers are slightly different and the hands on the Thinline are slightly smaller.  So they are definitely different models.

To confuse things even further, there's also a diamond-dial version in white rolled gold case called the Lord Lancaster A - but at least the diamond dial makes it easy to identify.  It also came on a black suede strap.

Tucked inside the 1962 Gary is a Hamilton 686 Swiss-made movement.  I suspect (so I could be wrong) that the Thinline 6500 has a similar Hamilton 639 movement.

So as I said at the start, I learned something new this week because I started off by buying what I thought was a Thinline 6500.  It was a grungy-looking watch and missing it's crown.  The crystal was a bit beat up too.  A little TLC would go a long way toward improving this watch.

The 17 jewel 686 movement is based on the A. Schild (AS) 1200 - which you can still buy new today.  It was a little dirty but otherwise in fine condition.

Thinking I had a Thinline 6500, I located the replacement crystal.  So far so good.

Then, thanks to the cumulative knowledge of my fellow Hamilton collectors, I learned that the 1962 Gary is pretty darned similar to the Thinline 6500.  In fact, so similar that I had misidentified my project watch.

If you look really closely at the photo below, there's a little groove inside the crystal ledge on the bezel in the center at the top and bottom.

If you compare that to the GS crystal for a Gary (and Lord Lancaster A) it actually comes with a corresponding portion to snap into that ledge.

If you look closely at the packaging, the two crystals differ by 1-tenth of a millimeter in dimensions.  My Thinline 6500 crystal fit the Gary bezel with no problems at all.

Well, everything gets disassembled and thoroughly cleaned.  Once it's all dry it goes back together with lubrication in all the critical areas.

One the timer, the now-running movement is keeping decent time, but notice the "beat error" of 7.5ms. Beat error is basically how far the balance swings to one side versus the other.  The two lines you see on the left of the screen below represent the "tick and the tock" of the balance swinging and the gap between them is the beat error.  Ideally you want the two lines to be horizontal and close together.

You can see below the two lines are separated and trending upward slightly - that means it's running slightly fast (18 seconds per day) and has a beat error of 7.5.  The 256 is the degrees of amplitude the balance swings - over 200 is a good goal.  The 18,000 is the "beat rate" and represents 18,000 beats in one hour.  Each tick is a beat - so if you've ever counted "one mississippi, two mississippi"- you've counted with a 5 beat per second rate, which is the same as 18,000 beats per hour.

By now you're probably thinking… "That's pretty cool, I didn't know that.  But why do I care about the beat error?"

Good question.  Obviously if it's too high the watch won't run well.  However, the main reason (in my opinion) is a watch with too high a beat error will stop sooner than a watch with a low beat error.  A high beat error means the balance's impulse jewel isn't centered in the pallet fork so at rest, the balance wants to rest off to one side or the other.  Since the pallet fork is what delivers the energy to the impulse jewel, it needs to supply more energy to get the balance to swing to the side that is off center.  Ideally the pallet fork would supply the same energy to both sides - which would allow the watch to run until all of the energy is expended.

Adjusting for beat error means moving the impulse jewel so that it's centered with the pallet fork.  The balance would swing freely if it were not attached at the stud end of the hair spring.  To move the position of the impulse pin, you need to move it relative to the position of the hairspring stud.

I'm willing to bet that I've lost you at this point - so watch this video and you'll catch up with me.

How a Watch Works Video

Too further explain adjusting for beat error, I'll use you as the balance wheel.  Let's pretend your right hand is the impulse jewel and your left hand is the hairspring stud.  Put your right arm straight out to the right and your left arm straight out to the left.  You should look like a traffic cop stopping traffic in both directions.  Let's say that you are now in "equilibrium" and comfortable at rest in this position.

Now, let's say the center of the pallet fork is the computer screen you're looking at.  Is your right hand pointing to the computer screen?  No, probably not - it's likely pointing off to the right somewhere.  That means that you've got a large beat error.

To adjust it, you need to move your right arm (without moving your left arm) to the left so that your hand is pointing to the screen.   Moving your right arm to the left would be moving against the hairspring… it would want you to get back to equilibrium.  Since your left arm is fixed to the left, you'd need to adjust the other end of the hairspring, called the "collet", where it attaches to the balance staff, so that at equilibrium, your right hand is pointing to the screen and your left arm is straight off to the left.  That's adjusting for the beat error on most Hamilton movements.

It's a pain.

The good news is on the 686, the hairspring stud is moveable - that means you can move your left hand  and essentially rotate your entire body so, with your arms straight out to the sides, you can move your right hand to the left by moving your left hand to the left… staying in equilibrium the entire time.

In the shot below, the red arrow is pointing to the hair spring stud.  It can be moved left or right.  The blue arrow is pointing to the regulator, which effectively lengthens or shortens the hairspring to make the watch run slower or faster.  By moving the hairspring stud, I can adjust the watch's beat error.

In this shot, I've adjusted it to 0.3ms…  I'd be happy with that on any other watch.

But a little more tweaking and I can get it down to zero.  It doesn't get better than that.  My two lines have converged to a single line and tweaking the regulator slows it to 9 seconds fast per day.  I like to leave watches running a little fast as they will slow slightly as the mainspring lets out.

And here's the finished product all cleaned up with a new crystal and Hamilton crown.  The dial shows it's age with a few spots but there's not much to do about that other than getting it redone and it's not that bad.

On the wrist with normal lighting, the watch looks much better.

1961 Accumatic A-501

Hamilton introduced it's first automatics in 1954 with the Automatic K-series in a variety of case metals and designs.  The second generation of automatics was added in 1956 with the Accumatic series.  Although the Accumatics started out with roman numerals to designate models, they eventually evolved to the A-series with the same variety of case materials offered along with the addition of rolled gold plate.  Shortly thereafter the Rotomatics and Thin-o-matics joined the line up.

All models featured Swiss-made movements from various makers.

One of the stainless steel Accumatics was the 1961 Accumatic A-501.  It was produced for only two years.

The Accumatic A-501 is an interesting looking watch.  It's very "gray" with a textured embossed dial with a pattern that reminds me of a stained glass window with diamond shaped panes.  The catalog image doesn't really do the design justice, in my opinion.

Under the dial is a Hamilton 689 movement.  This 17 jewel, 11.5 ligne movement is not as common as many other automatic movements Hamilton used.  The 689 was made by ETA and is the same as an ETA 2451 caliber.

I recently received an Accumatic A-501 case with a partial movement.  It was missing the balance assembly and the screw that holds the rotor on.  So a donor movement was needed to get the watch back in working order.

I don't know how long the Hamilton 689 was available but it was eventually replaced by the 689A movement - which was made later in the 1960's and into the 1970's I believe.  It's easier to find an ETA 2451 than it is to find a Hamilton 689.  However, I did find a loose 689A so I serviced and installed it in it's place.

This installation of a 689A in the place of a 689 presents an interesting situation.  Is it fair to replace an earlier movement with a later replacement or should I have held out for a donor 689?

Like most things, I suppose the answer is "it depends".  If this was a very expensive, rare watch with some sort of exciting provenance, then restoring the 689 would be the preferred route.  On the other hand, since the 689A is basically an upgraded version of the 689, who cares?

What really matters is what the watch looks like and how well it runs, right?  Well, this one looks really good and runs just as well.  The bracelet isn't original but it looks nice nonetheless.  The dial has a faint radium burn on the left - I guess the hour hand was stuck in the same position for a few years.  Otherwise I think it looks great.

I think the silver on gray design makes for a difficult watch to read.  On the wrist, it's a sharp looking watch.  Don't you think?