# My Newest Incoming 7A38 - Sorry- Orient J39....



## SEIKO7A38

It was made in the Orient - in the Land of the Rising Sun, by The Orient Watch Company ! 

Those of you who peruse the SCWF forum, may have seen a couple of brief posts about the 'Orient 7A38'.

They were made by Kurt, who originally found the watch on eBay Switzerland back in June 2008.

This is the most recent post / thread: http://www.network54.com/Forum/78440/thread/1264613210/

and this is Kurt's (now red-X'd) photo - re-used with his kind permission:










Needless to say, I had to have it for my 7A38 collection - at the time he posted, we had already started negotiations. :naughty:

I'll write up some more, later this weekend, once I've had a chance to better examine it.

The tacit Seiko - Orient 'connection' is very apparent in some aspects of it's construction.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> I'll write up some more, later this weekend, once I've had a chance to better examine it.


In the meantime, here's a few observations, based on the photos Kurt provided me with, prior to purchase. :wink2:



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> The tacit Seiko - Orient 'connection' is very apparent in some aspects of it's construction.


The classic Seiko 7A38 tri-compax / day-date layout is an immediately obvious giveaway.

Those of you who know your 7A38's will notice the resemblence to the all-black 7A38-7180.

(I wouldn't mind betting that they share exactly the same Seiko Tachymeter dial ring, too !)










Note - there is no Orient 'Lions Rampant' crest logo - even though there would have been enough space for it.

Other than 'Orient' being printed in the correct font, all other scripts are in standard Seiko fonts -

Including the small dial face identifiers either side of the 6 o'clock subdial ....

Which say simply 'Japan' and '*S1 001*'.

So was this the very first Seiko / Orient quartz chronograph collaboration ?


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> In the meantime, here's a few observations, based on the photos Kurt provided me with, prior to purchase. :wink2:
> 
> 
> 
> SEIKO7A38Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The tacit Seiko - Orient 'connection' is very apparent in some aspects of it's construction.
Click to expand...

In fact, though I may later be proven wrong in this assumption ....

Almost everything about this Orient 7A38 points to it having been made *by Seiko for* Orient.

Check out another couple of Kurt's photos:










The design and shape of the watch case is very similar to that used on the Seiko 7A38-7070/-7080 'Divers'.

The colour and consistency of the 'gunmetal' coating (with a tinge of lilac, when viewed in certain lights) ....

.... is almost identical to that used on the contemporary Seiko 7A38-7250 model (mine has faded slightly).

I intend to remove, clean and possibly replace the gold-plated pushers ....

with what are probably exactly the same Seiko parts, as used on the 7A38-702H; -7120 and -7130.

As is also the gold-plated crown, if I'm not mistaken. 

Note too, on the R.H. side of this photo of the caseback ....










.... how the bracelet part number identifier is stamped into the springbar link tube ....

.... in exactly the same place, and typeface that Seiko use. :wink2:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> In the meantime, here's a few observations, based on the photos Kurt provided me with, prior to purchase. :wink2:
> 
> 
> 
> SEIKO7A38Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The tacit Seiko - Orient 'connection' is very apparent in some aspects of it's construction.
> 
> ..... So was this the very first Seiko / Orient quartz chronograph collaboration ?
Click to expand...

Whether we had agreed on a deal or not (it was a forgone conclusion on my part ) ....

The one thing I really wanted to see was some close-up photos of exactly *how* the Orient '7A38' movement was signed.

And Kurt kindly obliged in providing a couple, despite the obviously poor ambient light. 



















Note how Orient is *stamped* (where Seiko normally would be stamped) on the anti-magnetic back-plate.

(Compared to how it is merely *printed* on the later Shimauchi Ltd. V906 and Ferrari Cal. 531 versions.)

The movement is designated J*39*20. Funny how that follows on from 7A*38*. :lookaround:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> Whether we had agreed on a deal or not (it was a forgone conclusion on my part ) ....


To which end, in an effort to further my research, I had written to the Orient Watch Company, the previous week.

I received this (typically Japanese) very polite reply to my email on Monday:



> Dear Sir,
> 
> We received your e-mail dated 15th Feb., 2010, thank you very much.
> 
> With reference to the model J39601, please find following.
> 
> This model J39601 seems to be produced on around 1987-1988, at our Hino factory, Japan.
> 
> Its movement is J3920, please find attached PDF.
> 
> Case & bracelet material : Stainless Steel
> 
> Glass: crystal
> 
> Water resistant to 100m
> 
> We had several type of J39 chronograph models until 1990 year, but it is regret to say that we do not have such records in hand now.
> 
> Please feel free to contact us if you have any other questions.
> 
> Thanks and best regards.
> 
> Orient Watch Co., Ltd.





SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> In fact, though I may later be proven wrong in this assumption ....
> 
> Almost everything about this Orient 7A38 points to it having been made *by Seiko for* Orient.


Note:



> This model J39601 *seems* to be produced on around 1987-1988, at our Hino factory, Japan.
> 
> .... several type of J39 chronograph models until 1990 year, but it is regret to say that we do not have such records in hand now.


Which seems a little strange, because I've seen them able to provide other Orient mechanical watch enthusiasts ....

with much more detailed information on specific calibres, going back to the 1960's, elsewhere on the 'Net, before. 

For example: http://watches.zsebehazy.com/orient_movements.htm


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> With reference to the model J39601, please find following.
> 
> *Its movement is J3920, please find attached PDF.*
> 
> Orient Watch Co., Ltd.
Click to expand...

Here's the first page of that Orient J3920 PDF (printed and re-scanned, so some resolution has been lost):










Unsurprisingly, the specification of the Orient J3920 is *identical* to that of the Seiko 7A38(A) in every respect.


----------



## BlueKnight

That is one interesting post! Now I know who to go to if I have a Seiko question.


----------



## diddy

those hands look exactly like the ones fitted to my seiko 5 i bought through the forum(apart from mine being steel)


----------



## Phillionaire

An interesting bit of sleuthing... :hi:

Dare I ask how many seiko's this one brings the total to??


----------



## SEIKO7A38

BlueKnight said:


> That is one interesting post! Now I know who to go to if I have a Seiko question.





Phillionaire said:


> An interesting bit of sleuthing... :hi:


Thanks (to you both). As long as the question is about Seiko 7A38's, I'll do my best. :wink2:



Phillionaire said:


> Dare I ask how many *Seiko's* this one brings the total to??


Hmmmm. I need to update my spreadsheet with a few more recent incomings ....

.... and re-organise my watch boxes to accomodate them. Running out of room. :blush:

But if you're talking Seiko *7A38*'s and other makes using the 7A38 movement ....

It's got to be close to (and is probably over) 70 in total now. Made up as follows:

60(+) Seiko 7A38's, (including some doubles which I need to put back on eBay);

4 Yema 7A38's; 4 Kamatz 7A38's; one Cartier Ferrari Formula '7A38' and this Orient.


----------



## DaveS

You finally crowbar'd it from Kurt!!!

Nice post mate.

Have you considered therapy?

:smartass:

Kind regards

Dave


----------



## SEIKO7A38

DaveS said:


> You finally crowbar'd it from Kurt!!!


Actually, persuading Kurt to part with it wasn't that difficult. :huh:

He's not too enamoured with two-tone watches, and had, in fact traded it with a friend last year. 

What made the negotiations a little protracted was contacting his friend, who was away on a skiing holiday.

Still, I got there in the end. 



DaveS said:


> Nice post mate.


Thanks, Dave. I probably wouldn't have got this far (so quickly) without all your help and advice. :thumbsup:



DaveS said:


> Have you considered therapy?


Only *anti-aversion* therapy to the 'Divers' versions of 7A38's ! :rofl:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> I'll write up some more, later this weekend, once I've had a chance to better examine it.


It doesn't look like I'm going to get the chance to do the strip-down and clean I'd planned for this weekend. :angry:



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> The tacit Seiko - Orient 'connection' is very apparent in some aspects of it's construction.


So while I remember, here's another little observation ....

I started getting interested in '*other makes* of 7A38' in early November last year.

Round about the time I made this post on SCWF: http://www.network54.com/Forum/78440/message/1257161186/Anybody+got+photos+of+the+Kamatz+or+Orient+7A38%27s+-

I still hadn't seen a photo of Kurt's Orient 7A38 (until mid-January), but that didn't stop me looking for one. :lookaround:

I started running various searches on eBay - 'Orient Quartz' seemed to work better than anything else. 

Whereas I've not seen anything vaguely like another Orient 7A38, to date ....

There is plenty more evidence of the tacit Orient / Seiko partnership ....

in the form of other collaborations on quartz chronographs out there.

Check out these two, for examples - eBay listings in Europe which ended earlier this week:

















Note the three-sub-dial layout and date window at 3'o clock (a very common configuration, in itself), but ....

.... then also note the fairly unique *two* crown and three pushers set-up on both these watches.

If these two aren't based on Seiko's *7T32* Cal. (Orient's rebranded version) .... well - I'm a Dutchman. :smartass:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> I'll write up some more, later this weekend, once I've had a chance to better examine it.
> 
> The tacit Seiko - Orient 'connection' is very apparent in some aspects of it's construction.





SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> It doesn't look like I'm going to get the chance to do the strip-down and clean I'd planned for this weekend. :angry:


Finally got the chance to do that strip down the Orient '7A38' today. 

My main purpose was to give it a good external clean (thereby removing 20-odd years worth of 'DNA'); :yucky:

see what might need replacing, and determine whether I could source it (either from Seiko, as equivalent parts, or possibly from Orient)

- and to discover what else I could learn about itâ€™s construction, and whether I'd been correct in some of my earlier assumptions, or not. 

I'd noticed a very small scratch on the crystal.  It's pretty hard to make it out, but it's just above the 40 marker on the bezel:










Not wanting to pop the crystal out, just yet â€" for fear of any damage to the bezel, and not before I'd identified it's replacement â€¦

I decided to measure it in situ, using a couple of (exactly) 8.00mm thick nylon spacers (borrowed from my crystal press):










The crystal is 30.00mm Ã˜ and it's exactly 2.55mm thick â€" with a slight 45Â° bevel on the top edge to clear the bezel.

Pretty much as Seiko used on many of their 7A38 'Divers'. Now all I've got to do is figure out the Seiko equivalent part number. :umnik2:



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> The design and shape of the watch case is very similar to that used on the Seiko 7A38-7070/-7080 'Divers'.


I never thought to take a photo of the side on view held between my fingers, instead of in the vernier caliper,

while I had my camera out - but here's a (borrowed and rotated) ex-eBay photo of a 7A38-7070 for comparison:










Whereas you can see they are similar in design, the 'swage line' on the Seiko 7A38-7070 case is much more defined.



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> The classic Seiko 7A38 tri-compax / day-date layout is an immediately obvious giveaway.
> 
> Those of you who know your 7A38's will notice the resemblence to the all-black 7A38-7180.
> 
> (I wouldn't mind betting that they share exactly the same Seiko Tachymeter dial ring, too !)





SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> In fact, though I may later be proven wrong in this assumption ....
> 
> Almost everything about this Orient 7A38 points to it having been made *by Seiko for* Orient.


Removing the dial face / movement and then the Tachymeter plastic dial ring spacer revealed something rather telling:










Note the cut-outs around the perimeter of the dial face, and compare them to this (borrowed) photo of a 7A38-6010:










Interesting coincidence ? :huh:



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> Other than 'Orient' being printed in the correct font, all other scripts are in standard Seiko fonts -
> 
> Including the small dial face identifiers either side of the 6 o'clock subdial ....
> 
> Which say simply 'Japan' and '*S1 001*'.
> 
> So was this the very first Seiko / Orient quartz chronograph collaboration ?


Removing the Tachymeter dial ring also exposed another dial face indicator / Orient part number which was hidden beneath it.

Better seen in this (somewhat accidentally) lightened photo of the dial face.










The additional printing reads: *J392 0017*


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> I intend to remove, clean and possibly replace the gold-plated pushers ....
> 
> with what are probably exactly the same Seiko parts, as used on the 7A38-702H; -7120 and -7130.


As you can see from Kurt's photo in my post #3, there was some evidence of corrosion on one of the pushers. 

I've seen this before on other 7A38's with gold-plated pushers, and it appears to be caused by an inter-reaction between different metals.

All three were actually even worse when I got them out:










The 'Orient' pushers I removed are on the left. To the right is a NOS Seiko p/n 80600703, used on various 7A38's, as I mentioned above.

They aren't quite exactly the same, as I'd hoped. :dontgetit:

Both are 3.50mm Ã˜, but those used on the Orient are 6.43mm overall length, compared to 6.30mm for this particular Seiko part.

I still believe that these *are* Seiko-manufactured pushers â€" itâ€™s just a matter of identifying which 7A38 'Diver' (or other model) 'donated' them.

Other possibilities include the 7A38-6010 and 7A38-6109 'Divers', both of which also used gold-plated pushers.

If I can't subsequently identify and match them exactly, I may well use Seiko p/n 80600703 as replacements, anyway. :naughty:

Some of you who've dabbled with Seiko 7A38's will probably recognise the tiny pusher C&E circlips, too !










See this other thread for Seiko (and alternate) part number information: http://www.thewatchforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=51988



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> Almost everything about this Orient 7A38 points to it having been made *by Seiko for* Orient.
> 
> Note too, on the R.H. side of this photo of the caseback ....
> 
> .... how the bracelet part number identifier is stamped into the springbar link tube, in exactly the same place, and typeface that Seiko use. :wink2:


Couple of other observations about the bracelet, which I forgot to mention in that earlier post. :blush:

The gunmetal coated clasp cover isn't signed Orient (nor anything else), but the Z-fold clasp is typically signed 'Stainless Steel Japan'.

The bracelet's construction is classic 80's Seiko folded link, right down to the familiar arrows and removal holes on the adjustment links.










Interestingly, the gold-plated ornaments on the bracelet are integral to the main links, rather than separate stampings:










Where the bracelet has a few scratches and rubbing wear between link sections, it shows gold plating under the gunmetal coating â€"

which means that the bracelet was first gold plated, then a further gunmetal coating added on top afterwards.



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> I received this (typically Japanese) very polite reply to my email on Monday:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With reference to the model J39601, please find following.
> 
> We had several type of J39 chronograph models until 1990 year ....
> 
> Orient Watch Co., Ltd.
Click to expand...

Makes me wonder if another finish variant of this particular Orient J39 might have been an all over SGP gold-plated version. :lookaround:

But that would have put it in direct competition with Seiko's own 7A38-6109 (see: http://www.thewatchforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=51242 )

So somehow, I doubt it.









I should have been putting it back together by now, but first I want to see if I can source correct replacements for the crystal and pushers.

I need to polish those few scratch-marks and pitting out of the case-back, before I reassemble it, too.

There's plenty of metal there â€" and the Orient stampings are really deep, so shouldn't pose a problem. :wink2:










More to follow, later. :sweatdrop:



BlueKnight said:


> That is one interesting post! Now I know who to go to if I have a Seiko question.


Now *that's* what I call a post ! :rofl:


----------



## Paul66

quote name='SEIKO7A38Fan' date='02 March 2010 - 07:02 PM' timestamp='1267556550' post='536070']



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> I intend to remove, clean and possibly replace the gold-plated pushers ....
> 
> with what are probably exactly the same Seiko parts, as used on the 7A38-702H; -7120 and -7130.


As you can see from Kurt's photo in my post #3, there was some evidence of corrosion on one of the pushers. 

I've seen this before on other 7A38's with gold-plated pushers, and it appears to be caused by an inter-reaction between different metals.

All three were actually even worse when I got them out:










The 'Orient' pushers I removed are on the left. To the right is a NOS Seiko p/n 80600703, used on various 7A38's, as I mentioned above.

They aren't quite exactly the same, as I'd hoped. :dontgetit:

Both are 3.50mm Ã˜, but those used on the Orient are 6.43mm overall length, compared to 6.30mm for this particular Seiko part.

I still believe that these *are* Seiko-manufactured pushers â€" itâ€™s just a matter of identifying which 7A38 'Diver' (or other model) 'donated' them.

Other possibilities include the 7A38-6010 and 7A38-6109 'Divers', both of which also used gold-plated pushers.

If I can't subsequently identify and match them exactly, I may well use Seiko p/n 80600703 as replacements, anyway. :naughty:

Some of you who've dabbled with Seiko 7A38's will probably recognise the tiny pusher C&E circlips, too !










See this other thread for Seiko (and alternate) part number information: http://www.thewatchforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=51988



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> Almost everything about this Orient 7A38 points to it having been made *by Seiko for* Orient.
> 
> Note too, on the R.H. side of this photo of the caseback ....
> 
> .... how the bracelet part number identifier is stamped into the springbar link tube, in exactly the same place, and typeface that Seiko use. :wink2:


Couple of other observations about the bracelet, which I forgot to mention in that earlier post. :blush:

The gunmetal coated clasp cover isn't signed Orient (nor anything else), but the Z-fold clasp is typically signed 'Stainless Steel Japan'.

The bracelet's construction is classic 80's Seiko folded link, right down to the familiar arrows and removal holes on the adjustment links.










Interestingly, the gold-plated ornaments on the bracelet are integral to the main links, rather than separate stampings:










Where the bracelet has a few scratches and rubbing wear between link sections, it shows gold plating under the gunmetal coating â€"

which means that the bracelet was first gold plated, then a further gunmetal coating added on top afterwards.



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> I received this (typically Japanese) very polite reply to my email on Monday:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With reference to the model J39601, please find following.
> 
> We had several type of J39 chronograph models until 1990 year ....
> 
> Orient Watch Co., Ltd.
Click to expand...

Makes me wonder if another finish variant of this particular Orient J39 might have been an all over SGP gold-plated version. :lookaround:

But that would have put it in direct competition with Seiko's own 7A38-6109 (see: http://www.thewatchforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=51242 )

So somehow, I doubt it.









I should have been putting it back together by now, but first I want to see if I can source correct replacements for the crystal and pushers.

I need to polish those few scratch-marks and pitting out of the case-back, before I reassemble it, too.

There's plenty of metal there â€" and the Orient stampings are really deep, so shouldn't pose a problem. :wink2:










More to follow, later. :sweatdrop:



BlueKnight said:


> That is one interesting post! Now I know who to go to if I have a Seiko question.


Now *that's* what I call a post ! :rofl:


----------



## Paul66

SORRY! Meant to add, great post, great forum with alot of excellent contributers! Have been reading a few threads lately specific to 7a38's as i have two of these watches and wanted a little more info! Certainly getting that on the forum after looking at alot of older(and some recent) posts. Many thanks Paul


----------



## SEIKO7A38

Paul66 said:


> SORRY! Meant to add, great post, great forum with alot of excellent contributers!
> 
> Many thanks Paul.


Thanks in return, Paul - from one to another .... and Welcome to the 7A38 section of RLT ! :rltb:



Paul66 said:


> SEIKO7A38Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> .... but first I want to see if I can source correct replacements for the crystal and pushers.
> 
> I need to polish those few scratch-marks and pitting out of the case-back, before I reassemble it, too.
> 
> More to follow, later. :sweatdrop:
Click to expand...

Quick update.

The Orient 7A38 is still in pieces, at the time of writing.

The case-back re-finished quite nicely, without too much loss of depth to the stampings.

I've looked at two other similar Seiko gold-plated pushers, but neither were quite the right dimensions.

I've got a couple more different part numbers incoming ....



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> If I can't subsequently identify and match them exactly, I may well use Seiko p/n 80600703 as replacements, anyway. :naughty:


But unless they are any closer, it looks like I may well resort to using the above.


----------



## Paul66

Thanks for the welcome Paul! I'll watch the Orient thread with interest, I'm sure its going to look great when finished! I see you listed the p/n for the all gold pusher in you photo! I have a gold/silver 7a38 (7270) which needs a new pusher but the pusher I need is silver with a gold plated top only! Would you or any of the other forum members be able to tell me what the p/n for this part might be? Many thanks Paul


----------



## SEIKO7A38

Paul66 said:


> I see you listed the p/n for the all gold pusher in you photo! I have a gold/silver 7a38 (7270) which needs a new pusher ....
> 
> Would you or any of the other forum members be able to tell me what the p/n for this part might be? Many thanks Paul


I listed *A* Seiko part number for one particular gold plated pusher assembly, Paul.

There are at least half a dozen different gold-plated pushers used in the 7A38's range ....

.... with an equivalent number of plain stainless and a few black chrome plated ones.

I've recently started measuring them (each time I strip a set out) or buy new ones ....

to get the exact dimensions. The differences are usually fractions of a millimeter ....

but there are differing diameters; different strokes and different seals used in them.

Where they share a similar application, there does seem some logic to Seiko's part numbering system.

For example, the 7A38-7190; *-7270*; -727A/B; -7280/-7289/-728A families of 7A38 models

.... all effectively share the same set of pushers - the last digit signifies the colour / finish.

Stainless is p/n Seiko p/n 80601809 and Gold-Plated is p/n 80601801



Paul66 said:


> .... but the pusher I need is silver with a gold plated top only!


Sorry, Paul.

There is no such thing as a stainless pusher with a gold top. Well not on any 7A38-7270 I know.

I presume you are either looking at the stainless pusher housing (which is actually part of the watch case) ....

.... or the plating on the sides of your gold-plated pusher have worn through to the base metal (stainless) underneath.

You can still get these Seiko G-P pushers p/n 80601801 from Cousins UK.

Order using the same part number, but prefixed with SEI. Â£3.85 + VAT each.


----------



## Paul66

Thanks again for the info! You are right about the pushers, they are meant to be all gold in colour. Found this post on the forum showing my watch http://www.thewatchforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=52662 The gold on the sides of my pushers has worn away giving the impression that they were two coloured. I,II order a gold set from cousins along with a new crown and crystal(couple of small scratches) when I can work out the p/n's and have a go at restoring it to its former glory! Thanks again for your help :thumbsup:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

Paul66 said:


> I,ll order a gold set from cousins along with a new crown and crystal(couple of small scratches) when I can work out the p/n's and have a go at restoring it to its former glory! Thanks again for your help :thumbsup:


The Seiko p/n for the gold-plated crown for your 7A38-7270 is 45M74NA1.

I've bought them from Jules Borel in the States, previously, but ....

I've just checked and Cousins UK stock them under their p/n S15062.

That's just the crown (with sealing O-ring fitted) - no stem attached.

If you want to fit a new stem with your new crown - it's Seiko p/n 0354728 -

But it will need trimming to length. I've nearly always re-used the old stem. :blush:

Pukka Seiko crystal part number for the 31.00mm Ã˜ crystal for a 7A38-7270 is 310W62JN01.

Jules Borel suggest another 'generic' Seiko p/n as a replacement: 310W62GN00, but it's marginally thicker.

I stopped using genuine Seiko Hardlex crystals in the 7A38-726x; -727x and -728x models long ago.

Initially I used Cousins 'own brand' (Japanese made) mineral glass - their p/n F150CMH310 ....

But later switched to Sternkreuz's hardened mineral crystals - as good as Seiko Hardlex IMHO ....

And about 25% of the price !! Only downside is that they don't have that small bevel on the underside ....

Which can make them slightly more difficult to fit, if you are using a new crystal gasket.

Sternkreuz p/n is MSM310 - needless to say, also available from .... :wink2:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

Paul66 said:


> Thanks again for the info! You are right about the pushers, they are meant to be all gold in colour.
> 
> I,ll order a gold set from Cousins ....


I forgot to mention, Paul ....

If you order (SEI) 80601801 gold-plated pushers from Cousins (same applies with Jules Borel) ....

The pusher comes pre-assembled; fitted with the spring, O-Ring gasket and washer ....

But NOT with a replacement circlip !!

Should you think you might need any (they are easy to lose), read this: http://www.thewatchforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=51988&view=findpost&p=533815


----------



## SEIKO7A38

Paul66 said:


> Found this post on the forum showing my watch http://www.thewatchforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=52662


I've just given Dave's (DMP) original thread on the subject of that watch a little bump: http://www.thewatchforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=51210

There's some more, better detailed photos of the same watch, here on SCWF: http://www.network54.com/Forum/170229/message/1263962960/



Paul66 said:


> .... when I can work out the p/n's and have a go at restoring it to its former glory! Thanks again for your help :thumbsup:


If you want to validate any of the part number information I've given you in the previous posts ....

Click on this link: http://service.seiko.com.au/pls/seiko/f?p=104:20:1530569491260648

Type 7A38 into the [Calibre] field; 7270 into the [Case No.] field and click on the 'Search' button.

Then click on one of the 'View Detail' buttons against SAA094J1/J8/Or J9. SAA094J doesn't give descriptions. :thumbsdown:

Bear in mind what I wrote previously about the pusher 'sub-assemblies' ....

.... when purchased *as spares* under Seiko p/n 80601801 from Cousins or Jules Borel.

In Seiko's parts lists (they are *NOT* multi-level bills of materials, as one might expect) ....

Part numbers for the pusher spring; O-Ring seal and washer are also shown separately. :wink2:

If you want to give me your email address, I have 5 or 6 sheets of Excel data on 7A38 part numbers and 'alternatives'.

Last thought. If you decide to follow my advice and order an 'aftermarket' 31.00mm Ã˜ crystal ....

You might want to order one of each - Cousins own brand *and* a Sternkreuz. The former are dead cheap !!


----------



## Paul66

Well what can I say Paul! Many thanks again for the very detailed info. I'll set up an account with cousins and a few others maybe and get these parts ordered. After looking at DMPs thread and your latest post and your fine collection(WOW) I may have to buy a few more! I do have another 7A38(TOP LEFT IN YOUR CASE) aswell as a couple of 7A28s. I will follow your advice and get the two crystals, not having replaced one before I may need the two!! I'd love to give you my email so you could let me have those part no.s but I couldnt see a way to contact you to give you my email other than on forum!


----------



## SEIKO7A38

Paul66 said:


> Thanks for the welcome Paul! I'll watch the Orient thread with interest, I'm sure its going to look great when finished!


Now where were we, before we meandered slightly fftopic2: off topic ?



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> SEIKO7A38Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> .... but first I want to see if I can source correct replacements for the crystal and pushers.
> 
> I need to polish those few scratch-marks and pitting out of the case-back, before I reassemble it, too.
> 
> More to follow, later. :sweatdrop:
> 
> 
> 
> Quick update.
> 
> The Orient 7A38 is still in pieces, at the time of writing.
> 
> The case-back re-finished quite nicely, without too much loss of depth to the stampings.
> 
> I've looked at two other similar Seiko gold-plated pushers, but neither were quite the right dimensions.
Click to expand...

Last weekend, it gradually began to dawn on me that I had too many 7A38's in pieces. :blush:

So, for the time being, at least, I decided to re-assemble the Orient J3920 '7A38'. <_<

It was late on Sunday evening, by the time I finished, and I didn't take any photos, so I've just rattled off a few.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> SEIKO7A38Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I need to polish those few scratch-marks and pitting out of the case-back, before I reassemble it ....
> 
> 
> 
> The case-back re-finished quite nicely, without too much loss of depth to the stampings.
Click to expand...

I skimmed about 10 thou off the case-back, in order to remove those 'removal tool graunch marks' ....










.... and then gave it a light overall polish. Though this still wasn't enough to remove some of the deeper pitting. 

One thing I'll say about the Orient is that it's comparatively rather more substantially built than the Seiko 7A38's.

After skimming and polishing that caseback, it was still slightly over 1.00mm thick ....

.... compared to only 0.85mm thick for a 'virgin' equivalent Seiko 7A38 caseback.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> .... Orient is that it's comparatively rather more substantially built than the Seiko 7A38's ....


The same applies to the bracelet too ! 

Note in the photo above, that the bracelet was designed to use 1.80mm Ã˜ spring-bars ....

.... compared to the 'standard' 1.50mm Ã˜ bars you'll find on most of the equivalent Seiko 7A38's.



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> The bracelet's construction is classic 80's Seiko folded link, right down to the familiar arrows and removal holes on the adjustment links.


In the past (at first), I'd used a gash small screwdriver, and later a short length of brass rod in a pin vice ....

.... whenever I needed to remove any adjustment links from a Seiko bracelet of this style of construction ....

.... without any problems, whatsoever. :lookaround:

9 times out of 10, they just popped out (accompanied usually with plenty of the previous owner's DNA :yucky: ).

As the Orient's bracelet still appeared to have it's full original compliment of removeable adjustment links ....

.... and I needed to reduce it; re-centre the clasp, and 'lose' some of the links with worn 'gunmetal' coating ....

I carefully tried my usual modus operandi. The adjustment links wouldn't budge. They were absolutely solid ! :angry:

Whether this was because the bracelet had been coated after the adjustment links were assembled  ....

tighter tolerances, or simply that these links had never been removed since the watch was manufactured ....

Anyway, it finally prompted me to buy a proper pair of A*F Seiko bracelet link removal pliers:










Well worth the outlay, and certainly did the trick ! I'll be using them in future. :thumbsup:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> I've looked at two other similar Seiko gold-plated pushers, but neither were quite the right dimensions.
> 
> I've got a couple more different part numbers incoming ....
> 
> 
> 
> SEIKO7A38Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I can't subsequently identify and match them exactly, I may well use Seiko p/n 80600703 as replacements, anyway. :naughty:
> 
> 
> 
> But unless they are any closer, it looks like I may well resort to using the above.
Click to expand...

Over the last couple of weeks, I've measured (to the nearest 0.01mm) just about every Seiko gold-plated pusher,

.... that was used on any of the (SQ100) 100m or 150m rated Seiko 7A38's in my own collection.

I even enlisted the help of Dave S - mithering him to pop out a pusher or two from his watches. Thanks, mate ! :thumbsup:

But I still couldn't find anything that was any closer dimensionally to the original Orient pushers ....

.... than the Seiko p/n 80600703 (as used in the 7A38-7020/-702A/-702H and 7A38-7120/-7130).

They were exactly the same in all dimensions, apart from their overall length being 0.15mm shorter.

The length of shaft (stroke) was exactly the same - the difference being in the depth of the button.

So that's what I've used for the time being. So can you tell the difference, when fitted ? :huh:










If I can't find any Seiko equivalent p/n to better match, I *may* yet get the original Orient pushers re-plated ....


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> I'd noticed a very small scratch on the crystal.
> 
> It's pretty hard to make it out, but it's just above the 40 marker on the bezel.
> 
> .... Not wanting to pop the crystal out, just yet â€" for fear of any damage to the bezel ....


After much deliberation, I thought it imprudent to disturb either the bezel nor the crystal. <_<

The bezel already has one or two light marks on it, and both it, and it's insert are *no doubt* irreplaceable ....

.... And apart from the fact that there was nowhere to insert a tool between the watch-case and the bezel ....

.... which after a good clean, was rotating quite nicely, thank you - with very positive clicks. So I left well alone. 












SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> .... by the time I finished, and I didn't take any photos, so I've just rattled off a few.


.... and, No. I still don't appear to learned that particular lesson in photography. :blush:

Taking photos of watches on printed backgrounds confuses the hell out of my camera's autofocus !


----------



## watchking1

> After much deliberation, I thought it imprudent to disturb either the bezel nor the crystal.


Very smart !!

THe 7A38 looks great!!


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> From Orient Watch Co. email:
> 
> We had *several type of J39 chronograph* models until 1990 year, but it is regret to say that we do not have such records in hand now.
> 
> Thanks and best regards.
> 
> Orient Watch Co., Ltd.
Click to expand...




SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> Whereas I've not seen anything vaguely like another Orient 7A38, to date ....


Despite weeks and months of googling, and even making a couple of posts on the Oriental Watchsite ....

I still had no idea of the extent of Orient's J39 '7A38' range. :sadwalk:



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> Makes me wonder if another finish variant of this particular Orient J39 might have been an all over SGP gold-plated version. :lookaround:


But then I got lucky a couple of weeks ago, and found a stainless two-tone cream-faced J39 on eBay in Austria. 

It hasn't arrived yet, so for the time being, here's a couple of the eBay seller's photos:



















It's nowhere near as good condition as the two-tone gunmetal-gold black-faced one I bought from Kurt in February.

In fact, it looks like it's had a fairly tough life - bit of a 'beater' - the original bracelet replaced by a leather strap. :thumbsdown:

I bought it more to help futher my research into the Orient J39 / Seiko 7A38 connection, tham any other reason. :umnik2:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> It hasn't arrived yet, so for the time being, here's a couple of the eBay seller's photos:












The '7A38' movement appears to be signed (stamped) *Orient J3920*, exactly as per the example I got from Kurt.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> I bought it more to help futher my research into the Orient J39 / Seiko 7A38 connection, tham any other reason. :umnik2:
> 
> It hasn't arrived yet, so for the time being, here's a couple of the eBay seller's photos:


In fact the eBay seller's photo of the case-back told me almost everything I needed to know:










It's an Orient model # J39*0*01-70 - compared to the ex-Kurt version, which is a J39*6*01-70.

So presumably, this was the first model in this range. But does it mean there were 7 different versions ? 

The case-back stampings for case material abbreviations are similar to those used by Seiko:

'Stainless Steel' (obviously) and *TGP* - meaning Top Gold Plated - presumably referring to the bezel.

Whereas the ex-Kurt gunmetal two-tone version's case-back was stamped *IPA+GP* (over Stainless Steel).

Meaning *I*.....? *P*......? Anodised?  + Gold Plated. Anybody any idea what that 'I' and 'P' stand for ? :lookaround:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> The case-back stampings for case material abbreviations are similar to those used by Seiko:
> 
> 'Stainless Steel' (obviously) and *TGP* - meaning Top Gold Plated - presumably referring to the bezel.


In case anybody was wondering what I was referring to .... :dontgetit:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> But then I got lucky a couple of weeks ago, and found a stainless two-tone cream-faced J39 on eBay in Austria.
> 
> It hasn't arrived yet, so for the time being, here's a couple of the eBay seller's photos ....
> 
> It's nowhere near as good condition as the two-tone gunmetal-gold black-faced one I bought from Kurt in February.
> 
> In fact, it looks like it's had a fairly tough life - bit of a 'beater' - the original bracelet replaced by a leather strap. :thumbsdown:
> 
> I bought it more to help further my research into the Orient J39 / Seiko 7A38 connection, than any other reason. :umnik2:


In fact, prior to bidding on it for a second time, I had sent a message to the eBay seller ....

asking him to eMail me the original high res. versions of his photos so I could have a better look.

He never responded to my message, :angry: so I decided to go for it anyway - with my expectations not set too high. 

Still - it came cheaply enough (for what is effectively a very rare '7A38'), with little in the way of bidding competition: http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=110560190161

It arrived this morning. 

Now for what was effectively a cheap 'beater' this eBay seller went to a great deal of trouble with his packaging. :thumbsup:










He'd taken a 40mm thick lump of expanded polystyrene, and carved out a shape for the watch ....

.... fitted thinner sections to perfectly fit top and bottom of it, plus some bubblewrap ....

.... and then built a beautifully formed corrugated cardboard box around the whole thing.

Unfortunately, in my rush to get it opened, I all but trashed his wonderful packaging. :blush:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> It arrived this morning.
> 
> Unfortunately, in my rush to get it opened, I all but trashed his wonderful packaging. :blush:


Now obviously I'm not too good at doing the 'unveiling' thing - I lack the patience. :blush:

I took a couple of photos of the watch, as recieved, in let's say, less than perfect lighting.


















Despite being a sort of nice-ish match to the watch - think 'GWR carriage chocolate and cream' ....

I had already decided, before it arrived, that leather strap had to go. :yucky:

It was new, but looked a bit 'plasticy', I suspect a bit of a cheapie. :lookaround:

But what to fit instead ? 

My chances of finding an original Orient p/n SA160 Stainless / Gold two-tone bracelet were slim to none.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> I had already decided, before it arrived, that leather strap had to go. :yucky:
> 
> But what to fit instead ?
> 
> My chances of finding an original Orient p/n SA160 Stainless / Gold two-tone bracelet were slim to none.


I'd already decided earlier in the week exactly what I was going to fit ....

A Seiko p/n B1688(S) bracelet:










I bought a couple of these on eBay last year - the one above was N.O.S.. They come in handy.









While not strictly 100% correct, I've used them when I wear my 7A38-7010 and 7A38-701B 'Vulcans':










In that photo, the right-hand watch (now sold) is fitted with the 'incorrect' B1688S bracelet.

Reason I fitted it ? :dontgetit: - simply because the original Z1118S bracelet is so prone to stretching.









It's also a very good match for the watch case, having the same silvery 'frosted' coating ....

.... 20mm lug width, and 23mm at the widest point of the end links.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> I'd already decided earlier in the week exactly what I was going to fit .... A Seiko p/n B1688(S) bracelet ....
> 
> It's also a very good match for the watch case, having the same silvery 'frosted' coating ....
> 
> .... 20mm lug width, and 23mm at the widest point of the end links.


Which, funnily enough, also made it an almost perfect match for this incoming Orient J39. 

Within 5 minutes of unpacking the watch, I had it on there.

To start with, I've fitted my previously used Seiko B1688 bracelet (+ long style SQ clasp):










If I decide to keep this, long term, I may fit the N.O.S. bracelet, possibly adding an Orient logo'd clasp. 












SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> I took a couple of photos of the watch, as recieved, in let's say, less than perfect lighting.


With apologies for more cr*p photos ! :blush: .... Trust me - it works quite well in daylight. B)


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> I took a couple of photos of the watch, as recieved, in let's say, less than perfect lighting.





SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> With apologies for more cr*p photos ! :blush: .... Trust me - it works quite well in daylight. B)


.... including this 'warts and all', rather unflattering close-up.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

A few observations:

It's no worse a well-used beater than I had expected. It doesn't appear to have been messed with too much, thankfully. :sweatdrop:

The bezel clicks round quite positively, but feels looser than that on the similar ex-Kurt example ....

So I suspect that possibly there may be a gasket missing from underneath it.

The crystal has several light scratches, and one small chip ....



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> .... Not wanting to pop the crystal out, just yet â€" for fear of any damage to the bezel ....
> 
> After much deliberation, I thought it imprudent to disturb either the bezel nor the crystal. <_<


So unlike the ex-Kurt Orient J39, this one is coming *completely* apart, in the not too distant future ! :hammer:

The gold plating on the bezel isn't as badly worn as in appears in the eBay sellerâ€™s photos. 

However, it's almost completely gone from the pusher buttons and crown. :dontgetit:

Easy solution â€" I'll be replacing them with the equivalent Seiko parts. :naughty:

The dial face isn't cream as it appears in the eBay seller's photos, but a most beautiful shade of metallic champagne. :wub:

And check out those hour and minute hands. 



diddy said:


> those hands look exactly like the ones fitted to my seiko 5 i bought through the forum(apart from mine being steel)


.... *exactly* the same as found on just about every variation of two-tone or gold-plated Seiko 7A38 that you could name. 

Only really minus is that the watch case has taken a big hit to the 6 o'clock end, at some point in its life.

Still maybe, one day, a better, rather more pristine example may come along.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> With apologies for more cr*p photos ! :blush: .... Trust me - it works quite well in daylight. B)


Except that early this morning (the watch was still set to C.E.T. and German days) ....

It was overcast and spotting with rain, when I took these couple of Q&D wrist shots:



















Second one clearly shows that big ding to the 6 o'clock end of the watch case.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> So while I remember, here's another little observation ....
> 
> There is plenty more evidence of the tacit Orient / Seiko partnership ....
> 
> in the form of other collaborations on quartz chronographs out there.
> 
> Note the three-sub-dial layout and date window at 3'o clock (a very common configuration, in itself), but ....
> 
> .... then also note the fairly unique *two* crown and three pushers set-up on both these watches.
> 
> If these two aren't based on Seiko's *7T32* Cal. (Orient's rebranded version) .... well - I'm a Dutchman. :smartass:


With apologies for the slightly fftopic: post.

Another of those Orient *7T32*'s (or whatever they designated that calibre) came up in my eBay searches last week.

The auction ended earlier today: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=280543358605



> *Orient Chronograph Alarm Watch Quartz*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New Orient Chronograph Quartz Alarm watch.
> 
> 35mm wide without the stem.
> 
> Approximately 40 mm lug to lug.
> 
> 150M Water Resistent
> 
> Model#: PTA0D000C0
> 
> Japan Movement
> 
> This watch is marked Orient on the band clasp, the face and the back cover.


New old stock, with tag - sold for less than $30 US - far cheaper than an equivalent Seiko 7T32 might have gone for.


----------



## watchking1

36mm?

Is it a ladies watch?


----------



## Chromejob

ALWAYS FUN to read your threads. 



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> *Orient Chronograph Alarm Watch Quartz*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New Orient Chronograph Quartz Alarm watch.
> 
> 35mm wide without the stem.
> 
> Approximately 40 mm lug to lug.
> 
> 150M Water Resistent
> 
> Model#: PTA0D000C0
> 
> Japan Movement
> 
> This watch is marked Orient on the band clasp, the face and the back cover.
> 
> 
> 
> New old stock, with tag - sold for less than $30 US - far cheaper than an equivalent Seiko 7T32 might have gone for.
Click to expand...

Ouch. NOS for < $30. But there's something about that one ... hard to read hands (like Blingy), and something bubbly and Dom Perignon-ish about those hour markers. The designer couldn't decide what size to make them....

Still, that buyer no doubt got a nice watch 'for the price of dinner.'


----------



## SEIKO7A38

I popped the champagne-coloured dial / movement out of this second Orient J3920 ('7A38') yesterday. :hammer:

As the watch case was a different model number: J39*0*01-70 to the ex-Kurt black-faced J39*6*01-70 ....

I was half expecting to find a different dial face identifier / part number under the Tachy dial ring spacer. 



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> Removing the dial face / movement and then the Tachymeter plastic dial ring spacer revealed something rather telling ....
> 
> Which say simply 'Japan' and '*S1 001*'.
> 
> The additional printing reads: *J392 0017*














SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> I bought it more to help further my research into the Orient J39 / Seiko 7A38 connection, than any other reason. :umnik2:


So much for the 'research'.  It's marked exactly the same as the black dial was:

JAPAN and *S1 001*, with *J392 0017* hidden under the Tachy dial ring. :dontgetit:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> So unlike the ex-Kurt Orient J39, this one is coming *completely* apart, in the not too distant future ! :hammer:


And yesterday evening, eventually, it did:










Although it felt relatively sloppy, actually removing the bezel required some considerable effort ! :sweatdrop:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

.... Which is surprising really, because all that actually holds it on is an 'O-ring' sitting in a machined groove ....

.... exactly the same method as used on the equivalent Seiko 7A28-7040/-7049 and 7A38-7070/-7080 models ....

.... as Dave Swan kindly informs me. :wink2:










The uni-directional 'click' rachet is provided by a tiny spring-loaded detent 'piston' (shown in the middle of this photo).


----------



## SEIKO7A38

However, removing the bezel (which I definately needed to do on this J39 'beater') ....

.... exposed a rather unfortunate and *incorrect earlier assumption*(s) on my part. :blush:



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> Not wanting to pop the crystal out, just yet â€" for fear of any damage to the bezel, and not before I'd identified it's replacement ....
> 
> *I decided to measure it in situ*, using a couple of (exactly) 8.00mm thick nylon spacers (borrowed from my crystal press)....
> 
> *The crystal is 30.00mm Ã˜* and it's exactly 2.55mm thick â€" with a *slight 45Â° bevel* on the top edge to clear the bezel.
> 
> Pretty much as Seiko used on many of their 7A38 'Divers'. Now all I've got to do is figure out the Seiko equivalent part number.


Lesson learned. :wallbash: You can't measure the crystal on a Diver properly, without first removing the bezel ! :duh:

If you look at the photo of the underside of the bezel, you'll see that there is a machined inner 'shelf' ....

which, when the bezel is fitted, overlaps the edge of the crystal by a good 0.5mm all the way round ! :angry:

So, when I popped the crystal out, not only was it actually *31.00mm Ã˜* and 2.53mm thick ....

I found that it also had a considerably bigger ground (and polished) bevelled upper edge to it.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> So, when I popped the crystal out, not only was it actually *31.00mm Ã˜* and 2.53mm thick ....
> 
> I found that it also had a considerably bigger ground (and polished) bevelled upper edge to it.


Here's the scratched Orient J39 crystal, which I removed on the left of this photo.

In the middle is a Seiko p/n 310W64GN00, as used on the 7A28-7040/-7049 and 7A38-7070/-7080.

It's 31.00mm Ã˜, but only 2.00mm thick, and has a much smaller ground and polished bevel edge.

On the right is another 31.00 Ã˜ crystal that came my way, purely by accident - incorrectly fitted in a 7A38.

It's only 1.95mm thick, but has a ground and polished bevel edge, almost as big as the Orient crystal's.

I believe, but am as yet unable to confirm, that it's an 'off-the-shelf' Sternkreuz crystal. 










I trial-fitted both of these crystals in the Orient case, deliberately not pushing them fully home ....

.... but neither 'worked' properly - both of them leaving a 0.5mm gap under the bezel, when it was offered up.

Here's a photo of the Seiko p/n 310W64GN00 fitted in the case:










If only that one had 'worked', as I'd hoped it would. :crybaby:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> Now all I've got to do is figure out the Seiko equivalent part number.


And I don't give up easily. 

I was going to try contacting The Orient Watch company, in Japan, again, to see if they could help ....

Hence the reason I asked Jason to slightly amend the title of this thread - it originally was titled:

*My Newest Incoming (Non-Seiko) 7A38 ....*

.... but then I remembered what Orient had written in their email, back in February:



> Glass: crystal
> 
> We had several type of J39 chronograph models until 1990 year ....
> 
> but it is regret to say that we do not have such records in hand now.


Meaning, probably, that if they couldn't even tell me the number of models in the J39 range ....

It was quite unlikely that they could give me a part number for the crystal, let alone supply one.

So, I spent an hour or two, yesterday evening, first ploughing through the Sternkreuz crystal catalogue ....

.... then wading through some bills of materials of possible donor Seiko 'Divers' on Seiko Oceania's database.

I found a couple of possible 'alternative' 31.0mm Ã˜ crystals - bevelled, and approximately the right thickness. 

Then, I phoned the ever-obliging Dave Swan, and ran my ideas by him. hone1:

Dave came up with another possible 31.0mm Ã˜ alternative:

Seiko p/n 310W60GA00 - as used in the H558-5000 'Arnie'.









It's 2.5mm thick, and has a 45Â° bevelled top edge ....

But unfortunately it's just ground - not polished. :thumbsdown:

Stayed up till midnight, then called Seiko Australia's parts department. :shocking:

Yup. Seriously.  They were showing a 31.0mm Ã˜ 'Diver' crystal in stock that I thought might work.

This morning, I phoned the very helpful Sam Emmery at Cousins UK. She emailed me back:



> Our stock dept have said that as far as they can see the glasses ..... do have polished bevels


Both p/n's ordered. Hopefully I'll find out tomorrow morning, if my legwork has paid off. :victory:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> SEIKO7A38Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now all I've got to do is figure out the Seiko equivalent part number.
> 
> 
> 
> Both p/n's ordered. Hopefully I'll find out tomorrow morning, if my legwork has paid off. :victory:
Click to expand...

Postie duly delivered packet from Cousins this morning.  So how did I do ? :lookaround:

Well, not exactly an 'Epic Failure'  - but hardly the 100% success I'd hoped for.









The 31.0mm Ã˜ crystal that I was really hoping would 'fit the bill', was actually a Sternkreuz part.

I'd found it, without too much effort, on only page 6 of their catalogue: http://www.cousinsuk.com/PDF/categories/498_G22-Page1-10.pdf

It's a Sternkreuz repro' of an original Seiko crystal:










Except it wasn't a very good representation (in more ways than one) ! :dontgetit:

Strangely (actually a plus) it was 2.55mm thick (not 2.4mm as per the catalogue illustration) ....

.... and the bevel was polished too.  Except that it was *humungous* !! 

Instead of being approx 50% of the depth of the crystal, it was more like 2/3 ....

which meant that the top flat surface diameter was only something like 28.0mm ! 

What effectively had been my 'second choice' actually turned out to be more of a success.










When I phoned Seiko Australia, and asked the parts person to measure it's thickness for me ....

He'd told me it was 2.5mm thick. He'd also told me it had a polished bevel - as did Cousins almost:



> Our stock dept have said that *as far as they can see *the glasses ..... do have polished bevels.


But obviously, neither Cousins nor Seiko Oz had taken them out of the heat sealed packs to check properly.

Turns out that it's 'only' 2.45mm thick (which will do), but the *majority* of the bevel *isn't* polished ....

It is the perfect ratio / angle - exactly the same as the original Orient crystal, but in a matt ground finish.

However, the very last >0.5mm of the bevel, before the flat surface of the crystal is highly polished. 

And that'll do me - because that's all that shows. :thumbsup:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> What effectively had been my 'second choice' actually turned out to be more of a success.


In case anybody wonders (or cares  ) how I came up with that Seiko 31.0mm Ã˜ crystal part number ....

I'm going to tell you anyway. :tongue2:

I don't normally 'do' Divers. h34r:

When I'd taken the Orient's bezel off, I'd measured the inside diameter of it, where the O-Ring retainer / gasket sits.

It was a shade under 34.0mm Ã˜.

Remembering that thread, on the old SCWF, about the 7A38-7070/-7080 bezel gasket: http://larrybiggs.net/scwf/index.php?mod=103&action=1&id=1237656501

I'd ordered a packet for myself, purely 'on spec.' from Cousins:










The part number indicates that it's 34.0mm Ã˜ and 0.4mm thick. So it would probably also fit the Orient bezel.









I took that part number, *0Z3404B02*, and fed it back into Seiko Oceania's database ....

Doing a reverse look-up (i.e. 'where used') on the part number - on the basis it would only be used on 'Divers'.

Apart from the obvious 7A28-7040/-7049 and 7A38-7070/-7080, it came up with a search result of 250+ lines ....

The majority of which were quartz (pseudo) 'Divers', with 31.0mm crystals - including many 7T32's, funnily enough.

The one I plumped for, however was this 7N36-7A00:










.... which in turn, yielded the crystal p/n *310W76HN01*. :smartass:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

I re-assembled the Orient this morning. :hammer:

More than anything, I wanted to see how well this replacement bezel sat, relative to the bezel. 

I haven't done anything like replacing the (worn plating) Orient pushers and with Seiko parts (yet) ....

.... as I'd done with the ex-Kurt Orient. Nor done anything about refurbishing the dinged case (yet). :blush:

Just wanted to see how it looked, put back together:










Replacing the bezel, with a new (Seiko) O-ring fitted took some considerable effort. :sweatdrop:

To help ease it back on, I had to use far more Silicone grease than should be neccessary.

That's what you can see (still oozing out) around the edges of the new crystal, in places. :blush:

Notice anything else, different to my couple of wrist shots on the previous page ? :lookaround:


----------



## Chromejob

Ooh, you switched bracelets.... I like it, but can't tell if the gold middle link detail is picked up by the faded yellow dial. (Or,... are there gold highlights on the pushers or bezel?)

I think I'd prefer the bracelet on the previous page. But ... switch around, changing bands is fun.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> Notice anything else, different to my couple of wrist shots on the previous page ? :lookaround:


I've changed the bracelet again. 

Before, *as a stop-gap*, I'd fitted a spare used Seiko p/n B1688(S) bracelet:



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> If I decide to keep this, long term, I may fit the N.O.S. bracelet, possibly adding an Orient logo'd clasp.


Somehow that longer old-style Seiko SQ strap I had on it seemed a bit incongruous. 

So, earlier in the week, I'd taken it off the bracelet and fitted a Cousins' 'cheapie' 16mm 'generic' stainless clasp:










Fitting this turned out a lot more involved than it should have been ....

Different widths - this 16mm clasp comes in a 10mm or 8mm width fitting ....

and of course the end link on the Seiko B1688 bracelet is a shade over 9.5mm ....

Plus pins of differing diameters resulted in some Dremeling and soldering. :hammer:

Still, it ended up fitting very nicely.  But 'Jamais Contente', I wanted something better.

I was still hankering after an Orient logo'd 16mm stainless clasp.

Don't know if any of you have ever looked on eBay for Orient stainless bracelets ....

.... but there's some fairly iffy-looking repro' (fakes) offered by Far East sellers. :thumbsdown:

A little closer to home, I found these cheap-ish NOS Orient bracelets being offered on eBay by 'moldymeat':



















My plan had been to buy one, just to rob it of it's 16mm Orient signed clasp - to fit to the Seiko B1688(S) bracelet. :naughty:

But when it arrived, it was rather too nice to befall that fate. <_<

Problem is, that although 22mm wide at it's widest point, where it meets the watch case ....

It's only an 18mm lug fitting. Of course, the Orient J39 has a 20mm (boxed in) lug fitting. :angry:

So what I've done, temporarily, is to fit it with a 1.0mm nylon tubing spacer either side to stop the slop. :blush:



















Anybody got any bright ideas, how I can possibly do this better, more permanently (in metal) ....

.... but still be able to get at the ends of the spring bars, with a tool, to remove the bracelet ? :umnik2:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

David Spalding said:


> Ooh, you switched bracelets....


You beat me to the punch-line, David !











David Spalding said:


> (Or,... are there *gold highlights on the pushers or bezel*?)


There *are supposed to be*, David, but much of their gold plating has worn off, sadly. 

One last Q&D (warts 'n all) wrist shot I managed before my camera battery ran out:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> I haven't done anything like replacing the (worn plating) Orient pushers and with Seiko parts (yet) ....
> 
> .... as I'd done with the ex-Kurt Orient. Nor done anything about refurbishing the dinged case (yet). :blush:


There are a couple of reasons for this:

I don't intend to keep on 'throwing good money after bad'. :schmoll:

Essentially, this watch is always going to be a bit of a 'beater'.

So there's no point in fitting replacement gold-plated parts to it.

And besides ....

I've got yet another (*my third*) Orient J39 incoming ! 

Snagged this off eBay in the States, earlier in the week:










It's another stainless two-tone J39001-70, but this time with a silver-grey coloured dial face.



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> Still maybe, one day, a better, rather more pristine example may come along.


However, I'm not holding out *too* high expectations of it, from the eBay seller's description:



> *Orient Chronograph Men's Watch Quartz 100M*
> 
> *This is a used watch. It has scratches all over and will sell as is.*
> 
> *
> The dial (**bezel**) around the watch is also loose and doesn't click.*
> 
> *
> You can change parts, or use its internal parts. *
> 
> *
> Auction starts at $1 and there is no reserve.*


Maybe it will turn out to be in better condition than the Champagne dial faced 'beater'.

Maybe I'll try to make one decent watch out of the two. Or end up with *2* J39 'beaters'.

At least this one's on the correct original Orient p/n SA160 bracelet. 

PS: That 10 minute post editing time-out window never seems to be quite long enough for me. :angry:

Perhaps I should make my posts a little less 'wordy'. :boredom: :shutup:

Got my Wucking Fords muddled up in a couple of my previous posts.









Post 54:



> More than anything, I wanted to see how well this replacement *bezel* sat, relative to the bezel.


(First) Bezel should read '*Crystal*', obviously. 

Post 56:



> Somehow that longer old-style Seiko SQ *strap* I had on it seemed a bit incongruous.


Strap should read '*Clasp*'. Doh ! :blush:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> And besides ....
> 
> I've got yet another (*my third*) Orient J39 incoming !
> 
> Snagged this off eBay in the States, earlier in the week:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's another stainless two-tone J39001-70, but this time with a silver-grey coloured dial face.
> 
> However, I'm not holding out *too* high expectations of it, from the eBay seller's description ....
> 
> Maybe it will turn out to be in better condition than the Champagne dial faced 'beater'.
> 
> Maybe I'll try to make one decent watch out of the two. Or end up with *2* J39 'beaters'.
> 
> At least this one's on the correct original Orient p/n SA160 bracelet.


That second J39001-70 (now my third Orient J39) arrived on Wednesday. 

Happily, it turned out rather better than I'd expected - certainly far too good to break up for parts ! 

I've fitted a new battery, and all functions work, and generally given it a good clean-up.

I haven't taken any photos of it, as yet, but probably will do some at the weekend.









The dial is not silvery-grey, as I'd assumed, from the seller's eBay photo, but a flat pastel shade of light grey.

It's clean and fresh, and the lume still glows - albeit rather faintly !!

The crystal has a couple of small marks, and will subsequently be replaced with a Seiko p/n 310W76HN01.

The bezel isn't 'loose', at all, as (mis)described by the seller, but spins round very nicely ....

but without any 'click' at all - so it's presumably lost it's detent spring / plunger.

The gold-plating on the bezel, pushers and crown is much better than the previous example.

As I wrote, it's on the original Orient p/n SA160 bracelet, which just fits me.

It came fitted with a different style shorter Orient signed clasp to that fitted to the ex-Kurt J39601-70.

That's probably the most graunched part of the watch. Also, I'm convinced that the Z-fold isn't original. :thumbsdown:

So for the time being, I've replaced the Orient clasp assembly with a Cousins stainless 16mm generic 'cheapie' ....

But that's just a stop-gap measure, hopefully. I have another Orient signed clasp in the pipeline.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

In the meantime, I'd been thinking more, about the Orient J39's obvious similarities to some Seiko 7A38 models. :umnik:



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> The tacit Seiko - Orient 'connection' is very apparent in some aspects of it's construction.
> 
> Almost everything about this Orient 7A38 points to it having been made *by Seiko for* Orient.


Remembering a sentence from the email that I received from the Orient Watch Company in February:



> This model J39601 seems to be produced on *around 1987-1988, at our Hino factory*, Japan.


I happened to be browsing the SCWF last night, and came across this thread: http://www.thewatchsite.com/index.php/topic,7857.msg39081.html#msg39081

In his post Reply #9, Thian made an interesting statement:



> *In the mid 80s, Seiko and Orient shared a factory together.*


So I went 'googling'. I didn't find any photos of, nor reference to the actual factory ....

But I found this Japanese Wiki entry: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Seiko_Epson_Corp_Hinffice_Tokyo_Japan.jpg

File:Seiko Epson Corp *Hino* Office Tokyo Japan.jpg










The photo is captioned:



> *SEIKO* EPSON Corp. *Hino* Office (Hino-shi, Tokyo, Japan)
> 
> *The head office of ORIENT WATCH Co.,Ltd. existed in this place once.*


Interesting coincidence ? :lookaround:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> I popped the champagne-coloured dial / movement out of this second Orient J3920 ('7A38') yesterday. :hammer:
> 
> As the watch case was a different model number: J39*0*01-70 to the ex-Kurt black-faced J39*6*01-70 ....
> 
> I *was* half expecting to find a different dial face identifier / part number under the Tachy dial ring spacer.
> 
> 
> 
> SEIKO7A38Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Removing the dial face / movement and then the Tachymeter plastic dial ring ....
> 
> Which say simply 'Japan' and '*S1 001*'. The additional printing reads: *J392 0017*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SEIKO7A38Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I bought it more to help further my research into the Orient J39 / Seiko 7A38 connection, than any other reason. :umnik2:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So much for the 'research'.  It's marked exactly the same as the black dial was:
> 
> JAPAN and *S1 001*, with *J392 0017* hidden under the Tachy dial ring. :dontgetit:
Click to expand...




SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> That second J39001-70 (now my third Orient J39) arrived on Wednesday.
> 
> I haven't taken any photos of it, as yet, but probably will do some at the weekend.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The dial is not silvery-grey, as I'd assumed, from the seller's eBay photo, but a flat pastel shade of light grey.


Actually it doesn't look quite as dull as this, but again this morning, the light wasn't ideal:










Not surprisingly, from what I'd previously found, this dial face carries exactly the same markings as the other two:

JAPAN and *S1 001*, with *J392 0017* hidden under the Tachy dial ring.

.... and actually, that shouldn't really have been a surprise to me. :dontgetit:

If you think about some of Seiko's 7A38 dial face designs, which have exactly the same typefaces and layout ....

.... but differ *only* in colour of the dial face / sub-dials; printing and baton plating, such as the various colour:

White / Grey / Brown / Black / Gold 710L dials used in the 7A38-7090; -7100; -7180; -7190 and -728x range ....

They are all *marked exactly the same*: JAPAN 7A38 -710L T # .... Another useless 'anorak fact'.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

While I still had the back off this Orient J39, I thought I'd take a quick photo of the movement in situ.









At the same time, I was about to start work on the nearest equivalent Seiko 7A38 model - the 7A38-7070. :hammer:



















As you can see, the two 'Diver' designs are uncannily similar. <_<

Where the Orient J39 scores over Seiko 7A38 is in the method of sealing the screw-down case-back. :thumbsup:

The Orient has an O-Ring seated in a milled recess in the watch case ....

whereas the Seiko relies on a Flat ring trapped between the mating flanges.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> While I still had the back off this Orient J39, I thought I'd take a quick photo of the movement in situ.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At the same time, I was about to start work on the nearest equivalent Seiko 7A38 model - the 7A38-7070. :hammer:


But again, today, the natural light is cr*p (typical Bank Holiday weekend  ) ....

So I took a couple more Q&D shots, but this time using the camera's inbuilt flash.



























Notice anything on the Orient J39 that you couldn't see in the previous darker photo ? :dontgetit:

Well, I didn't either, at first, when I was deciding which photos to use. 

The Orient J3920 movement is using a circuit block spacer with '*710*' moulded into it.

Yup - that's *SEIKO* part number 4408 *710* :shocking: ....

Hence the reason I gave that other thread a bump: http://www.thewatchforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=51594


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> Maybe it will turn out to be in better condition than the Champagne dial faced 'beater'.
> 
> Maybe I'll try to make one decent watch out of the two. Or end up with *2* J39 'beaters'.
> 
> At least this one's (Grey dial) on the correct original Orient p/n SA160 bracelet.


Maybe I have.  I don't care, I like 'em. :man_in_love:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

So what next ?  Well, I had thought about swapping parts around between them but have decided against it. :schmoll:



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> The crystal has a couple of small marks, and will subsequently be replaced with a Seiko p/n 310W76HN01.
> 
> The bezel isn't 'loose', at all, as (mis)described by the seller, but spins round very nicely ....
> 
> but without any 'click' at all - so it's presumably lost it's detent spring / plunger.


I need to order another Seiko 31.0mm Ã˜ x 2.5mm bevelled crystal from Cousins, for the grey-faced one ....

.... and at the same time as I'm fitting that, fix the (distinct lack of) bezel 'click' problem. :hammer:



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> As I wrote, it's on the original Orient p/n SA160 bracelet, which just fits me.
> 
> It came fitted with a different style shorter Orient signed clasp to that fitted to the ex-Kurt J39601-70.
> 
> That's probably the most graunched part of the watch. Also, I'm convinced that the Z-fold isn't original. :thumbsdown:
> 
> So for the time being, I've replaced the Orient clasp assembly with a Cousins stainless 16mm generic 'cheapie' ....
> 
> But that's just a stop-gap measure, hopefully. I have another Orient signed clasp in the pipeline.


A better replacement clasp is already in hand.









This is what came fitted on the bracelet. I believe that the clasp closer is the original (but not the Z-fold part):










This it hopefully what I'll be replacing it with, next week, even if it isn't technically 'correct' for this particular model Orient:


----------



## watchking1

The project is coming along nicely.

I'm living vicariously through your tenacious efforts :notworthy:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

watchking1 said:


> The project is coming along nicely.


Thanks, Skip. :hi:

Would all be so much easier if I had access to the relevant Orient parts lists (as we do with Seiko). :book:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

As you can see from the date of the previous post, things have been a little quiet on the Orient front, for a few months.

Yes, of course I'd kept looking for more J39's on eBay, but my various searches had turned up absolutely nothing. :sadwalk:

In January of this year, thanks to the 'heads ups' (plural) from Derek 'LuvWatch' and the other Paul(66) :cheers:

I got hold of that rare Puma Y19, which is obviously related to, and shares common components with the Orient J39's. 



















.... and I did write that I'd cross-reference the two threads. So here you go: http://www.thewatchforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=62169



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> David Spalding said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's EASIER to follow along and find your investigations when they're continuing in a single thread.
> 
> 
> 
> In hindsight, it certainly would have saved me some copying and pasting between the two threads, David ! :sweatdrop:
> 
> However, because it isn't (officially) an Orient J39, but a Puma Y19 by JEPIC Corp. .... I thought it deserved it's own.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PS: *Next time I update the Orient J39 thread, I'll cross-reference this one. O.K.?* :thumbsup:
Click to expand...


----------



## SEIKO7A38

I'd *almost* got to the stage where I couldn't be bothered to search eBay for them any more, when ....

another Orient J39 finally turned up in Germany in March. These are the eBay seller's listing photos:



















It's another (stainless) J39001-70 variant, but fitted with the black dial from the (gunmetal coated) J39601-70.

As you can see, from the eBay seller's photos, it has lost it's original Orient (presumably p/n SA160) bracelet,

which the last owner had replaced with a horrible cheap patent black 'croco' or alligator grained leather strap. :yucky:

That was the first thing to go ! :thumbsdown:

As I've already got the black dial in another J39 (my first - ex Kurt), and the watch case and bezel were in better condition

than my other two, my initial thoughts had been to break this up for parts, to help improve the other two J39001-70's. :hammer:

It had cost me less than 25 Euros, after all. But for the time being, at least, it has survived still intact. 

It's currently fitted with that Seiko B1688S bracelet, which I'd originally fitted to the champagne coloured dial.

In due course, I may get another of those cheap two-tone stainless Orient bracelets, and fit that. We'll see. :think:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

Over the last 6 months or so, I've come across literally dozens more Orient 7T32's (as I'd mentioned in post #13).

But apart from these J39 'Divers' (and the Puma Y19) all sharing the same watch case, I'd seen no other '7A38's. :search:

I kept remembering those couple of sentences from that email reply I received from Orient Watch Co., last February:



> This model J39601 *seems* to be produced on around 1987-1988, at our Hino factory, Japan.
> 
> *We had several type of J39 chronograph models* until 1990 year, but it is regret to say that we do not have such records ....


So I expanded my eBay search criteria 'more than a little'. 

I finally came across this Orient - and spent a long time zooming in, and straining to make out what I hoped it actually was:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> .... and spent a long time zooming in, and straining to make out what I hoped it actually was:


Inverting the eBay seller's (only) photo, I almost convinced myself I was looking at another Orient J39:










One can clearly see the classic 7A38 crown @ 8 o'clock / 3-pusher, tri-compax 3-subdial

layout, and just about make out the day / date windows by zooming in and squinting. :umnik2:

The Italian eBay seller had titled the auction as simply 'orologio orient' (in lower case). 

His listing description (all typed in UPPER CASE) was little more help.

This is an almost literal translation from the original Italian using Babelfish:



> I SELL CAUSE I MAKE UNUSABLE MOST BEAUTIFUL ORIGINAL ORIENT QUARTZ WRISTWATCH,
> 
> IMMACULATE WITHOUT NEVER USED PRACTICALLY AND NEW. A TRUE OCCASION FOR WHO LOVES CLOCKS ....


I messaged the seller, in Italian, asking if he could kindly tell me the Orient model number off the case-back.

Obviously I was hoping that he'd reply with something like J39xxx-xx, which would confirm its '7A38' origins.

He didn't. :dontgetit: He simply wrote back that he was too busy working ! :angry:

So I thought sod you then, and deleted the auction listing off my eBay watching page. :schmoll:

Didn't last, though.  I relented and took a last 5-second snipe at it; won the auction. :naughty:


----------



## Guest

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> I relented and took a last 5-second snipe at it; won the auction. :naughty:


:victory:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> I relented and took a last 5-second snipe at it; won the auction. :naughty:


That was over two weeks ago.

Many folks may knock 'Poste Italiane', but we have a far worse enemy within. Parcel Farce. :thumbsdown:

The package was sent recorded, so I had a tracking number for it.

According to Parcel Farce it allegedly arrived in the UK on the *15th*.

It was then tagged as having 'insufficient address' (it hadn't) and was 'misdirected' around their various hubs.

Bearing in mind this was supposed to be their 48 Hour service ....

They finally attempted delivery at *19:25* yesterday evening, the *21st* - and of course, I was out. :angry:

My neighbours were away for the weekend too (or so I thought), but the 'Sorry' card they left

.... stated that it had been left next door. Neighbour's teenage daughter had signed for it. 

So, I waited until just after 10:00am this morning before knocking on their door.

Had it had been worth the 'eBay fuzzy photo' gamble and the long wait ? :sweatdrop:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> Orient - and spent a long time zooming in, and straining to make out what I hoped it actually was:





SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> Inverting the eBay seller's (only) photo, I almost convinced myself I was looking at another Orient J39:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One can clearly see the classic 7A38 crown @ 8 o'clock / 3-pusher, tri-compax 3-subdial
> 
> layout, and just about make out the day / date windows by zooming in and squinting. :umnik2:


Maybe my eyesight isn't that bad, after all. :blind: Here's a Q&D photo, exactly as received.




















SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> I messaged the seller, in Italian, asking if he could kindly tell me the Orient model number off the case-back.
> 
> Obviously I was hoping that he'd reply with something like J39xxx-xx, which would confirm its '7A38' origins.


.... and here's another Q&D photo (as received) showing the Orient J39xxx-xxx model number on the highly polished case-back - *J39909-80*


----------



## watchking1

Looks NOS to me BUT does it run or is a paperweight??? :shocking:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

watchking1 said:


> Looks NOS to me BUT does it run or is a paperweight??? :shocking:


Of course it runs, Skip, and this one (like most of my Orient J39's) keeps remarkably good time. :thumbsup:

It isn't NOS though (as the eBay seller had falsely described it), but has very obviously been worn lightly and infrequently.

Heck, I even wear it myself occasionally - I tried it on briefly at the weekend:










It's a decent size at 39mm diameter, but only thanks to the 'dead-weight' of that ridiculous dress-up fixed 'divers' bezel.

Not one of my favourites, really  - but again another interesting variation on the 7A38 theme to have in my collection.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

Something that I forgot to mention, when I posted that photo of the watch in it's presentation box on the previous page:



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> .... Here's a Q&D photo, exactly as received.


.... was the colour of the Orient box:










It was an eBay auction for a *Yema* presentation box, which ended earlier today, that reminded me. :blush:










I've got a couple of these myself already, plus some other Yema P.o.S. stuff, including:










The burgundy / maroon colour vinyl / leatherette and velour used on the Orient presentation box ....

(although it might not appear so in the photos above) are an identical colour to the Yema materials.

I already have my suspicions about a Seiko / Orient collaboration on these J39's - but were Yema (C.G.H.) involved too ? :lookaround:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> Not one of my favourites, really  - but again another interesting variation ....


Indeed, I much prefer wearing my Orient 'Pseudo-Plongeurs', even though a couple of them can be classed as 'beaters'. :wub:

This is another Q&D group photo of them I'd posted elsewhere, recently, in another thread in 'General Discussion' section:










Left to right:

J39001-70 - on an el cheapo 'Orient' branded 18mm bracelet.

J39001-70 - on the correct original Orient p/n SA160 bracelet.

J39001-70 - currently on Seiko p/n B1688S bracelet (fitted with an Orient clasp) and

J39*6*01-70 - the original (ex-Kurt) Gunmetal two-tone J39 which started off this thread.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

You'll note that the first 3 are all the same case model # - J39*0*01-70.

That's presumably because they share the same Stainless / Gold two-tone finish.

The ex-Kurt Gunmetal / Gold two-tone on the far right is case model # J39*6*01-70 ....

even though it shares exactly the same gold lettering on black dial as the one next to it.

It's had me wondering, for quite a long time, what the intermediate models, presumably ....

J39101-70; J39201-70; J39301-70; J39401-70 and J39501-70 might look like (if they ever existed).

It's this extract from the Orient Watch Co.'s email, which has been nagging at the back of my mind:



> We had several type of J39 chronograph models until 1990 year, but it is regret to say that we do not have such records in hand now.


To which end, I 'google' every now and then - in the vain hope of finding something else - besides my own musings. :read:

I got (very) lucky a couple of weeks ago, when I found this: http://www.wimstore.com/schmuck/uhren-flohmarkt/nivada---poljot/orient/orient-herrenuhr-chronograph-quarz.php










It appeared to be yet another variation on the J39x01-70 'Pseudo Plongeur' - but *not* two-tone for a change - ALL stainless.

Although the Tachymeter ring has white lettering instead of gold, it uses the same J392 0017 black dial with gold printing:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


>


48 Euros didn't seem like a bad price to me - particularly from a dealer, and ....

this example looked to be in nice condition, despite missing its original bracelet.

So I swiftly added it to my basket, and proceeded to check-out. :naughty:

Then I came across a stumbling block - payment required by Bank Transfer. 

So I emailed the vendor, and asked if, by any chance, he accepted PayPal. Nein. :no:

I was about to email him and ask if I could phone a Visa card number through ....

when he emailed me saying that it was O.K. to send cash Euros by recorded letter. :thumbsup:

So I printed off a copy of the invoice ready to send him the cash the next day.

Then a couple of hours later, I received this email from Wimstore's proprietor, Josef Walkner:



> Wir kÃ¶nnen Ihnen die Uhr leider nicht verkaufen. Bei der Endkontrolle stellte sich heraus, dass ein Chrono nicht ordnungsgemÃ¤ÃŸ funktioniert und sich die Uhr dadurch nicht justieren lÃ¤sst. Die Uhrzeit ect. ist funktional. Ein Service wÃ¼rde sich fÃ¼r uns nicht auszahlen.
> 
> Wenn Sie wollen, dann schenken wir Ihnen die Uhr. Sie mÃ¼ssten nur die Portokosten Ã¼bernehmen. Ein Maxi-International Plus â€" Brief, kostet 8.20.
> 
> Falls Sie die Uhr haben mÃ¶chten, legen sie bitte 8,00 â‚¬ in ein Kuvert.
> 
> Entschuldigen Sie bitte die Unannehmlichkeiten.
> 
> Mit freundlichen GrÃ¼ÃŸen. Josef Walkner


Roughly translated, it starts off .....

*Unfortunately, we cannot sell you the watch*. During final inspection it turned out that a chrono functions incorrectly,

and (the watch) cannot thereby not be adjusted. The time etc. is functional. Servicing it would not be economic for us.

:cray: But it soon gets *much* better. :grin:

Because Josef subsequently offered it to me, *FREE OF CHARGE* - for just the 8 Euros cost of postage.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> Then a couple of hours later, I received this email from Wimstore's proprietor, Josef Walkner ....
> 
> Because Josef subsequently offered it to me, *FREE OF CHARGE* - for just the 8 Euros cost of postage.


That was late on a Friday evening - 29th July, IIRC.

Before he might have a chance to change his mind .... I was determined to post off a letter, the very next day.

Saturday morning, I went to my local Post Office, to get 10 Euros cash - to find they only had 20 Euro notes in stock. :angry:

But I thought 'what the heck', and posted off a 20 Euro note by 'International Signed For', with a copy of Josef's email.

Being the impatient and inquisitive so-and-so that I am, I'd also emailed Josef ....

asking him if he could tell me the J39xxx-xx model number stamped on the case-back.

He simply replied at the bottom of that same email:



> Ps. J39â€¦â€¦â€¦ befindet sich an der RÃ¼ckseite.


You can find it on the case-back yourself. :umnik2:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

On the 9th August, as I hadn't heard anything I sent an email 'chaser', and received this reply:



> hello mr.
> 
> here is thomas â€" son of josef.
> 
> yes we get your letter. i found 20 euros inside. i put 10 back to the watch (if i would know that the postage will be about 15 euros i take more). so i will arrive soon.
> 
> yours sincerly
> 
> thomas walkner


It duly arrived last Friday. 

I was away for most of last weekend, so here's a couple of Q&D photos I rattled off earlier today:




























The watch is in almost pristine condition, save being sadly bereft of it's original fitment stainless bracelet.

It's fitted with a nice quality leather strap, but you can see marks on the end of the case where the bracelet once rubbed.

In fact, the watch head generally / bezel insert / crystal on this is in even better condition, than the one I bought from Kurt.

Not bad for 10 Euros, eh ?


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> You'll note that the first 3 are all the same case model # - J39*0*01-70.
> 
> That's presumably because they share the same Stainless / Gold two-tone finish.
> 
> The ex-Kurt Gunmetal / Gold two-tone on the far right is case model # J39*6*01-70 ....
> 
> It's had me wondering, for quite a long time, what the intermediate models, presumably ....
> 
> J39101-70; J39201-70; J39301-70; J39401-70 and J39501-70 might look like (if they ever existed).


And the J39xxx-xx case-back model number ?










J39*7*01-70 ! :rofl2:

So I'm still none the wiser (about the 'missing' intermediate J39x01-70 model numbers). :umnik2:

Note also 'ALL Stainless Steel' on this one, instead of the usual Stainless Steel + 'TGP'.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

And the 'chronograph fault' mentioned by Josef in his email, the reason he wouldn't charge me for the watch ? :huh:

Well, within 10 seconds of unpacking it, I'd diagnosed it, and honestly less than a minute later had fixed it ! 

You guessed it, the easiest '7A38 fix' of all ....

The sweep hand's finger tension spring had been displaced, and was rubbing on the side of the shaft.

With many thanks to Josef and Thomas Walkner of Wimstore.com, for their very generous donation to my collection. :cheers:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> You guessed it, the easiest '7A38 fix' of all ....
> 
> The sweep hand's finger tension spring had been displaced, and was rubbing on the side of the shaft.


In case anybody's in any doubt about the ease of this fix, I've already documented it in an earlier 7A38 thread:

A Rant About High Street Watch-Botchers (with apologies to Josef Walkner - no such criticism intended







)

After I took those Q&D photos in post # 82, I noticed a speck of dust on the dial (as you always do :blush.

I'd previously removed the movement to re-align the Tachymeter dial ring (see the Wimstore web image).

So while I had the case-back off, I thought I'd take a couple more Q&D's to demonstrate the (non) problem.









Dis-placed finger spring (as received):










Rectified (in under 30 seconds):


----------



## new2the7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> SEIKO7A38Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You guessed it, the easiest '7A38 fix' of all ....
> 
> The sweep hand's finger tension spring had been displaced, and was rubbing on the side of the shaft.
> 
> 
> 
> In case anybody's in any doubt about the ease of this fix, I've already documented it in an earlier 7A38 thread:
> 
> A Rant About High Street Watch-Botchers (with apologies to Josef Walkner - no such criticism intended
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> After I took those Q&D photos in post # 82, I noticed a speck of dust on the dial (as you always do :blush.
> 
> I'd previously removed the movement to re-align the Tachymeter dial ring (see the Wimstore web image).
> 
> So while I had the case-back off, I thought I'd take a couple more Q&D's to demonstrate the (non) problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dis-placed finger spring (as received):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rectified (in under 30 seconds):
Click to expand...

Lol...yep...I had one with the same "problem". And being the complete mechanical klutz it took a little

prodding from Seikofan to get me to act...but finally..I removed the back and replaced the finger to the proper location. It's worked like a charm ever since.


----------



## bpc

I'm glad I read all the way to the end of this thread, because I found a fix for a problem I didn't even know I had! I knew my 7A28-7089 chrono sweep second hand sometimes stuck, but I didn't know about this common problem and thankfully easy fix:










Thanks for showing me the light!

Just for fun, here's my [now properly-functioning] titanium beauty:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

bpc said:


> I'm glad I read all the way to the end of this thread, because I found a fix for a problem I didn't even know I had!


You should hang around here more often, Brandon. :wink2:

You'll learn LOTS more about 7Axx's here than you might on the SCWF. :thumbsdown:










By the way, you really should replace that under-sized # 399 cell with a # 394 type - ideally a Maxell SR936SW. :smartass:



bpc said:


> Thanks for showing me the light!


Pleasure as always ! :hi:


----------



## bpc

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> By the way, you really should replace that under-sized # 399 cell with a # 394 type - ideally a Maxell SR936SW.


I was wondering if you'd call me out on that! The 399 is what was in it when I got it, and I haven't gotten around to putting a correct one in there yet. Soon, I hope...



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> You'll learn LOTS more about 7Axx's here than you might on the SCWF.


I've already found that to be true. Though, admittedly, there are a couple good 7Axx threads on the SCWF (mostly in the "Watchmaking & Tinkering" section). Forum member DaveS is a wealth of knowledge on 7Axx's and has helped answer a few of my questions.



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> You should hang around here more often, Brandon. :wink2:


I've been lurking for a couple weeks; I'll try to get a little more chatty! Looks like you've got a good crew here.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

bpc said:


> SEIKO7A38Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> By the way, you really should replace that under-sized # 399 cell with a # 394 type - ideally a Maxell SR936SW.
> 
> 
> 
> I was wondering if you'd call me out on that! The 399 is what was in it when I got it, and I haven't gotten around to putting a correct one in there yet. *Soon, I hope...*
Click to expand...

Brandon. Likely to be sooner rather than later, in my experience. 

If you read the first three posts in that other thread on the subject of displaced finger springs: http://www.thewatchforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=53474

The #399 (a Maxell SR927SW) fitted in that 7A38-726A lasted less than 2 years ....

whereas the correct #394 size (Maxell SR936SW) can last *more than 5 years*. :thumbsup:


----------



## watchking1

> You'll learn LOTS more about 7Axx's here than you might on the SCWF.


----------



## watchking1

> You'll learn LOTS more about 7Axx's here than you might on the SCWF.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

watchking1 said:


> You'll learn LOTS more about 7Axx's here than you might on the SCWF.
Click to expand...

Wassup, Skip ? :huh: True dat ? :grin:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

The most recent of my Orient J39's came from Austria - as had another earlier similar 'Diver'.

But they've turned up on eBay in Germany; Italy; Switzerland; and even the good old U.S. of A.

They're nowhere near as common as their esteemed Seiko 7A38 cousins, and take a little bit of seeking out. :search:

So how about the chances of another different J39 model surfacing 'down under' in Australia for a change ? :lookaround:

This first cropped up on my early warning radar nearly three weeks ago. 

All I've got to go on so far, is the Antipodean eBay seller's two fuzzy photos:

















Obviously from the unique tri-compax sub-dial + Day/Date layout, it's another 7A38 / J39.

Looks similar to some of the Yema N8 dress gold-plated dress quartz chronographs too. :think:

Was described simply as: 'ORIENT QUARTZ CHRONOGRAPH' and 'White Face; Gold; Tan Adjustable Band'.

Oh - and (with the usual secondhand quartz watch rider) 'require batteries'. :fear:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

Phillionaire said:


> An interesting bit of sleuthing... :hi:
> 
> Dare I ask how many seiko's this one brings the total to??


Forget the Seiko 7A38's - they're into three figures now. :blush:

But special thanks to Phil(lionaire) for his very helpful intervention in procuring this one on my behalf, :cheers:

(from an un-cooperative eBay seller) which will hopefully soon become the 7th Orient J39 in my 'little' collection.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> All I've got to go on so far, is the Antipodean eBay seller's two fuzzy photos ....


Phil's just kindly emailed me a better photo, taken on his iPhone. Thanks, Phil ! :thumbsup:










It looks a bit battered, but then it was always a bit of a 'fuzzy photo gamble' 

and besides 'we' only paid $33Au (+ postage) for it - a little over 20 Quid. :grin:

And the full J39 model # on the case-back (which I couldn't get from the intransigent eBay seller :angry ?

*J39908-70* - So it fits nicely (numerically) into 'the scheme of things'. 

These are what I've found so far (notes from my Excel spreadsheet):



> *Orient*
> 
> Only three basic case model styles (Diver and 2 Dress) seen to date; more may exist, besides:
> 
> 'Diver' # J39001-70 - Stainless + Gold two-tone with Champagne dial face (eBay July 2010).
> 
> 'Diver' # J39001-70 - Stainless + Gold two-tone with Light Grey dial face (eBay August 2010).
> 
> 'Diver' # J39001-70 - Stainless + Gold two-tone with Black dial face (eBay March 2011).
> 
> 'Diver' # J39601-70 - Gunmetal + Gold two-tone with Black dial face (ex Kurt Heide).
> 
> 'Diver' # J39701-70 - Stainless (all over), but with same Black dial face (Wimstore July 2011).
> 
> 'Dress' # J39908-70 - Gold-plated with White dial face, similar to Yemas. (eBay August 2011).
> 
> 'Dress' # J39909-80 - Gold-plated with White dial face, and fixed 'Divers' bezel. (eBay April 2011).
> 
> All use movements signed ORIENT J3920 (stamped).


That, however, potentially still leaves *a lot* of gaps in Orient's J39xxx-xx model numbering sequence, yet to be 'discovered'.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> The watch is in almost pristine condition, save being sadly bereft of it's original fitment stainless bracelet.
> 
> It's fitted with a nice quality leather strap, but you can see marks on the end of the case where the bracelet once rubbed ....
> 
> Not bad for 10 Euros, eh ?


I decided it might look better on a stainless bracelet - even one nothing like the original fitment Orient p/n SA160 bracelet:










So I've fitted a Seiko p/n G1410S, for the time being, which goes quite well, with a matching brushed finish Orient clasp:










Slightly better photo, posted elsewhere:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> Slightly better photo, posted elsewhere:


.... and a few more I rattled off this afternoon:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

mollydog said:


> I think it has the wrong dial as *you rarely find gold batons / hands etc without a complement of gold on the case.*


So what do you think about my recent 'freebee' all-stainless Orient J39, in the previous couple of posts, Robert ? :huh:



SEIKO7A38Fan said:


> It appeared to be yet another variation on the J39x01-70 'Pseudo Plongeur' - but *not* two-tone for a change - ALL stainless.
> 
> Although the Tachymeter ring has white lettering instead of gold, it uses the same J392 0017 black dial with gold printing:


Particularly as when I received it, it looked just like that, with a slightly mis-aligned Tachymeter ring. :disgust:

That would indicate (to me) that the dial face and movement had been removed and replaced at some point.

I've been wondering myself as to whether it should have had a black dial with white printing, rather than gold. 

It would certainly look even better. But can anybody post a photo of a complete and original Orient J39701-70 ? :no:


----------



## mollydog

Paul,

How far are you from writing the book (Seiko at its best)

You do realise its got to come :read:

Robert.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38 said:


> Phil's just kindly emailed me a better photo, taken on his iPhone. Thanks, Phil ! :thumbsup:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It looks a bit battered, but then it was always a bit of a 'fuzzy photo gamble'
> 
> and besides 'we' only paid $33Au (+ postage) for it - a little over 20 Quid. :grin:
> 
> And the full J39 model # on the case-back .... *J39908-70*


Suppose I ought to somewhat belatedly update this little segment of the Orient J39 thread.

Although comparatively rare, this particular Orient J39 turned out to be something of a disappointment. 

Here's a photo I took back in September (and posted elsewhere in another thread), as received:










Doesn't actually look too bad, does it ? :dontgetit:

The leather strap fitted appears to be the original Orient item.

Interestingly it's a 20mm strap cut down to fit the watch's 19mm lug width fitting.

Notice also the crystal is glued in - there's no nylon gasket visible in that photo.

Bit of an odd size too - approximately 31.5mm Ã˜ x 1.27mm thick, with a polished bevel edge.

As you can possibly see from that photo, the crystal has started to shatter around '250' on the Tachy scale.

Sourcing a suitable replacement crystal was just one of the set-backs I encountered which delayed the rebuild.

I pressed out the original crystal, which didn't come out particularly cleanly, leaving glass fragments to clean up.

My first thought was to order a Cousins' 'cheapie' replacement crystal - 31.5mm Ã˜ x 1.30mm thick.

That didn't want to fit, let alone be glued in, so then I ordered another - 31.4mm Ã˜ - which was a bit loose. :angry:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

The watch-case has suffered some strange sweat-induced :sweatdrop: corrosion - nothing quite like I've ever encountered before.

Although the case-back is stamped 'GP' - implying gold plated, I'm not convinced that whatever lies underneath is 'metal'.

Once the worst of the verdigris was cleaned off, under close magnification, it looked more like injection-moulded resin. 










But worse was to come, when I unscrewed the case-back:










This is probably the worst example of battery acid damage to a 7Axx movement that I've ever personally encountered ....

Though from memory, DaveS had a much worse-looking 7A28 - although I can't find the particular photo at the moment.










Doesn't look any better in a bright light:










As you can see, the acid gunge had run right around the movement, virtually destroying everything in it's path. 

Not only that, but the battery has welded itself to the back-plate, which will make that very difficult to rescue.

Before I popped the movement out, I'd already tried *very* tentatively turning the main hands using the crown.

The sweep second hand moved around with the minute hand, instead of staying static, as you'd expect. :fear:

The date would click over manually, but the day wheel stayed resolutely stuck on *DOM*.

The simple reason for the former was that the acid damage / rust had permeated right up through the central hand stack:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

As you can see from the second photo in the previous post ....

From the sheer amount of rust and gunge which also pooled in the inside of the case-back,

it would appear that the watch was left for years in a drawer with an old battery, luckily face up.

I suspect that the leaking acid running up through the central hand stack was by capilliary action.

So, other than some oxidization to the batons and hands, the dial itself survived reasonably well undamaged.

There is also a very small localized amount of paint micro-blistering - but it's almost invisible to the naked eye. :blind:

I've put the original Orient movement to one side, for the time being, and will see what I can rescue from it at a later date.

In the meantime, I fitted the dial and hands to a spare rebuilt Seiko 7A38 movement (one with a Spanish *DOM* day wheel):










I carefully polished up the hour and minute hands, using a small piece cut from a sheet of printer paper.

The pin on the underside of the original Orient sweep second hand was too badly rusted to consider re-using,

so I've fitted a similar-looking Seiko sweep second hand, which is used on quite a few of the dressy 7A38's.

For the time being, until I'm feeling braver, the gold plated batons have been left as found - with odd flecks of tarnish.

The main purpose of that particular shot was to show the Orient (by Seiko ?) dial part number printing:

*S1 - 034* visible near the 5 o'clock baton, and *J392 9087* (usually) hidden under the Tachy dial ring spacer.

I'll take some photos of the rebuilt watch at some point, but it's never going to look much better than my photo in post # 101.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

mollydog said:


> Paul,
> 
> How far are you from writing the book (Seiko at its best)
> 
> You do realise its got to come :read:
> 
> Robert.


Robert, if you're referring to any book I might be contemplating writing about the Seiko 7A38,

I think I've probably still got quite a lot more research to do for the chapter on the Orient J39's. :umnik2:



SEIKO7A38 said:


> That, however, potentially still leaves *a lot* of gaps in Orient's J39xxx-xx model numbering sequence, yet to be 'discovered'.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

So after my less-than-satisfactory experience with buying that J39908-70, based on an eBay seller's 'fuzzy photos',

You'd think I'd have learned my lesson, about buying cheap 'junker' Orient J39's - just to further my research. Right ? :huh:

Wrong ! :grin:

Couldn't resist this one which came up in a job lot of 4 assorted watches on eBay in France a couple of weeks ago:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/130595833225?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649#ht_500wt_950



> *4 montres divers dont 2 chronographe quartz*












(It's the one in the top left of the photo, just in case anyone reading isn't familiar with the '7A38' dial layout by now.)

The seller's description included the following:



> *Chrono fond blanc 4 boutons ,3rond noir intÃ©rieur avec aiguille ,marque jour chiffre,*
> 
> *
> bracelet d'origine mÃªme marque que la montre marchait mais pile usÃ©e,*
> 
> *
> manque 1 tÃªton pour accrocher bracelet sur montre verre rayÃ© poids 110gr*
> 
> *
> marque Orient wach CO LTD JAPAN water rÃ©sist 10bar nÂ° Y **J39725-70** CA*


Just to be sure of exactly what I was bidding on, I asked the seller if he could email me a few better photos.

Which he very kindly did, the same day.  Erm, let's just say that they were 'bigger' rather than 'better'. 










I'm not holding my breath, but it looks moderately promising. It also looks vaguely familiar. Anybody recognize it ?


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38 said:


> (It's the one in the top left of the photo, just in case anyone reading isn't familiar with the '7A38' dial layout by now.)
> 
> The seller's description included the following:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Chrono fond blanc 4 boutons ,3rond noir intÃ©rieur avec aiguille ,marque jour chiffre,*
> 
> *
> **bracelet d'origine mÃªme marque que la montre** marchait mais pile usÃ©e,*
> 
> *
> **manque 1 tÃªton pour accrocher bracelet sur montre** verre rayÃ© poids 110gr*
> 
> *
> marque Orient wach CO LTD JAPAN water rÃ©sist 10bar nÂ° Y **J39725-70** CA*
> 
> 
> 
> Just to be sure of exactly what I was bidding on, I asked the seller if he could email me a few better photos.
> 
> Which he very kindly did, the same day.  Erm, let's just say that they were 'bigger' rather than 'better'.
Click to expand...

Now where was I ? :umnik2:

Ah Yes, apart from that very fuzzy close-up photo of the dial, the seller did send me a couple more of the ....

bracelet fitted (which wasn't actually visible in his single eBay listing photo, but mentioned in the description):



















Before it had even arrived, I'd already sussed it wasn't correct nor original to this particular Orient watch.

It's well made - solid, rather than folded link construction; style makes me think it's 70's rather than 80's.

Also, although it's 23mm wide at the watch case, it's actually designed for an 18mm lug width fitting.

Here it is having just spent a full 10 minutes in the ultrasonic tank, after an overnight soak in neat Flash:



















As it isn't the original bracelet to the watch, and although they've obviously been together a long time, I won't be re-using it.

I will robbing the Orient signed clasp off it, for use with another 'alternative' bracelet - probably on this same watch, in fact.

The two lengths of bracelet will get chucked in my bits box, for later possible use on some other 'bitza' project, I suspect.

But if there's any 70's Orient owners out there looking for this particular bracelet (less the clasp) .... Do drop me a PM.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

There now follows a brief analysis of my latest incoming Orient J39 .... a.k.a 'ex-eBay piece of junk'. :grin:

Sorry.







I don't do brief, do I ? :no: More like in-depth. Easily bored ? :yawn: Best look away now then. :schmoll:

Here it is, warts and all, just as I received it, apart from the bracelet having been removed (from one end).










You can see that the seller's fuzzy photos were hiding a very badly scratched crystal (that's just for starters). :disgust:



SEIKO7A38 said:


> .... but it looks moderately promising. It also looks vaguely familiar. Anybody recognize it ?


I'm not going to give you too many clues - besides, it's so bleedin' obvious really. :naughty:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

I may as well start with the case-back.

Markings are all legible, and pretty much what I'd expected to find, including the all important *J39725-70* case model #:










The only thing which surprised me (to a certain extent), is that it says 'ALL STAINLESS STEEL' ....

as opposed to say SS + GP. This refers only to the case materials - not the gold-plated pushers and crown.

It's the same as my recent 'freebee' all-stainless Orient J39701-70, in that respect ....

but different to the other watch we've previously seen using an almost identical watch case and bezel. 

The case-back is worn, but only has a few light scratches, so should polish up quite nicely, without losing definition.

Inside the case-back wasn't such a pretty picture. The watch has obviously suffered from some prior battery leakage:










Here's the Orient J3920 signed movement - you can see where the back-plate has been stained by the leaking battery acid:










Note also how the centre chrono' finger tension spring had been deftly deflected to one side. 

You can also see the impressions made in the lug boxes by that incorrect replacement bracelet.

Showing if nothing else, that they'd been worn together for quite some time (rightly or wrongly).

Here's one of the stripped and cleaned watch case:










Whereas it's obviously worn, there is no trace of there ever having been any gold plated sections on the bezel ....

Unlike that other watch. You can also just see the machined edge of the (alternative case use) rotating bezel's track. :grin:


----------



## SEIKO7A38

I did try a battery in it, and the movement is totally dead - everything - time and all the chrono' functions. :disgust:

So much for the 'probably just needs a new battery' clause, which seems to be getting all too familiar lately.

In fact, there's plenty of evidence that someone had already tried to get the watch going again - and failed. :thumbsdown:

The main hands move quite freely on turning the crown, and the day / date click over nicely too. Reassuring ? <_<

I gently nudged the sweep second, 1/10s and 30 minute chrono' hands around to their 'zero' / 12 o'clock positions.

Here's the dial face and movement, with the somewhat incongruous light grey Tachy spacer ring still in place:










Couple of photos of the very pretty dial.

Pity about the marks someone has made on it - between the 9 and 10 o'clock batons. :angry:

Further evidence that someone has tinkered with it before, maybe attempting to pull hands.



















Note that unusually, with this particular Orient dial, all the dial identifier printing is visible -

Usually some is hidden under the Tachy dial ring spacer. This one reads *SI J392* and *7257-032*.

Speaking of that Tachy dial ring spacer, notice anything unusual about it ? :dontgetit:










*TACHY* and *METER* are printed apart in an odd futuristic typeface, and unusually to the left of '60', rather than the right of it.

I could have sworn we've seen this somewhere else before.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

This next post is really for the benefit of Monsieur ClÃ©ment, with whom I have been in correspondence. 



SEIKO7A38 said:


> The watch has obviously suffered from some prior battery leakage.
> 
> .... you can see where the back-plate has been stained by the leaking battery acid.





SEIKO7A38 said:


> I did try a battery in it, and *the movement is totally dead* - everything - time and all the chrono' functions. :disgust:
> 
> So much for the 'probably just needs a new battery' clause, which seems to be getting all too familiar lately.


I had a pretty good idea what to I was going to find when I removed the movement back-plate:










The battery acid had permeated under the plate, and attacked the PCB (and possibly the chrono' sweep second coil). 

As I've said before, someone clearly knew about this problem, and had tinkered with the watch previously.

The back-plate screw which also holds the -ve battery terminal was screwed in murder tight - not rusted in.

So much so, that not only had they buckled the back-plate slightly, but also left an impression in the PCB.

With the result that the PCB, already weakened by acid attack and crumbling, was broken in a critical place:










I haven't taken a photo of the PCB which I removed, because there is a *very slim* chance that I might be able to

get one of the tech's at work to repair the broken track. The C-MOS IC's integrity is easily damaged by bright light.









Luckily, I still have a couple of these spare. 












> John, Spares it's all about spares !!


Here's the partially rebuilt movement cleaned up - mostly with Rodico (*aprÃ¨s nettoyage*) :artist:










.... and re-assembled with new PCB and sweep second coil block (that's the one nearest the battery, incidentally) but ....



SEIKO7A38 said:


> Note also how the centre chrono' finger tension spring had been deftly deflected to one side.


I suspect, from the nick worn in the side of the finger spring, that the above was a more likely cause of the coil's demise. :disgust:










Note there's still some evidence of battery acid-staining on the back-plate, but I didn't want to end up with

it looking over-polished - so it just had an overnight soak in WD40, then 10 minutes in the ultrasonic bath.

New battery fitted, and it all works now.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38 said:


> New battery fitted, and it all works now.


Here's a 'real time' Q&D photo of the cleaned and reassembled *now-working* watch I took earlier this afternoon:










For the time being, I've fitted a used replacement crystal which I found among my 'odd' spare crystal stock.

It's 31.0mm Ã˜ with a correct-ish-appearing polished bevel edge, but only about 2.0mm thick (as opposed to 2.5mm)

- possibly a Sternkreuz p/n XMF310.848 (I don't have the original packet for it - it came out of my 7A38-7240, IIRC).

It's got a couple of very light scratches on it, but it's 100% better than the state of the original crystal I took out.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

So is nobody going to even attempt to guess which other very similar watch I was referring to ? :duh:

Well does this now look vaguely familiar to anybody (after all my hints) ? 



SEIKO7A38 said:


> In this photo, you can see the edge of the machined surface - the track on which the Orient J39's 'Diver' bezel would turn:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously, the fixed bezel on the Puma version needed to be this chunky to cover the Orient's 'Diver bezel' flange.
> 
> Here's another photo of the head, again by flash
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , unfortunately:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Note the slightly different Tachymeter dial ring used in the Puma ....
> 
> The words *TACHY METER* are to the left of '60', and printed with a gap.


Sisters under the skin - the Orient J39725-70 and Puma / JEPIC Y19001-70. Many common parts, including the hand set.

I now feel fully vindicated in having titled that other thread: *Puma 7A38 .... By Orient*

That's why I wanted this 'beater' watch so badly. Before I wasn't 100% sure. Now I know I was right all along. :smartass:


----------



## mollydog

Nice one Paul, just love the 'back from the dead' stories. :thumbup:

Quite like the J39725-70 white dial, red hands.

A little over kill by orient again with the

water resist/10 bar. :artist:

Would consider a re case on this one myself, something

a little less modernistic, :bag: a bit more subtle i think


----------



## SEIKO7A38

mollydog said:


> Would consider a re-case on this one myself, something a little less modernistic, :bag: a bit more subtle I think.


It may indeed yet get 're-cased', Robert - but it won't be any less more subtle. :grin:



mollydog said:


> Nice one Paul, just love the 'back from the dead' stories. :thumbup:


Whereas I'm pleased about having got it running again (at the cost of a new PCB, etc.  - more than the watch cost me),

I'm actually more chuffed at about finding a missing piece to the Seiko + Orient + Puma part of the 7A38 jigsaw puzzle.


----------



## jude

the seiko font orient looks great. Interesting peice indeed


----------



## SEIKO7A38

mollydog said:


> Nice one Paul, just love the 'back from the dead' stories. :thumbup:


Speaking of 'back from the dead' stories ....



SEIKO7A38 said:


> But worse was to come, when I unscrewed the case-back:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is probably the worst example of battery acid damage to a 7Axx movement that I've ever personally encountered ....


I thought I might as well post these few photos of my J39908-70 'beater', which I finally nailed back together yesterday. :hammer:

Took advantage of the decent bit of sunlight and rattled them off this morning. Also posted elsewhere (to some hilarity). :tongue2:

It still ain't exactly pretty, but everything works now (courtesy of replacement Seiko 7A38 movement, and Seiko pushers).





































And No. :no: Your eyes aren't deceiving you (in the 3nd photo). :blind: The Tachymeter dial ring printing IS actually *green*. :bad:

Whether that was the original colour, or it was (black) affected by the leaking battery acid fumes, guess we'll never know.


----------



## mollydog

Quite like this one Paul, something a little different :cool2:

Best part for me 'Is the geen on cream tacho dial' :drool:

Complete with early breitling chronomat crown,

imho it was well worth saveing


----------



## SEIKO7A38

mollydog said:


> Nice one Paul, just love the 'back from the dead' stories. :thumbup:
> 
> Quite like the J39725-70 white dial, red hands ....


Thanks Robert. :thumbsup:

I just realized I'm remiss in finishing off this particular chapter of the Orient J39 / 7A38 'story' thread. :book:

Although within the following week, I did post a few more bits about it elsewhere - in 3 other threads:

Here: Sunday Morning (Post-1980) Beaters - Post #21



SEIKO7A38 said:


> SEIKO7A38 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Finally got around to nailing this one back together yesterday. :hammer:
> 
> It still ain't exactly pretty, but it's a lot better now than it's original received condition ....
> 
> 
> 
> Swapped to this one now (but the photo was taken this morning :tongue2 ....
> 
> after what I thought was the final re-assembly yesterday afternoon.
> 
> My other recently acquired Orient J39 'probably just needs new battery / re-build it yourself beater' - the J39725-70:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and for KrispyDuck's benefit, here's another with all the hands aligned.
Click to expand...

and here: Must Get Seikos - Post # 80



SEIKO7A38 said:


> By far the cheapest and simplest (if not the most aesthetically pleasing) solution would be to fit one of those
> 
> 'el cheapo after-market' 20mm (non-)Seiko S/S bracelets regularly offered on eBay, as shown in post # 78.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SEIKO BRACELET FOR BULLHEAD offered on eBay by 'Mountapo_Merchant' and other Far East eBay sellers:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You'll often see these fitted to 'Frankens', described as 'Original Seiko bracelet', on 7A38's coming out of the Philippines.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, I've just fitted one, as a stop-gap solution, to my recently acquired Orient J39725-70 'beater':
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's another view showing the re-brushed vintage Orient clasp closer I fitted to it, in place of the 'fake' Seiko clasp:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty it ain't, but it 'works'.
Click to expand...

Lastly here's a partial re-quote from the Puma 7A38 .... By Orient - post # 27 thread:



SEIKO7A38 said:


> SEIKO7A38 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sisters under the skin - the Orient J39725-70 and Puma / JEPIC Y19001-70. Many common parts, including the hand set.
> 
> I now feel fully vindicated in having titled that other thread: *Puma 7A38 .... By Orient*
> 
> 
> 
> Anyway, here's a side-by-side photo of my latest Orient J39725-70 'beater' with my original 'stainless' Puma Y19001-70:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To further reinforce the (now completely obvious) Orient / Puma connection, please compare ....
Click to expand...

One thing I hadn't mentioned in any of those other posts was a little piece of advice I've given to other forum members.

That is, if you're not happy with an eBay purchase - i.e. it's significantly 'not as described' in the listing ....

You have a couple of options. The obvious one is to return the item 'as received' to the seller for a refund.

However, there is actually nothing stopping you keeping the item and trying to negotiate a partial refund.

Which is what happened in the case of this particular Orient J39725-70.

Checking my records, I paid 24.28 Euros + 9.50 Euros postage - total 33.78 Euros.

After a bit of haggling, I got a partial refund (to my PayPal account) of 19.78 Euros from the eBay seller.

O.K., so it 'cost me' a NOS Seiko 7A38 PCB  (and coil), plus my labour :hammer:, to get it running properly again ....

But effectively this particular Orient J39 'beater' ended up costing me only 14 Euros (as far as eBay fees are concerned).

Which is one reason why, for the time being at least, I fitted that somewhat befitting 'cheap and nasty' aftermarket bracelet.

Since those photos were taken, I've also fitted a Cousins 'cheapie' 31.0mm Ã˜ x 2.5mm crystal - same as on the Puma Y19.


----------



## SEIKO7A38

SEIKO7A38 said:


> But effectively this particular Orient J39 'beater' ended up costing me only 14 Euros ....


Which is how I like them - cheap. :naughty: :grin:

Indeed, probably my favourite, so far, of the Orient J39 'Diver' variants, the all-stainless J39701-70 (see previous page) ....



SEIKO7A38 said:


> So what do you think about my recent 'freebee' all-stainless Orient J39, in the previous couple of posts, Robert ? :huh:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I decided it might look better on a stainless bracelet - even one nothing like the original fitment Orient p/n SA160 bracelet.
> 
> So I've fitted a Seiko p/n G1410S, for the time being, which goes quite well, with a matching brushed finish Orient clasp ....


.... was effectively a 'freebee' - costing me only 10 Euros in postage, thanks to the mis-guided generosity of the seller. :notworthy:

I have absolutely no intention of paying 'silly money' for any of these Orient J39's, in an effort to further my research.









So you can imagine my reaction when I came across one for sale on Yahoo Japan Auctions this morning. 

See: http://page7.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/jp/auction/g104664844



> *â˜…ORIENT by SEIKO-7A38ãƒ ãƒ¼ãƒ-ãƒ¡ãƒ³ãƒˆæ­è¼‰ 1980å¹´ä»£ãƒ»è¶…ãƒ¬ã‚¢å"â˜…*




























Below is an unadulterated Google translation of the seller's description (from the original Japanese):



> Well you know your brand â- "ORIENT Â· Orient" has been released from, the Indianapolis 500 Â· chronograph.
> 
> This product â-, more than 20 years from now (1980) and the watch was released at the time, the world's first quartz chronograph movement developed over the prestige of the SEIKO / Seiko "7A28", the Day-Date features added end for overseas movement was "7A38" rare model with a becomes. (This product is not for the domestic market, the date display is "switched on Chinese or English," I will, It is a rare high points in this area)
> 
> because the latest Seiko â-, fed to the Orient is the best movement What was? I tried to be examined. (The Orient was "7A38" and the ability to develop a similar movement, so I did not)
> 
> appear on the Orient SEIKO EPSON 1984 (Publisher 7A28/7A38 Suwa Seikosha old), including a financial interest in joint venture which began operations in around the edges "7A38" and got in supplies? It is estimated. (Currently, the Orient, "Seiko Epson" has become a wholly owned subsidiary, the relationship is more solid ones)
> 
> * Manufacturer ORIENT (ORIENT)
> 
> * Model Indianapolis 500 - Chronograph Quartz Drive system Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·
> 
> * (SEIKO-7A38 movement) , and more confident that we have remained fairly good level state.
> 
> * Case Silver (Matte finish)
> 
> * Metal Silver Belt (Matte finish)
> 
> * White Dial
> 
> * Accessories Clear Case (made omega)
> 
> * Currently, "Day-Date features / functions demonstrate functional chronograph watch" is tested.


And the (Buy-it-Now) asking price ? :huh:

*Â¥59,500 Yen* - that's *Â£488.29* or *$763 US* - before you start adding on the Japamart fees / shipping / VAT etc. :shocking:

Not sure about the 'Indianapolis 500' logo on the dial, due to the blurry photos - it could possibly be a genuine 'limited edition',



SEIKO7A38 said:


> But can anybody post a photo of a complete and original Orient J39701-70 ? :no:


.... but otherwise looks very much like another J39701-70 variant - on the correct original (all-stainless) p/n SA160 bracelet.


----------

