# Some Kind Words For The Lowly 2414a Komandirskie



## Polo_Step (Aug 24, 2005)

Got a wad of watches in the mail yesterday from Goloubev in a box that looked like it had been hit by a train. Sent from Moscow on Monday, it made it to me in California by Saturday. Not bad delivery time! I'm assuming that abusing the packaging took at least a day extra.

I got an Amfibiya, a couple of Komandirskie self-winders and a couple of Molniya pocket watches. Remarkably, given the condition of the box, they all seem to work...so far (pictures from the seller):

The #801 open-face Molniya is essentially garbage, with a crystal so loose that it literally rattles and a big blister under the stick-on face, which is also smudged. Included is the cheesiest watch chain I have ever seen or imagined. To add to the oddity, on the back of this reproduction of a commie party watch is a very creepily voodooish representation of the signs of the zodiac. I haven't encountered this back on a Molniya before. It's certainly the best thing about the watch, which is otherwise enough of a dog that I wonder at its being shipped and will have some choice words for Viktor on the subject.

The Molniya #819 hunter commemorating Mikhail Kutusov (who beat Nappy in 1812) is very much nicer, though it has some slight debris fuzz under the crystal. The chain is somewhat sturdier and inspires more confidence.

The nominally "3602" movements are substantially diferent, with at less jewels (and smaller jewels) in the open-face lemon. What that's all about, I don't know. I've been looking at various pictures of the 3602 movement through the years and it seems to be, uh, very _fluid_ in interpretation and execution, let's say. The work on these two is very coarse, with the bridges and looking like they were shaped by scraping scrapmetal on someone's front steps by someone with a pressing engagement elsewhere. Still, snazzy engine-turning doesn't make a watch run any better.

I was curious about these Molniyas (correct transliteration; I'm assuming "Molnija"is an accomodation to the Germans)...so now I know. Rough work, but maybe reliable. [shrug] I find wearing a wristwatch about as natural as wearing stilts, so I appreciate a good cheap pocketwatch.

The 2416b Komandirskie self-winders were just the usual stuff, a submariner face (anything with the image of a Russian sub being a sort of elevated bad-luck talisman, I should think), and a regular paratroop face.

Just for fun, I got a jauntily nautical Amfibiya as a little present for a seagoing buddy of mine (he's the one in the stylin' Swiss army camouflage pants). You've convinced me of its waterproofness and typical relibility, so I thought it might be a nice gift that won't embarass me in three weeks.

I now understand, after fooling around with this for a while, what that little man in the flippers is about on some of these faces: This Amfibiya is an unadvertised diving weight. Why it should be so incredibly heavier than the Komandirskie self-winder, a watch with the same 2416b movement and approximate dimensions, I can't imagine. I know that the cases are of different metals, but I'm really amazed.

So...what does this have to do with the 2414a Komandirskie? Just this: It's so much lighter, sleeker, thinner (1/10") and more comfortable that I think that it's still going to be my Russian wearing watch. Mine's quite accurate, given a regular winding schedule, and I think that the comfort margin is decisive. Besides, it was a gift, so that makes it special.


----------



## raketakat (Sep 24, 2003)

Yes the Molniyas are a bit rough aren't they







.

I remember the "Signs of the Zodiac" watch. Looks like they've just stuck a new dial face on an old watch. Very shoddy.

Hope your friend enjoys his Amphibia though







. It is very "jaunty"







.


----------



## Polo_Step (Aug 24, 2005)

raketakat said:


> Yes the Molniyas are a bit rough aren't they
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Currently, at least, yeah. They're supposedly "80% handmade," which may account for it, with the hands being attached to a typical disgruntled and hung-over employee.



> I remember the "Signs of the Zodiac" watch. Looks like they've just stuck a new dial face on an old watch. Very shoddy.


I think the combination is pretty hilarious, really. Creepy, voodooistic astrology on one side, creepy, voodooistic communism on the other. I wouldn't change it.

The box is in a thunderstorm motif, and upon closer observation, there's a dim, ghostly rider on a rearing horse that one wouldn't notice right off. Strange.

A relief Lenin back would have been more appropriate on this one, but no... They put those on something else, and the ones with Lenin on the face have a train on the back. Go figure.

I think it's just "parts is parts" more than anything else, factory Frankentickers.

The Kutusov hunter said it was 15 jewels on the face, but it had one of the 18 jewel movements inside.

They're doing a lot of old reproduction open-faces and I was trying to get one of the ones with Brezhnev on it, though somehow they managed to find a picture of him where he didn't look like Tor Johnson, which was something of a disappointment...but after seeing this one, I'm not going for thirty bucks for another rattletrap, no matter what great helmsman is on the wrinkled face..

Supposedly these Molniyas actually keep good time and last for many years, and there's a certain Platonic idealism in not wasting a lot of sweat on something that doesn't matter. I'm OK with the cobby interiors, but there's a limit to my patience with stuff that shows.

Anyhow, after cleaning my glasses and taking a closer look, I find that the looseness is not in the crystal, but in the surrounding bezel, which is probably an easier fix to kludge.



> Hope your friend enjoys his Amphibia though
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm sure he will. I'm trying to get him into a suitable nautical hat, but so far he's not having any.


----------



## raketakat (Sep 24, 2003)

Tor Johnson. I have "Plan 9 from outerspace" on video somewhere







.

Molniya made a lot of the pocket watches which were imported into the U.K. under the "Sekonda" brand name.

My dad used to buy them in 1970's and they would generally take two or three years of heavy use before they developed a fault.

He had one repaired but generally, they were so cheap, he just bought another.

I've got a couple from the late 70's, early 80's. They run but need a good clean.

Hope the bezel is easy to fix







.


----------



## Polo_Step (Aug 24, 2005)

raketakat said:


> My dad used to buy them in 1970's and they would generally take two or three years of heavy use before they developed a fault.
> 
> He had one repaired but generally, they were so cheap, he just bought another.
> 
> ...


The second reason I got these was that I'm thinking about learning to do my own cleaning and simple repair of these various "proletarian" Russian watches (it is not economic to have it done as cost exceeds the value of the piece) and the texts I've seen recommend learning on a cheap pocketwatch.

All these books I'm reading say that watches should be cleaned every six to eighteen months (!), and one of these books was even written since the advent of modern synthetic lubricants. One wonders if there's such a thing as progress, or how many times one can disassemble and reassemble a functioning watch before it becomes nonfunctioning simply from being worked on, regardless of how expertly.

These Russian watches, for all their crude production, were never intended to be disposable, and I think it would be kind of a noble thing to be able to keep them maintained in tip-top shape for at least their factory projected ten-year lifespans. Or...am I being a _hopeless romantic?_


----------



## raketakat (Sep 24, 2003)

" hopeless romantic."

You'll find a few of those around here







.


----------



## Polo_Step (Aug 24, 2005)

raketakat said:


> Yes the Molniyas are a bit rough aren't they
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This can't possibly help.









What a nightmare!

"Most contaminated place on earth"..."worse than Chernobyl"...


----------

