# Pocket Watch 7-Day Challenge



## AVO (Nov 18, 2012)

I've gone from zero to three pocket watches in 3 months, during which time I've been gently fiddling with regulators. I am now hopeful that they are all within about a minute per day.

I'm also aware that I haven't done one of my timing tests for months, so I thought I would have a go next week when I'm around a lot at home.

I will wind and set them tomorrow, Sunday, at 2100 BST, and will wind and check at the same time approx. every night. The test will run until the same time next Sunday, 28th July. The watches won't be carried, they will just sit in their boxes ticking away.

If you fancy running a couple, pop up a picture and go for it - just for fun of course!

My contenders in order of acquisition:

1. Lip ChronomÃ¨tre - pretty little French thing (c.1920 or earlier)

















2. Smiths - cheap and cheerful ('60s at a guess)


----------



## AVO (Nov 18, 2012)

Silly - won't allow 3 images on one post!

3. "Improved Patent" - huge solid key wound English fusee lever - what C19th watch snobs called a turnip! (1883)

















I haven't got a clue how this will pan out. Tune in, or join in!


----------



## DJH584 (Apr 10, 2013)

I'd like to be able to join in. Unfortunately I'm not here for two days next week.

Would have been fun comparing my Smiths and one of my other Anglo Celtic movement wtaches against yours.

So I will be just tuning in.

Have fun.

Regards

David


----------



## luckywatch (Feb 2, 2013)

Nice on Avo I must enter. Picture in the morning. Something Russian this time I hope. :yes:


----------



## Thomasr (Oct 11, 2011)

i shall play, may have another go with the jlc


----------



## AVO (Nov 18, 2012)

Excellent - keep 'em coming!

Unfortunately, I have a feeling the Lip will be withdrawing at an early stage. I wound it and set it yesterday, and it was still looking very good when I went to bed. It has lost several minutes overnight. It has done it before, and I think it may be to do with the hands sticking temporarily. I'll start it tonight, but I'm not too hopeful. I think it may need a visit to the watchie!


----------



## Will Fly (Apr 10, 2012)

I'll join you in this one - with my wartime Hamilton 4992B. It needs fine tuning and currently runs around 50' fast a day - so no problem for you there! I'll also dig out my 1950s Hamilton 992B Railway pocket watch as a comparison - piccy later...










Just found the Hamilton 992B pic:


----------



## luckywatch (Feb 2, 2013)

I'm ready!


----------



## AVO (Nov 18, 2012)

Excellent, chaps! Relaxed challenge, this one - report in whenever you like. 

Sadly, I'm down to the IP and the Smiths - the Lip is not well at all!


----------



## Melville (Jun 17, 2013)

I'll have a go with this 1927 Hamilton 992 with a Canadian 24 hour dial.


----------



## Will Fly (Apr 10, 2012)

Excellent, Melville - let the battle of the Hamiltons commence! :notworthy:


----------



## Will Fly (Apr 10, 2012)

They're off!


----------



## AVO (Nov 18, 2012)

Gorgeous Hamilton, Melville!

My two are up and running - sadly the Lip didn't make the start - it is not well! 

For the record, mine read:

IP: -37s

Smith: -28s

:buba:


----------



## luckywatch (Feb 2, 2013)

Not able to hack but at 2100 hours I was 10 seconds behind.


----------



## luckywatch (Feb 2, 2013)

I think I am now about 40 seconds fast. :taz: Will wind again at 2100 hours. This PW just sits in a draw year after year so it must be having fun. :thumbup:


----------



## AVO (Nov 18, 2012)

Today's result:

IP reading -6 (+31 today)

Smiths reading +18 (+46 today)

Pleased to see them both well under the minute. Both were running 2-3 mins fast when I got them, so my fiddling is paying off.


----------



## Melville (Jun 17, 2013)

After 24 hours lying face up the Hamilton 992 is running 3 seconds fast. I'll see how it goes pendant up for the next 24 hours.


----------



## luckywatch (Feb 2, 2013)

The 2nd day and it looks like 90 seconds fast.


----------



## AVO (Nov 18, 2012)

Interesting results today. I left them pendant up last night, and whilst that brought the Smiths nicely into line, the IP went on go-slow. As pendant up is the most common orientation when being worn, I may need to give that one a little tweak to the plus after the test.

IP: reading -2:08

Today: -2:02

Aggregate: -1:31

Smiths: reading +10

Today: -8

Aggregate +38


----------



## Melville (Jun 17, 2013)

End of day 2 and the Hamilton 992 lost 5 seconds and so it is now 2 seconds slow. I'll wear it tomorrow during the day and see how it performs.


----------



## Thomasr (Oct 11, 2011)

mine was a non starter, forgot to start this time


----------



## Will Fly (Apr 10, 2012)

Both my Hamiltons were 1 minute fast at 9pm this evening - 2 days into the challenge.


----------



## luckywatch (Feb 2, 2013)

Day 3 and its 2 and a half minutes fast. :yes:


----------



## Melville (Jun 17, 2013)

Carried the Hamilton 992 all day and it has lost 3 seconds, so it is now 5 seconds slow after 3 days. I think I'll carry it for the rest of the 7days and see if it maintains this rate.


----------



## AVO (Nov 18, 2012)

Oops - forgot to click submit and therefore post this last night:

Day 3

IP: reading -2:25

Today: -17

Aggregate -1:48

Smiths: reading +4

Today: -6

Aggregate: +32


----------



## luckywatch (Feb 2, 2013)

Day 4 and its a good 3 minutes fast.


----------



## AVO (Nov 18, 2012)

Day 4...

IP - reading: -2:28

Today: -3

Total: -1:51

Smiths - reading: +15

Today: +11

Total: +43

Good day for both of them!


----------



## Melville (Jun 17, 2013)

The Hamilton 992 seems to have settled down now. Carried it again today and it lost another 3 seconds, so it is now 8 seconds slow after 4 days.


----------



## AVO (Nov 18, 2012)

Day 5

IP - reading: -2:33

Today: -5

Aggregate: -1:56

Smiths - reading: +42

Today: +27

Aggregate: +1:10


----------



## luckywatch (Feb 2, 2013)

I am a good four minutes fast at day five. :threaten:


----------



## Melville (Jun 17, 2013)

The Hamilton 992 lost 5 seconds today, That makes a total loss of 13 seconds after 5 days. It's good that it has settled down and is being consistent and losing slightly every day. If it continues to lose over the next couple of days I should be able to tweak the micrometric regulator slightly. I've only had the watch a few weeks so this is it's first real test since I cleaned and oiled it.


----------



## AVO (Nov 18, 2012)

Great performance, Melville. You must be chuffed as 'eck with that! :thumbup:


----------



## luckywatch (Feb 2, 2013)

Day 6 and I got the hump :taz: I am over 5 minutes fast!


----------



## AVO (Nov 18, 2012)

Day 6

IP - reading: -2:40

Today: -7

Aggregate: -2:03

Smiths - reading: +1:16

Today: +35

Aggregate: +1:45


----------



## Melville (Jun 17, 2013)

Day 6. Lost another 4 seconds, giving a total loss of 17 seconds.


----------



## luckywatch (Feb 2, 2013)

Last day and six minutes fast! :yes:


----------



## AVO (Nov 18, 2012)

Day 7 & Final

IP - reading: -2.43

Today: -3

Aggregate: -2:06

Smiths - reading: +1:45

Today: +29

Aggregate: +2:14

Not bad!


----------



## Melville (Jun 17, 2013)

Final day, and the Hamilton 992 lost another 6 seconds so a loss over the week of 23 seconds. A very fine advance on the regulator adjustment screw may reduce the loss. I'll have a little fiddle with it over the next few days.


----------



## AVO (Nov 18, 2012)

Won't need too much - that's a damn' fine rate! :thumbup:

I'm happy with +/- 2 mins per week, especially with my 130-y-o!


----------



## Will Fly (Apr 10, 2012)

Well, the Hamilton 4992B checked in at 3' 5" fast over the 7 days - better than I thought it would - and the Hamilton 992B at 2 minutes fast. I haven't got a hack on the 992B, so that's pretty much as close as I can get.

Good fun - and some great watches here - some of them well into old age! :thumbup:


----------



## Melville (Jun 17, 2013)

After two tiny adjustments to the regulator the Hamilton 992 has gained just 4 seconds in 7 days, so I think I'll leave it at that. I think that's pretty good for an 86 years old watch.


----------

