Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback


Posts posted by Daveyboyz

  1. 17 minutes ago, Karrusel said:


    For those that are interested?, John Arnold, Coventry & London, made a ring watch for George III (1764), to include a quarter repeater.  On display within the Usher Gallery, Lincoln.




    But not sure what you mean about it being a linear ebauche?   I thought it was a movt the size of a matchstick head used in ring watches and the reverso 101.

  2. I put in another order today.   Firstly for a pair of movements.   1 will be my "clean" movement and the other will be my "dirty" movement used in construction and liable to be full of dust by the time I finish.

    These are super thin eta 282.002 typically used in Rado and the like.    This will change my spec a little, I am thinking I can reduce the thickness of my watch to 5mm.

    Also I selected some gold plated delphine hands of the correct dimensions which should look ok against a background of brushed white gold. 

    It's going to be some waiting for these bits to arrive.

    Also I ordered silver solder with three different melting points and some silver wire (I am not sure why yet but it may prove useful if I want to make any hinges or rivets.)

  3. Just an observation.   When dealing with sheet materials the gauge makes a lot of difference to the weight.

    Ordering a sheet of gold 30mm x 60mm the difference between 0.7mm and 0.8mm was a couple of hundred pounds.

    If every part of the case uses slightly thicker gauge steel in one watch as apposed to another that really will make a large difference to the weight regardless of the quality of the steel.

    On higher quality pieces I would suspect they don't try to save on materials and are happy to use a thick gauge and machine out indentations to facilitate parts rather than use thinner materials.

    • Agree 1
  4. 55 minutes ago, Karrusel said:

    Sorry, I just don’t get the logic behind this, precious metals & using a ‘quartz’ movement?

    Also, why send precious metal for assaying before machining/forming, surely that will limit, restrict, your fabrication, construction processes?

    The logic is that I want the watch to be slim, the crown will be hidden so a wind up won't be convenient.  

    Presently I don't have a quartz watch in my collection.  I also don't have the tooling or knowledge to produce a mechanical movement from scratch so if I am buying a unit I may as well buy a decent quartz unit that can be set and need no further attention.

    As to the hallmarking.   If I send it after fabrication it will fail because I intend to use silver and silver solder for some parts of the case (the bezel around the glass for instance)   if I send a piece of 18ct and a piece of silver I can place them where I want...for instance the gold hallmark will be in the middle of the back and the silver hallmark will be inside on the housing for the movement..   It won't limit me in the least.   I know it is a little unorthadox to have silver and gold in the same watch but using white gold instead of silver would take the gold content from £1000 to double that as well as some more in wastage. 


    The logic with the precious metals is I know how to work with them and if I am going to spend the amount of hours on this that it will take me then the materials may as well be as valuable as the time I am putting into them. 

    It would be harder for me to assemble in steel... nickel would be the cheap option but gold is more attractive.

  5. Well it looks like I am going to attempt making a watch.  I have never done it before but will feel my way through.  

    I have been thinking about it for some days and can't think of any insurmountable problems.

    It will be a quartz for various reasons and the watchmaking will be minimal (attaching hands, trimming stems) the other aspects will be more strenuous.

    I am just ordering some stuff...

    18ct yellow gold 30mm x 30mm x 0.7mm (£757.10+VAT)

    9ct white gold 25mm x 25mm x 0.5mm (for dial £80.47+VAT)

    Silver sheet 1000mm x 1000mm x 1mm (£81.47+VAT)

    3 x Sapphire mineral domed glasses

    When my metal is recieved I will be sending the back and two strips of silver for hallmarks.    This just dates the thing and ties the origins to London.

    I have the basic design in my head but will need to order movements before finalising the dimensions.


    Multiple glasses by the way as I may break or experiment with them. 

    • Like 4
  6. 11 hours ago, Ugg10 said:

    This took my eye when I spotted it on EBay, not an impulse buy but very nice IMO

    Might fit nicely in @Daveyboyz collection.

    Breguet 5930BB/12/986 Automatic White Gold Men's 35.5mm


    Yes, I do feel I am missing a Breguet.   I was looking at the Marine or switching my speedy for a type XX.  I just can seem to make room.   My collection needs reducing but I can't bear to let much go.

    • Like 1
  7. I see,  well there is nothing new under the sun... the idea of having the crown between the two cases is not original, nor clipping the two together.   

    However that has a square glass and I want a round one...  I guess it is a rather basic question about how to securely fit a glass but its outside of my experience.   I guess I should have a chat with my watchmaker.

  8. I thought I would jot down my initial thoughts.

    The construction of the watch is somewhat comparable to a match box with the outer sleeve made from 18ct gold and the sliding part in silver housing the movement.

    At the six o'clock end a pair of spring bars inside the case lock it home and to get to the movement simple requires these to be released and it slides out.

    At the other end the lugs are detachable with two buttons which operate a pair of box catches.   This means the strap will be a single piece with no buckle.



    I am thinking the crown will be at 12 o clock and exposed when the strap is undone.

    Measurements are 30 x 30 in gold but with an extra 2mm either end in silver plus the lugs.   Maybe I am being cheap using silver and I should use white gold instead.... 

    In order to keep the thickness down (for some reason 8mm thick seems appropriate to me) I guess a quartz eta would be the way to go.  

    Still I come back to the glass.   I am not sure how to fit it.   It could go in the drawer with the movement or in the sleeve.   To hand cut and file a circle in the sleeve to the precision required seems a stretch.  

    How thick I make the dial (I was thinking of using copper for it) and how much space is required to accommodate the hands is also necessary information before I even think of ordering some metal.

    • Like 1
  9. Well if I ever do it I will make a thread on it...

    One thing I might do is have a strap with no buckle... the lugs will slot into the case with a button each side (a bit like a clip on a rucksack) to release it. 

    This is not hard to do, I wonder why I have never seen it before.  

  10. 28 minutes ago, midnitemo said:

    Pasha , Explorer and Royal Oak for me

    This was the closest so far.   I couldn't part with the Royal Oak, it holds a lot of memories for me and I think its pretty much a perfect watch.

    The Pasha probably brings me the most joy of all these watches too... not sure why but I think it is a beautiful thing (even with that cyclops)

    The third is tough... the JLC master calendar is a good shout...but for setting it... in a one watch collection it would be the bee's knees but the Calatrava edges it out for me.

    The Speedy is cool but tbh the seamaster makes more sense if looking for a practical everyday wearer. 

    Overseas equally is a great watch but a bit lumpy for everyday. 

    @mitadoc my mum has a steel and gold reverso manual wind... its not an oversize one but suits me perfectly... I have been known to borrow it.

  11. So far some interesting answers.    The vintage ones are getting more love than I expected, the JLC moonphase is particularly popular too.  (Note to self I need to wear it more often... ) 

    @yokel Is our taste so different?  I think out of everybody on here I'd probably favour your watches to most on here.  The fact many were assembled in Germany rather than Switzerland isn't really here nor there the style is there.

    • Thanks 1
  12. The movement end of things is probably beyond me, both in terms of understanding and tooling.  I would probably simply opt for an ETA.

    The case however I believe I could produce in gold and silver using basic hand tools (a set of mills would be very useful but sheet materials can be bought at various thicknesses and I can solder and file etc)  It would be a time consuming process but I have some interesting ideas for construction...  either mounting the lugs to the caseback, having a sandwich type affair, another idea where the movement and everything slides into the case which is open along one edge... a rectangular case with a round dial in the centre of it...   I have many ideas of how to assemble these cases, none are seemingly beyond me but all would be time consuming.   Importantly they would be original solutions because the range of things I can do dictates limits in some directions which require design work arounds.

    I am trying to work out what the dimensions would be.   Allowing for 1mm of material front and back, 3.6mm for a movement, 0.5mm for a dial (I can imagine a lot of possibilities for that) I need a sapphire glass (whats that 1mm?) and space for the hands but I am unsure how much to allow. 


  13. There was a thread up about all designs looking like others etc not so long ago.   It got me thinking about how I would build a watch if I were going to.

    The design I have in my head doesn't look like any watch I ever saw because its form follows the function and solutions to assembly.

    You see I have skills as a jeweller but I never made a watch.  I know how to work with precious metals and I could use these techniques to form a watch case but for instance I haven't the tools to thread a case back etc so these limitations would necessitate a less common assembly.

    Now I have a design in my head... I don't know if I will put it into practice... I don't have access to a jewellers bench and equipment presently... but It may nag away at me....   maybe I will just produce a component at a time and eventually produce a watch... maybe it will just stay as a design project.

    Anyway my question is.   On a watch with a dial size of 36mm, assuming I would be using dauphine hands and there is nothing raised on the dial (markers would be inbedded) how much space should I allow between the glass and the dial to accommodate the hands?

  14. I am not about to do this but I was thinking about which watches I could part with and the answer was not very many.   I therefore decided to think about it another way.   If there was a fire and I could only save 3 watches which would they be?   

    Well the most expensive three is the obvious answer but money aside it isn't the three I would choose.


    Anyway I wondered which three you lot would pick if you could steal three.   I wonder if any of you can select the three I have in my head.

    Box 1

    1. Patek Gondolo 5111r manual wind

    2. Patek Calatrava 5107g auto

    3. Audermars Royal Oak 14790st auto

    4. JLC master calendar moonphase 18ct white gold auto

    5. Seiko snowflake springdrive

    6. Cartier Pasha 18ct yellow auto

    7. Rolex Polar explorer II 16570 auto

    8. Vacheron Constantine Overseas 49140

    9. Omega seamaster midsize auto

    10. Omega speedmaster MOTM manual


    Seiko cocktail time auto


    Box 2

    1. Longines 1921 manual wind

    2. Omega constellation 14ct 1966 auto

    3. IWC platinum pilot manualwind 1960

    4. Rolex 9ct extraprima rectangular 1923 manual

    5. Universal Geneve 18ct polerouter 1959 auto

    6. JLC 18ct Memovox 1950's auto


    This is for fun only, I think I would sell a  kidney before I reduce to three.

    • Thanks 1
  15. 3 minutes ago, JoT said:

    I have owned or own: Navitimer Cosmonaut, Chronomat Longitude, Chrono Avenger, Superocean, Superocean Steelfish, Chrono Avenger M-1, B-1, Aerospace Avantage, Aerospace

    Not a hint of a problem with any of them and dealing with BUK for service was always very professional and the results were always first-rate.

    And to pierce @Daveyboyz bubble I didn't think any of them were high horology they are (or were) just very good tool watches. My son wears Breitling for the same reasons and has owned a B-1, Superocean Heritage Chronograph and currently has a Cockpit B-50

    Having said that - Breitling have been heading in another direction since 2018 under different ownership (a hedge fund I think) and are putting a lot of effort into Top Time, Premier heritage ranges and women's watches. The Premier and Top Time aren't bad looking watches but they are not tool watches which is why I bought Breitling.

    The updated Chronomat (or at least the versions with the steel bezel) looks good to me and it houses the excellent B01 in house chronograph movement. I have never liked the Superocean Heritage range nor do I like the current Superocean.



    I am not sure how that's piercing my bubble.   As I was clear to point out it isn't everyone... just a large % of fanboys.   Rolex and Breitling seem to be magnets for similar attitudes.   As I say I don't fault their watches (even if some are too big for my humble wrist)

  • Create New...