Vthoky, That is odd about the crown on the Monster. I was expecting it would be a screw down crown too. I bet if you find the dial you want on the fleabay you could easily build something like that. The sky is the limit with Samurai & seiko mods. Samurai cases (real examples) command a premium but it’s still going to fall well under the cost of a new Samurai.

I’m really torn. My Orange Samurai mod AKA Orange Crush has just gotten some SERIOUS COMPETITION. The Blue Lagoon Samurai dial is just stunning! I’ve been wanting one of these for a while and can’t believe I found a full kit clean example for under $400!

The most interesting aspect of modding is the super high end materials slowly becoming available to even the lowly amateur custom or mod watch builder. In a watch such as the SKX titanium cases with Ti (titanium) bezels and case backs are available at very reasonable prices.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: stickman428,

quote:

Originally posted by 453030:
Picked up this all ceramic in May. My first Tudor. The movement is as accurate as I have ever owned. Very impressive offering.

Does that one have Tudor's in-house movement?

What a difference it made ditching the big tooth bezel and ceramic insert for an actual OEM Seiko DLC bezel. The bezel and insert are off of a save the ocean Samurai. The lighter blue 15 minutes on the bezel insert ghosts into and matches the darker color of the rest of the bezel insert from some angles. The DLC bezel matches the hands and chapter ring marks very well and changes the look of the watch quite a bit compared to the standard all stainless Orange Samurai. It’s almost one I could see Seiko actually putting together as one of their endless limited editions.



Seiko super smooth rubber from the unique SRPA83 PADI. As far as I know it’s the only diver Seiko has made with these straps. I think they work well with the hard angles of the Samurai case.
.

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:
Does that one have Tudor's in-house movement?

It sure does, and it is METAS certified. I believe it is the first non-Omega watch to gain that credential. My sample has been unbelievably accurate. I wore it 7 days straight upon arrival, and it was < 2 seconds different than my atomic clock. My first Tudor and the piece has been overly impressive.

quote:

Originally posted by Tooky13:
That black, all ceramic Tudor is very cool! I've got a Black Bay and it's, by far, the most accurate automatic I have. It's consistently within a couple of seconds a month.

Thanks Sir. A brand that has tempted me for some years, glad I finally jumped in.

quote:

Originally posted by 453030:

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:
Does that one have Tudor's in-house movement?

It sure does, and it is METAS certified. I believe it is the first non-Omega watch to gain that credential. My sample has been unbelievably accurate. I wore it 7 days straight upon arrival, and it was < 2 seconds different than my atomic clock. My first Tudor and the piece has been overly impressive.

Tudor's supposedly "in-house" movement is a Kenissi movement. They make movements for Breitling, Chanel, Norqain and Tudor. The factory is a collaboration between Rolex, Breitling and Chanel.

There is also a hairspring factory owned by Rolex and Omega for anti-magnetic springs.

https://www.ablogtowatch.com/n...ied-to-tudor-chanel/

Well, I calmed down. Given the lack of replies to my predicament, I figured I was being either unrealistic or unreasonable or both. I ordered a timegrapher last night, which should be here Friday. I should also hopefully have my Glycine back some time this week. I’m going to take a crack at regulating it myself. Plenty of enthusiasts do, and I figure it’s not really all that different from owning any other regular maintenance tool.

Which timegrapher did you order? I've been tempted to try regulating a Seiko movement.

YaeTek on Amazon. Picture shows a Weishi, and the reviews say that’s what shows up, so who knows? Probably a Chinese copy, but we’ll see how it does. If it’s a turd, I’ll send it back. I’ll follow up either way.

Every hobby I’ve gotten into, I started adjusting, repairing, and building my own stuff, so it just seemed like the thing to do.

Thanks for the information. I'm the same way. Although this Seiko movement is within spec, I'd like to try regulating it.

The building it on your own aspect of watches is VERY fun. P220 Smudge, I’m glad you got a time grapher. It shouldn’t be too hard to get your Glycine keeping better time.

I was looking at my fathers Combat Sub and should have taken a few pics because he has really beaten the hell out of it. That man is hard on his watches! So far he has only complained about the reserve not lasting long but he might not be moving the watch enough to fully wind the power reserve. His accuracy has been holding steady at about +4 seconds a day.

Yeah, that’s what mine was running at first. Hopefully I can get it that close or better.

Got my timegrapher. It’s a Weishi 1000, and seems to work just as advertised. IWSC hung onto my Glycine until Thursday, so I’ll have it Monday and fiddle with the whole thing at work later in the week. My manager bought a deceased jeweler and watch maker’s shop, and we have a rather ridiculous digital microscope as well, so I’ll have better equipment to work on it there. Seeing the texture of the paint on the dial was interesting, if that gives you any perspective on what I can use to look at the movement while I make adjustments.

An initial look at my current mechanicals with the Weishi was interesting. Phoibos does indeed seem to regulate their movements. Beat error was .3ms and it was +/- 5 in most positions. My Invicta was 1.2ms and +9 to -19, so if I’m going to go ahead and mod it, I should get after it and play with regulating this movement first store I go after my Glycine.

quote:

Originally posted by P220 Smudge:My Invicta was 1.2ms and +9 to -19...

Whoa, that's a huge difference. Position changes shouldn't have that much effect, so the balance is most likely not poised. If it's just the hairspring not being centered that's not too hard to fix, but if the balance wheel itself is out of balance that's a more-involved job to correct.

Hmmm. I’ll have to double-check it. There was a fair bit of variance in the results over time as well. I tried to let it sit in each position for about a minute, and the readings changed. I guess I’ll need to average them and see how I wind up.

If the movement is that messed up, well… I bought the watch purely with the intention of pulling it apart and learning how things work and modifying it, so if the movement gets destroyed in testing, I’m ok with that as a learning experience. I’ll just buy another NH35 on Amazon and tinker with that.

quote:

Originally posted by P220 Smudge:
so if the movement gets destroyed in testing, I’m ok with that as a learning experience. I’ll just buy another NH35 on Amazon and tinker with that.

Does you Invicta have an NH35 in it now?

If so, you can probably manage to service it yourself if you go carefully. Be aware that lubricants are NOT cheap.The calendar works will probably give you the most trouble. Take a picture at every disassembly step and watch where the springs go. Other wise, be very careful with the balance. There's a guy on YouTube - "My retro vintage watches"- Michael Bolton who services a lot of Seikos and they're pretty similar. Check him out.

As for the Chinese time-grapher, do hang too much credence on the readings. Their quality varies a bit. I've had one for several years and generally on the vintage watches I work on I don't even bother with it. I simply bench time and regulate. Works O.K. on modern movements, but the vintage movements rarely make any sense at all on it.

Good Luck,

RMD

quote:

Originally posted by rduckwor:
Does you Invicta have an NH35 in it now?

It does.

quote:

Originally posted by rduckwor:
If so, you can probably manage to service it yourself if you go carefully. Be aware that lubricants are NOT cheap.The calendar works will probably give you the most trouble. Take a picture at every disassembly step and watch where the springs go. Other wise, be very careful with the balance. There's a guy on YouTube - "My retro vintage watches"- Michael Bolton who services a lot of Seikos and they're pretty similar. Check him out.

Thanks. Yeah, I think I'm going to give it a try. I'm considering going with a no-date dial anyways, but I'll go slow and easy. Taking pics of the steps will be critical, yes. I'll look up that guy on Youtube.

quote:

Originally posted by rduckwor:
As for the Chinese time-grapher, do hang too much credence on the readings. Their quality varies a bit. I've had one for several years and generally on the vintage watches I work on I don't even bother with it. I simply bench time and regulate. Works O.K. on modern movements, but the vintage movements rarely make any sense at all on it.

Good Luck,

RMD

Thanks. Yeah, I did wonder to myself how accurate the timegrapher was, and decided I'd have to proceed on a combination of faith in the equipment and common sense. If the watch isn't keeping time correctly over a given period time when I wear it, that's more a concern then what the machine tells me in each position. I did put my vintage (50's, I believe) Spiedel Sportsman 17 jewel hand-wind on it and it said it was running two minutes fast per day, amplitude of I think about 150 and a beat error of 2.0ms or so, if I'm remembering all that correctly. That may be correct, but it seems really off to me. I had it fully wound when I tested it, and I tend to keep it that way when I wear it and I've never noticed it running that wild.

^^^^Following!

quote:

Originally posted by P220 Smudge:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by rduckwor:
That may be correct, but it seems really off to me. I had it fully wound when I tested it, and I tend to keep it that way when I wear it and I've never noticed it running that wild.

Generally, check it on the time-grapher 1 hour after a full wind and then 24 hours after a full wind. This will tell you about the timing accuracy as the main spring winds out.

RMD

Thanks, I’ll try that when I get ready to fiddle with my Glycine.

So… I bought and owned a Luminox for about 20 hours. My impression was that the money all went into the carbon case, the tritium and the marketing. It just felt cheesy, and I wound up not finding it all that readable except in full sun. The tritium in pitch dark was less impressive than BGW9. I’m sorry, but the whole “it glows for 25 years” pitch seemed wholly unimpressive when you’re starting with dim tubules that will get progressively dimmer with time. No AR coating. The shade of Orange looked more pumpkin than I was wanting. I dunno, I could go on, but it just felt incredibly cheap. It was very comfortable on the wrist, though, but that wasn’t enough to save it. $190 with tax back on the card today. Bye-bye, Luminox.