NRG

Sounds like this bozo is right up there with the likes of Flip and all the other loose screw heads...

Sorry, can't help with part numbers but you can put a new mainspring in by hand...... or simply buy the barrel & spring assembly complete...

Here we go again...so funny my sides are splitting What's next, how to CNC a 100% accurate case from epoxy glue...

[censored]. How clever of you to crop the picture like that, how about a shot of the end case betwwen the lugs. Forget it don't bother. BTW the crown is different in that last pic.

"I'm not a Dave! I'm a free man!" or should that have been; "I'm not a number! I'm a free man Dave!" With a nod to the classic 60's TV series 'The Prisoner'

Yes, every time this bozo posts he takes the [censored], ignore the Troll....

No offence intended.....

Can't help with the PP, however, The first Omega reps where reported back in the mid 1890's so in theory it's possible, however, the recasing suggestion above is most likely.

Neil, with regard to regulation and 'COSC' I would not make any mention of it, you could be making a rod for your own back...just my 2p worth...

I'd recommend a look at Damasko watches. http://www.damasko.de/eng/index.html A bit more than your budget, however, extremely well made and engineered, check out the 'prospect' and 'technology' links... I have the DA36 that would just fit your budget:

TT please stop! As wonderfull as this is, there's no way anybody is going to be able to trawl through all of this and keep track of where the reference info is. It needs some sort of index even if it's as crude as post number!

Wow! Stunning amount of information, thanks TT! Shame it's not indexed in some way....

2824 is 4.8mm vs 5.05mm for the 2836 AFAIK. I'm not 100% sure but I think the difference is solely down to the addition of the day wheel feature to the '36. It sits inside the '36 date wheel which is offset slightly compared to the 2824 date wheel. So if my presumption is correct the 2824 would need to be lowered WRT the crown tube by .25mm Hope that is of some help.

Round and around it goes again, where will it stop, nobody knows. OK, thanks… I bought a Rolex from some Guy called TTK, it looks like this: It’s got Rolex stamped on the dial, and it only costs £55 delivered! Imagine my horror when it arrived and I realized it was a fake Rolex! Not a real one at all! I feel cheated, I demand my money back! I say this subject should be dropped. I empathize with the call for ‘honest’ advertising but really guys when I see people posting using words like dishonest, fraud, fraudulent claims, false advertising and lines like “…the way I was brought up...” etc. I can only shake my head in disbelief and amazement. If you really want to be vent your anger on false advertising get into Hi-Fi and start looking at what cable manufacturer’s claim and charge for wire, then you will know the real meaning of those terms above. I’ll say it again, ours is a hobby based on purchasing counterfeit goods. We know what we are doing and we should be smart enough to understand the risks and the items we receive may not be exactly what we where told they would be. To bang on about ETA movements and Swiss etc. when the watch we buy is a false hood in its own right is beyond my understanding. Andrew and Josh, have for a long time now, provided a Wall Mart shopping experience with really great back up considering the legality of the product that is really amazing IMHO. Short of making them fall on their proverbial swords as a way of an apology I can’t see what else there is to be gained in beating them to depth....oh yes, I forgot, honest advertising… This really is starting to look like a witch hunt. Neil has the right idea, all the advertising should be just a picture, no other description, you can see the watch the logo and as long as it looks the same as the photo and ticks when you get it then nobody will be ‘mislead’ or unhappy… Having put my foot in my mouth, I'll shut up now.

Whatever you do to remove the hands, levers, lifting the dial (ugly way but it can work), hedge trimmer etc. Protect the dial! Don't use paper get some thin but stiff acetate sheet. Cut it larger than the dial and cut narrow slots in it to accommodate the hands. Slide it in between the hands and the dial. Never touch the dial with your fingers! The oils from them and easily ruin a dial.

Don't flatter yourself. No you weren't. You know exactly what they are for. And even you are capable of using Google. Go on enlighten us... Yes it would....go away.

The torque from the main spring should be fairly constant except at the extremes of the power reserve. If it does vary alot then it needs looking at. Given a healthy mainspring your observation of DU rate difference is again down to the state of regulation for the watch. By taking the watch off at night you can, to a limited degree, compansate for daily wear rate changes by finding an overnight static postion that opposes that daily rate change.

Exactly, the spring drive has no beat. It has a glide wheel instead of a pallet wheel, the sweep rate of the glide wheel is controlled by electromagnetic force. The second hand glides beautifully around the dial. Both these movements are great steps forward IMHO, I would love either but I really want a springdrive!

Yes, trying to adjust it further is a waste of effort because your watch is poorly regulated if DU it is -4 and CU +20. What you are doing by moving the regulator arm, and many get this wrong, is you are adjusting the 'rate' of the watch. You are not regulating it at all. Regulating a watch involves many tiny adjustments to the hairspring, regulator pins, balance jewels, pallet jewels etc etc. so that the rate difference between your 5 positions is minimal IE the -6/+4 often quoted COSC standard. It is incredibly difficult to achieve this and is beyond many movements basic capability or quality to achieve it. Ideally rate can only be adjusted adequately if the regulation of the watch is good enough in the first place. There are some excellent article on TZ by Walt Odets on this.

Welcome to the forum and as these kind gents have just saved you $200 how about making a donation to this fine community?

LOL! I've just realised, Flav like many of our friends on RWG are American...when this guy said 'rubber' he meant a 'pencil eraser' like the ones used in school LOL!

It's not so rosey in gen land either, you could have bought an Invicta and have the same issues!

Oh you're clever. A very measured unemotional response. Sarcasm, [censored] take, Troll, Rolex movement duplication using CNC (inspired that one!), modding service and even the offer of a video... Guys stop feeding it.

A troll. Don't feed it.

IMHO no. First the 6497 is 16.5 ligne, much larger than the 2801 11.5, the course (part one) teaches you how to handle the small parts of a watch. It teaches you the necessary skills and handling ability to successfully tear down and build up a movement, if you can't do that with the smaller 11.5 you ain't gonna succeed with a 16.5 movement. Master the 2801 and the 6497 will be more like a stroll in the park. Also, the 2801 is only used in part 1, part 2 moves on to the 2836 a much more complex movement. Practicing on the 6497 will not prepare you for the 2836. The course really doesn't cover watch repair, for that you should invest in some good books and buy broken stuff from the 'bay to get practice.