tomyeshuah Posted June 11, 2011 Report Share Posted June 11, 2011 Josh's New Red 1680, 2836-2 based Pure Time's current Red 1680, ETA 2846 based Which of the two versions has a genuine retaning ring bezel construction and will fit the clark's 127 plexi without modifications? Thank You. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronin Posted June 12, 2011 Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 will fit the clark's 127 plexi without modifications? I have found some modification is always necessary in this dept. A Dremel with sanding barrel is probably required if too tight. Someone may be able to comment as to weather any of these are actually to over-sized. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
preacher62 Posted June 12, 2011 Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 I have Josh's 1680 and I purchased a 127 from Clark and it fit puuuurrrrrfectly. I was hopeful that this would fix another problem with the watch. The datewheel and date window and the cyclops do not line up, horizontally. The dwo is left justified in the window and the cyclops is right justified to the date window. Since I believe that the Clark crystal is correct, then the problem lies with the dial and dwo. I fixed the problem by purchasing a 5513 dial and a 19 crystal from Clark. Machined down the crown, vintagized just a smidge. Problem solved.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dezcori Posted October 11, 2011 Report Share Posted October 11, 2011 Sorry to bump this old thread, but does Josh's watch have gen-like bezel construction, using a flat metal washer for the crystal retaining ring, instead of the white plastic ring like the PT sub? I have the PT sub and the white plastic retainer is crap, considering getting one of Josh's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJGladeRaider Posted October 11, 2011 Report Share Posted October 11, 2011 Sorry to bump this old thread, but does Josh's watch have gen-like bezel construction, using a flat metal washer for the crystal retaining ring, instead of the white plastic ring like the PT sub? I have the PT sub and the white plastic retainer is crap, considering getting one of Josh's. Why not get the MBW version -- everything fits, and they hold their value. Bill 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alligoat Posted October 11, 2011 Report Share Posted October 11, 2011 Sorry to bump this old thread, but does Josh's watch have gen-like bezel construction, using a flat metal washer for the crystal retaining ring, instead of the white plastic ring like the PT sub? I have the PT sub and the white plastic retainer is crap, considering getting one of Josh's. On my PT 1665, jmb turned a crystal retention ring out of SS for me. That solved the problem of the PT retention ring, got rid of the flukey nylon gasket and the bezel snapped down right over the retention ring. The whole thing turned out to be WR and is basically a copy of the gen assembly at this point. The flat little tension washer is in there also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbutlerman Posted October 11, 2011 Report Share Posted October 11, 2011 I just logged in because I too am having some 1680 retaining ring Issues. I have a Yuki case and I keep getting horizontal cracks underneath the retaining ring. I am using Clarks crystals, which measure out at 30.30. My retaining ring mics at around 30.20. Is that too much compression? Anybody have genuine rolex numbers floating around on this measurement? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbutlerman Posted October 11, 2011 Report Share Posted October 11, 2011 PS...the crack develops after several days of being on the watch... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alligoat Posted October 11, 2011 Report Share Posted October 11, 2011 Yep, DB, your ring is too tight. 30.27mm would be about right on a 30.30 mm crystal. Like Ronon says, you can sand down the inside w/ a dremel or by hand w/ some 200-400 grit sandpaper. The 30.3mm on your crystal is what Cousinsuk shows for their T-127. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbutlerman Posted October 11, 2011 Report Share Posted October 11, 2011 Cool - I've sanded the retaining ring down to 30.25. We'll see if it cracks this time. Good thing Clarks 1680 crystals are so cheap! I just received an order of 6, so I'll have a lot of testing options Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alligoat Posted October 11, 2011 Report Share Posted October 11, 2011 It's pretty much a matter of test fitting it as you sand away- just don't go too fast. Are you using a crystal press? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbutlerman Posted October 11, 2011 Report Share Posted October 11, 2011 Yes I am, kinda. Because of the height of the crystal and the "pressers" (the little plastic pieces that go in the press), I am using the presser by hand - putting it on the retaining ring and using my hand and body weight to press the ring flush...works pretty well... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
automatico Posted October 12, 2011 Report Share Posted October 12, 2011 (edited) (using a crystal press?) "Yes I am, kinda. Because of the height of the crystal and the "pressers" (the little plastic pieces that go in the press), I am using the presser by hand - putting it on the retaining ring and using my hand and body weight to press the ring flush...works pretty well..." If the crystal retaining bezel is the correct size, it may still crack the crystal if the press cup flexes and gets out of level during installation. I would advise anyone who plans to press bezels on watches to invest in a crystal press with metal press cups (usually aluminum). Some supply houses have them for as little as $50 or $60. Make sure the bottom of the press that holds the case (a cup or flat piece) is also made of metal as I have a cheapo press with aluminum press cups that screw onto the plunger but it has a 40mm wide by 16mm thick flat plastic (bottom) case rest and it will not take much pressure before it tilts to one side or the other. The bottom case rest is bored to fit down over a 10mm diameter stump but the plastic case rest will not stay flat because the stump sticks out of the base about 10mm under the case rest allowing it to tilt. You would think a 40mm x 16mm piece of hard plastic would stay flat but it does not. One of the best 'affordable' crystal/bezel presses is the BB 502B/505 but they cost about $175 and come with only a few basic cups. The difference between the 502B and 505 is the cup set that comes with the press. You can sometimes find BB presses at NAWCC etc shows and on eBay for a lot less. Extra cups are not hard to find either. Horotec has a good bezel/crystal press too but it sells for close to $1000!! That's more than my first three cars cost all added together...two '55 and one '56 Chevrolets, all V8 with 'three on the tree'. Look on ofrei.com to see the presses. How many know what 'three on the tree' is? Hint 1...'four on the floor'. Hint 2...'four on the floor' is not an orgy. Edited October 12, 2011 by automatico Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sneed12 Posted October 12, 2011 Report Share Posted October 12, 2011 I've driven a three on the tree. It was a WEIRD experience. (It's a type of manual transmission.) For those who are cheap hobbyists like me, here's a suggestion: buy just the cups (I got a lot of cheap cups on eBay a while back) and use the edge of a desk + a medium sized metal c-clamp as a case press. Total investment <$10. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dezcori Posted October 12, 2011 Report Share Posted October 12, 2011 (edited) On my PT 1665, jmb turned a crystal retention ring out of SS for me. That solved the problem of the PT retention ring, got rid of the flukey nylon gasket and the bezel snapped down right over the retention ring. The whole thing turned out to be WR and is basically a copy of the gen assembly at this point. The flat little tension washer is in there also. Thanks for the tip. I contacted him about it, and his ring will solve about half my problems with this watch. But that brings me to another problem with this watch. Before I send it to JMB, I have to decide if I'm going to keep the PT crystal or get a Clark 127. Because the calender is farther to the left than the gen because of the ETA 2846 movement, installing a Clark 127 would mean the cyclops would be too far to the right, and I'm afraid it would look terrible. The date mag on my PT crystal is pretty good, so is there any real reason to put on a 127? What movement does the MBW use? Is it low beat, is it ETA? Having a low beat ETA is great, I just wish the calender was a few more millimeters to the right. The MBW and Josh's 1680 have the calender in the right spot (presumably) and it would line up with a 127 cyclops- but you couldn't use the low beat movement, could you? Why not get the MBW version -- everything fits, and they hold their value. Bill After what I've learned from researching the flaws with the PT 1680 and Josh's 1680, I wish I had bought a MBW in the first place. If a good one popped up for somewhere around $500, I would probably get it. But if it gets too much higher than $500, it's not worth it for me. I have a genuine 1974 1680 red sub, but I can't afford to service it ($1,500 estimate), so if I start spending that much money on reps, I could just service the gen. I wouldn't want to wear the gen every day anyway. I like having a beater "stunt double" of my watch. Edited October 12, 2011 by dezcori Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duke1973 Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 "Three on the tree" was the shifter in my first chevy truck! 3 speed with the gear shifter on the steering column just like an automatic transmission is today... Boy oh boy was that truck fun to drive! I went through 3 sets of back tires the first year I owned it! Burnin' rubber! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ephry73 Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 "Three on the tree" was the shifter in my first chevy truck! 3 speed with the gear shifter on the steering column just like an automatic transmission is today... Boy oh boy was that truck fun to drive! I went through 3 sets of back tires the first year I owned it! Burnin' rubber! Three on the three. Best of everything. Bench seat for the girl to slide over and get close to you and nothing getting in the way and still have full control of the transmission. E Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwatch Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 Yes I am, kinda. Because of the height of the crystal and the "pressers" (the little plastic pieces that go in the press), I am using the presser by hand - putting it on the retaining ring and using my hand and body weight to press the ring flush...works pretty well... Offshore has a great crystal press kit and a vast assortment of dies for it. I have the whole set and I have yet to need the correct size. It's a great kit and very affordable. Looks just like the horotec Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.