OK opening myself up to ridicule here
Discussion
With no training, a few tools, and reading stuff on the internet, I decided to have a go at making my first watch.
Nothing too ambitious - just a bespoke dial, change of hands, swap the movement, whilst using a standard case and bracelet (ubiquitous Rolex 37mm Datejust and oyster bracelet).
Yes it's s
te. But for the very first attempt, with no training - what do you think? I quite like the dial iridescence myself, but I'm the n00b of n00bdom when it comes to watches. I know my st regarding my career, to the extreme - but this is very different and a real learning experience for me. And I have no detailed engineering experience nor jewellery-making experience. So this is completely 'beginner of beginners' rubbish.
Any tips and ideas to make it better?? I'm fully open to constructive criticism, no defensiveness here
ETA - oh yeah, it works. Just a minor point, but worth mentioning. Timekeeping as good as the donor movement, which I think is a Chinese Seagull job without date.
Nothing too ambitious - just a bespoke dial, change of hands, swap the movement, whilst using a standard case and bracelet (ubiquitous Rolex 37mm Datejust and oyster bracelet).
Yes it's s
te. But for the very first attempt, with no training - what do you think? I quite like the dial iridescence myself, but I'm the n00b of n00bdom when it comes to watches. I know my st regarding my career, to the extreme - but this is very different and a real learning experience for me. And I have no detailed engineering experience nor jewellery-making experience. So this is completely 'beginner of beginners' rubbish.Any tips and ideas to make it better?? I'm fully open to constructive criticism, no defensiveness here
ETA - oh yeah, it works. Just a minor point, but worth mentioning. Timekeeping as good as the donor movement, which I think is a Chinese Seagull job without date.
Edited by cyberface on Sunday 6th July 00:28
El stovey said:
Good work. I mean it is a bit rubbish but i'm sure it was great fun making it. To me, it's a shame it's so rolex-esque. I would have liked it a lot more if you hadn't used any rolex crown on the face.
Great for making something though. It's much better than I could do.
Good point, just needed something other than another red dot for the 12 position and that's all I had lying around from the donor watch.Great for making something though. It's much better than I could do.
Anyway it was a laugh making it - I can attest that getting hands back *on* to the movement is the hardest bit (even with the right tools). This was just an effort to see if I could reassemble something that still worked / kept reasonable time. Which appears to be the case - it's still running...
With the next one I'll take a different approach anyway with the dial and see if it's practical to modify the case (i.e. dremel it to a slightly different shape) - to move it further away from its Rolex base...
Stuart_Forrest said:
I'm confused. Was this once a real Rolex? If so...why?
Nope, as per my comment about the Seagull movement, it was a fake that had a well made case and bracelet, but crap dial and movement.This is a hobby for me, and as I've become more knowledgeable about mechanical movements, I've decided to learn how to pull them apart and put them back together again. I find it therapeutic. This was just my first experiment - aesthetically it's not impressive (apart from the iridescence, which I like, even though it's amateurish as hell) but it at least proves that I can do the basics (dismantle, alter, reassemble).
After all it'd be a bummer to pull a watch apart, design and print a fantastic dial with weeks of work, and then find I can't get the hands back on, or worse, damage the dial in the process.
With this one, I can pull it apart, dunk the dial in solvent and start from scratch anyway.
I'd obviously not attempt this sort of thing with any of my collection of genuine watches (obviously, I bought each one because I liked them as they were - not some crazy 'yeah, I liked the Daytona but the lack of a date pissed me off so I hacked a hole in the dial and retro-fitted a Valjoux 7750 movement to sort it out' idea - I'm insane, but not that insane).
And for the cynical, there is no ulterior motive (i.e. buying decent fake Rolexes and modifying them to near-perfection by finishing off / correcting the poor QA of replica watches).
I eventually want to make 'my own' watch. Obviously without tooling to work metal (which I haven't got), I won't be designing my own case and bracelet just yet - besides, the generic Oyster bracelets are IMO the most comfortable bracelets to wear on any of the watches I've owned (the Vacheron Overseas being the only one I haven't tried that is meant to be better). So I'll use one of those, and a case from another watch, but I'll almost certainly use an ETA 2824 for simple time and date (it's thin as well, which helps), and then design and print my own dial. Hands may be tricky depending on fitment, but there are plenty of hand styles available to fit the ETA movements and I can further modify them after the fact.
I think its a bloody good effort. I wouldn't want to wear it mind, but that is rather by the way ...
A few suggestions:
1. as per El Stovey ditch the crown - how about two dots at 12?
2. I think slate would make a fine material for a watch dial and shouldn't be impossibly difficult to work
3. I think the red dots are too large and too intrusive for the face; as an alternative (developing the slate idea) what about drilling shallow depressions at the 12/3/6/9 positions instead of affixing the dots? (I mean just the countersink part of the drill bit not an actual hole) You could drill two at the 12 position; they also need to be nearer the edge of the dial
4. I'd use simpler hands than the Milgauss ones
5. It needs the makers name on it ...
A few suggestions:
1. as per El Stovey ditch the crown - how about two dots at 12?
2. I think slate would make a fine material for a watch dial and shouldn't be impossibly difficult to work
3. I think the red dots are too large and too intrusive for the face; as an alternative (developing the slate idea) what about drilling shallow depressions at the 12/3/6/9 positions instead of affixing the dots? (I mean just the countersink part of the drill bit not an actual hole) You could drill two at the 12 position; they also need to be nearer the edge of the dial
4. I'd use simpler hands than the Milgauss ones
5. It needs the makers name on it ...
tertius said:
I think its a bloody good effort. I wouldn't want to wear it mind, but that is rather by the way ...
A few suggestions:
1. as per El Stovey ditch the crown - how about two dots at 12?
2. I think slate would make a fine material for a watch dial and shouldn't be impossibly difficult to work
3. I think the red dots are too large and too intrusive for the face; as an alternative (developing the slate idea) what about drilling shallow depressions at the 12/3/6/9 positions instead of affixing the dots? (I mean just the countersink part of the drill bit not an actual hole) You could drill two at the 12 position; they also need to be nearer the edge of the dial
4. I'd use simpler hands than the Milgauss ones
5. It needs the makers name on it ...
Two dots... if only I'd have thought of that A few suggestions:
1. as per El Stovey ditch the crown - how about two dots at 12?
2. I think slate would make a fine material for a watch dial and shouldn't be impossibly difficult to work
3. I think the red dots are too large and too intrusive for the face; as an alternative (developing the slate idea) what about drilling shallow depressions at the 12/3/6/9 positions instead of affixing the dots? (I mean just the countersink part of the drill bit not an actual hole) You could drill two at the 12 position; they also need to be nearer the edge of the dial
4. I'd use simpler hands than the Milgauss ones
5. It needs the makers name on it ...
IWC big pilot style, right? Damn.Slate would be tricky for a complete muppet like me - you wouldn't believe how I actually made that dial....
The milgauss hands were the only ones available at the time, for a first effort. You're right, the lightning bolt second hand is out of place. Trouble is that out of the entire operation, getting the seconds hand back onto the movement was the hardest (trickiest) job for me. That's definitely a knack I don't have yet...
And no, no maker's name until I've made something I want associated with me
Unfortunately my real name is far too much like 'Rolex' 
and I don't think 'cyberface' would work, heh..I may wear it to work tomorrow and see what people make of it
The crown will be very simple to remove and I can add another dot below it easy enough.All I can say is that whilst my efforts look like crap, it's been very good fun! So I'm definitely going to continue arsing around... perhaps one will turn out wearable
Congratulations, CF, it must be a pretty amazing experience to have made your own watch.
From an aesthetic perspective, it doesn't work for me personally - I think the individual elements are all interesting but don't come together as a cohesive whole.
That said, the cliche is that whose who can do, those who can't criticise...
Please keep us posted as to all future creations - I'm genuinely interested in seeing where you take it from here.
If you guarantee to make a limited production run, I might place an order for one. Maybe.cyberface said:
Slate would be tricky for a complete muppet like me - you wouldn't believe how I actually made that dial....
OK what about enamel?To do it properly you'll need a suitable oven - but if I remember my school metalwork/design classes correctly you can get quite small ones that would be perfectly sized for a watch dial.
Guys - it's not that impressive. All I did was take a fake Milgauss replica, which turned out to be in a 37mm Datejust case so nothing like a real Milgauss, and realise that I could have some fun with it.
I researched how to disassemble a watch, bought the correct tools (my first effort with a knackered Sub fake ended in breaking the second hand, heh) and disassembled it. The dial was knackered anyway so I removed all the text with solvent, removed the stuck-on markers, painted the dial, reattached to the movement, put the hands back on, and put it all back together.
Franck Muller I am not, there is no 'master of complications' involved here other than me making red dots a damn sight more complicated than need be
It wasn't meant to be aesthetically pleasing though the iridescence turned out well... just to see whether I'd completely balls it up or not. That was just paint on the dial. Next time I'll start using my Mac like it should be used and design something that can be inkjetted onto plastic film, then perhaps coat the plastic film with clear varnish (or do a Panerai and use multiple layers of film with cutouts for the numbers).
It's then just the easy task of sticking it to the existing face (for replicas with non-ETA movements, the dial is a metal disc with two non-symmetrical prongs that are fastened to the movement with screws. ETA movements are a bit trickier as the dial is glued to the front of the movement and razor blades etc. have to be used, which guarantees a cyberface trip to Casualty.
The varnished plastic / layered plastic will look better than expected, and the ability to inkjet at high resolution will allow words to be printed on the dial. After that, just put the watch together again. My duff attempt above is still running now, so it's got more than a day's power reserve in the movement, and I obviously haven't bodged the movement badly enough to increase friction too much.
Anyway I'm a thinker and analyst by trade, not a craftsman, so this is one hell of an achievement for me (though the craftsmen among you will be thinking 'so what' - fair enough, but my metalwork and woodwork classes at school were abject failures )
As to the back of the watch, it's just a Rolex oyster screwdown job. I've got a set of Bergeon copy Rolex caseback tools, originally to see whether my Daytona was actually genuine before selling it to a friend, but now used to mess about with fakes. I see no real problem with buying counterfeit Rolexes and then turning them into non-Rolexes, and I get the benefit of the sound, solid Rolex case build (and lovely bracelets). One thing the replica Rolexes are brilliant for is the bracelets, which are as good as genuine Rolex bracelets at a fraction of the price. If I still had my Daytona or Explorer (genuine) and mashed up the bracelet somehow, I probably wouldn't pay £1000 in an AD for a gen bracelet, I'd pay £150 for a whole Daytona rep, use the bracelet on the genuine watch and then use the Valjoux 7750 for something else......
I researched how to disassemble a watch, bought the correct tools (my first effort with a knackered Sub fake ended in breaking the second hand, heh) and disassembled it. The dial was knackered anyway so I removed all the text with solvent, removed the stuck-on markers, painted the dial, reattached to the movement, put the hands back on, and put it all back together.
Franck Muller I am not, there is no 'master of complications' involved here other than me making red dots a damn sight more complicated than need be
It wasn't meant to be aesthetically pleasing though the iridescence turned out well... just to see whether I'd completely balls it up or not. That was just paint on the dial. Next time I'll start using my Mac like it should be used
and design something that can be inkjetted onto plastic film, then perhaps coat the plastic film with clear varnish (or do a Panerai and use multiple layers of film with cutouts for the numbers). It's then just the easy task of sticking it to the existing face (for replicas with non-ETA movements, the dial is a metal disc with two non-symmetrical prongs that are fastened to the movement with screws. ETA movements are a bit trickier as the dial is glued to the front of the movement and razor blades etc. have to be used, which guarantees a cyberface trip to Casualty.
The varnished plastic / layered plastic will look better than expected, and the ability to inkjet at high resolution will allow words to be printed on the dial. After that, just put the watch together again. My duff attempt above is still running now, so it's got more than a day's power reserve in the movement, and I obviously haven't bodged the movement badly enough to increase friction too much.
Anyway I'm a thinker and analyst by trade, not a craftsman, so this is one hell of an achievement for me (though the craftsmen among you will be thinking 'so what' - fair enough, but my metalwork and woodwork classes at school were abject failures
)As to the back of the watch, it's just a Rolex oyster screwdown job. I've got a set of Bergeon copy Rolex caseback tools, originally to see whether my Daytona was actually genuine before selling it to a friend, but now used to mess about with fakes. I see no real problem with buying counterfeit Rolexes and then turning them into non-Rolexes, and I get the benefit of the sound, solid Rolex case build (and lovely bracelets). One thing the replica Rolexes are brilliant for is the bracelets, which are as good as genuine Rolex bracelets at a fraction of the price. If I still had my Daytona or Explorer (genuine) and mashed up the bracelet somehow, I probably wouldn't pay £1000 in an AD for a gen bracelet, I'd pay £150 for a whole Daytona rep, use the bracelet on the genuine watch and then use the Valjoux 7750 for something else......
cyberface said:
Stuart_Forrest said:
I'm confused. Was this once a real Rolex? If so...why?
Nope, as per my comment about the Seagull movement, it was a fake that had a well made case and bracelet, but crap dial and movement.This is a hobby for me, and as I've become more knowledgeable about mechanical movements, I've decided to learn how to pull them apart and put them back together again. I find it therapeutic. This was just my first experiment - aesthetically it's not impressive (apart from the iridescence, which I like, even though it's amateurish as hell) but it at least proves that I can do the basics (dismantle, alter, reassemble).
After all it'd be a bummer to pull a watch apart, design and print a fantastic dial with weeks of work, and then find I can't get the hands back on, or worse, damage the dial in the process.
With this one, I can pull it apart, dunk the dial in solvent and start from scratch anyway.
I'd obviously not attempt this sort of thing with any of my collection of genuine watches (obviously, I bought each one because I liked them as they were - not some crazy 'yeah, I liked the Daytona but the lack of a date pissed me off so I hacked a hole in the dial and retro-fitted a Valjoux 7750 movement to sort it out' idea - I'm insane, but not that insane).
And for the cynical, there is no ulterior motive (i.e. buying decent fake Rolexes and modifying them to near-perfection by finishing off / correcting the poor QA of replica watches).
I eventually want to make 'my own' watch. Obviously without tooling to work metal (which I haven't got), I won't be designing my own case and bracelet just yet - besides, the generic Oyster bracelets are IMO the most comfortable bracelets to wear on any of the watches I've owned (the Vacheron Overseas being the only one I haven't tried that is meant to be better). So I'll use one of those, and a case from another watch, but I'll almost certainly use an ETA 2824 for simple time and date (it's thin as well, which helps), and then design and print my own dial. Hands may be tricky depending on fitment, but there are plenty of hand styles available to fit the ETA movements and I can further modify them after the fact.
moment you'd done that to a real Milgauss...markomah said:
cyberface said:
Interesting stuff......
Cyberface,
Just wanted to say that I don't think you've ever posted a dull post.
If PH became a paid subscription site, you'd make it worth it.
Keep up the good work, fella!
(there's no 'blush' emoticon so can't use that) - err thanks. I'm sure you'll find a lot of dross within the useful posts though Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff