Tudor movement tool

[Fredcohiba]

I have a Tudor Black Bay GMT and it appears there is a special tool needed to make a timing (regulation) adjustment.
Does anyone know where such a tool can be purchased? I don’t really need it, but I’d like to have it just in case - down the road.

[Dan Pierce]

Originally Posted by Fredcohiba

I have a Tudor Black Bay GMT and it appears there is a special tool needed to make a timing (regulation) adjustment.
Does anyone know where such a tool can be purchased? I don’t really need it, but I’d like to have it just in case - down the road.

I have a BB GMT as well and have never heard of such a tool. AFAIK, you regulate this like any other mechanical watch.
dP

[Tools]

Regulation on the BB movement is very similar to the micro-stella nuts on the balance wheel of any typical Rolex movement.

I think that the nuts on the Tudor movement are on the outside of the wheel, and recessed, but the physics is the same.

Otto Frei and Esslinger, as well as other watch shop sources likely have the tools used for these adjustments.

I'm not sure that holding the balance wheel properly and adjusting these nuts/screws would typically be considered a DIY operation.

[kieselguhr]

Here’s what Larry is talking about

[bremersm]

I would not mess with that.

[Boaters]

I dont think that would be a DIY job at least not for me.

[Daveclock]

Don't forget Tudor Torque settings - if you don't have the tool the normal guess is to tighten up until you strip a thread and then back off 1/2 turn.

Seriously needing to do such a coarse adjustment needing skilled hands - it would be best to get watch professionally serviced or rectified if error is so bad.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Boaters

I dont think that would be a DIY job at least not for me.

Agree quite a delicate operation for anyone unskilled, best leave to professional watchmakers.

[GGGMT]

True Value or Lowe’s


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[m j b]

I had a rather inexpensive watch that was way off, and I decided to regulate it myself. It had an ETA movement, so it was quite easy to do and I was quite proud of myself.

Then I regulated my Speedmaster, which was only about 10 seconds fast but enough to annoy me. I got it to 4 seconds (give or take) which is about as good as I could get it. I don't have the proper timer.

Then I bought some really cheap Chinese POS as a lark, which ran something like 3 minutes fast, and so I thought, bah, I can do this. It's just a rip-off of the ETA movement anyway. So that one, I totally buggered up the balance spring and had to sell it on eBay as non-working for $50.

Lesson learned. I got lucky, twice. Next time, it goes to someone who knows what they're doing.

[77T]

Originally Posted by Fredcohiba

I don’t really need it, but I’d like to have it just in case - down the road.

I think the other commenters have covered the turf about wisdom of regulating the balance - that is, unless you are a trained watchmaker.

My comment is to wait before buying a tool that you don’t need. When the time comes to do a regulation, it won’t be an emergency and you can buy the tool at that time.

You never know if it will run true until you sell the watch and then the tool wouldn’t have been needed anyway.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[saxo3]

I may add that even if you have the right tool it will be a nightmare to regulate a movement without proper watchmaker instrumentation (timegrapher) to monitor what you try to adjust. Don't try with an 'expensive' watch and better give it to a professional watchmaker.

[Fredcohiba]

Thanks for all the comments folks and the great picture.
I was going to get the tool to provide it with the watch to my local watchmaker for service when it needs it, but I will most likely send it to the Rolex service center when the time comes.
By the way, it is only about 3 seconds a day fast since resetting it for DST two weeks ago (which is awesome) and, it never had the date issue - I bought this watch new from the AD in Feb of 2019.

[Crazy Lugs]

Any watchmaker worth their salt should not need you to provide them with tools. Good decision not to mess with it- leave it to RSC.

[HiBoost]

My understanding was that the screws in the balance wheel are for poising the wheel. Poising ensures that the wheel itself has the same inertial properties around its circumference. This would let the balance wheel, quite literally, balance on its staff when properly adjusted. The regulation should be a matter of adjusting the effective length of the hairspring. But not being a watchmaker I could be wrong.

[kieselguhr]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

My understanding was that the screws in the balance wheel are for poising the wheel. Poising ensures that the wheel itself has the same inertial properties around its circumference. This would let the balance wheel, quite literally, balance on its staff when properly adjusted. The regulation should be a matter of adjusting the effective length of the hairspring. But not being a watchmaker I could be wrong.

You’re correct.

It’s a free sprung balance. That’s really the only way to “regulate” it. There is no regulator. Also with free sprung the hairspring is fixed length.

Here’s a good article for free sprung vs. regulated balance

https://www.watchprosite.com/?page=w...501&pi=3662881

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by kieselguhr

You’re correct.

It’s a free sprung balance. That’s really the only way to “regulate” it. There is no regulator. Also with free sprung the hairspring is fixed length.

Here’s a good article for free sprung vs. regulated balance

https://www.watchprosite.com/?page=w...501&pi=3662881

Right, there are two styles, but in the picture shown above, that does not appear to be a free sprung balance does it? The polished silver cock with the incabloc appears like it would rotate. But maybe that picture isn't the movement in question? That is the part that threw me off not being familiar with the Tudor specifically.

[kieselguhr]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

Right, there are two styles, but in the picture shown above, that does not appear to be a free sprung balance does it? The silver cock with the incabloc appears like it would rotate. But maybe that picture isn't the movement in question? That is the part that threw me off not being familiar with the Tudor in question.

The picture shown is a close up of the free sprung balance of the MT5652, the movement of the Tudor BB GMT. This movement is derived from Tudor’s first in house movement the MT5621.

From what I understand, Rolex design place the screws on the inside of the balance wheel allowing increased diameter of the balance wheel, contributing to stability.

Tudor uses a different design, hiding the screws within recessed portions of the balance to minimize and avoid increased movement size

I’m not sure if the part containing the shock system actually moves, but I expect it is non mobile and in a fix position.

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by kieselguhr

The picture shown is a close up of the free sprung balance of the MT5652, the movement of the Tudor BB GMT. This movement is derived from Tudor’s first in house movement the MT5621.

From what I understand, Rolex design place the screws on the inside of the balance wheel allowing increased diameter of the balance wheel, contributing to stability.

Tudor uses a different design, hiding the screws within recessed portions of the balance to minimize and avoid increased movement size

Ok. To my novice eye that polished cock sure looks like a separate piece that would rotate, but I see the movement referred to as free sprung in multiple places so I guess not!

[kieselguhr]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

Ok. To my novice eye that polished cock sure looks like a separate piece that would rotate, but I see the movement referred to as free sprung in multiple places so I guess not!

Likely our eyes have about equal experience in watchmaking as I am a simple enthusiast myself

I do read a lot and see many images in addition to fooling around with my Seiko movement whenever I have time.

[Tools]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

My understanding was that the screws in the balance wheel are for poising the wheel. Poising ensures that the wheel itself has the same inertial properties around its circumference. This would let the balance wheel, quite literally, balance on its staff when properly adjusted. The regulation should be a matter of adjusting the effective length of the hairspring. But not being a watchmaker I could be wrong.

There are two types of "regulation" with a hairspring.

Movements with a regulator have the adjustable cock that effectively changes the functional length of the hairspring.

Free Sprung balances do not have a regulator and the weights around the balance are adjusted in or out, evenly, to change the inertia of the balance wheel. Moving the weights to the outside slow, and moving them inside speeds, the rate of oscillation.

Several watch manufacturers are introducing new-style oscillators that do not include the conventional hairspring balance.

[spoilsofwar01]

Originally Posted by bremersm

i would not mess with that.

+ 1

[Liga]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

My understanding was that the screws in the balance wheel are for poising the wheel. Poising ensures that the wheel itself has the same inertial properties around its circumference. This would let the balance wheel, quite literally, balance on its staff when properly adjusted. The regulation should be a matter of adjusting the effective length of the hairspring. But not being a watchmaker I could be wrong.

Sorry but the if these screws were used to poise the balance wheel you would be making a big mistake.

There are 4 screws opposite each other. These are used only to regulate the watch to put it within spec.
You must move pairs exactly the same amount either way to adjust the timing of the movement.

They weigh exactly the same amount, so moving one, in or out, may give a reading of being poised, however the balance wheel would actually be not poised at all.

Reading a Witchi can be tricky. I've seen many watchmakers make this exact mistake and end up making a horrible mess that they do not know how to fix.

Actual weight must be taken off of the heavy side, phisically removed.
You can do this either of two ways.

By reading the timing difference between pendant positions and taking weight off the correct place.

Or by putting it on a Poising tool.

Once the regulation ["microstella"] have been made unbalanced, the only way to regain proper poise, you must screw them all the way back in and then unscrew them the exact amount.


Let's not forget this is a silicon hairspring and nobody really knows if it the balance wheel will respond to traditional ways of poising the balance wheel.

[HiBoost]

I guess this is the downside to learning watchmaking via books that are 75+ years old. After reading dozens of pages on ways to adjust balance screws to achieve poise I got a little tunnel vision. Sounds like modern movements use lasers to cut tiny holes to achieve poise and don't generally do it with screws at all. Next thing I know somebody will tell me they're making cars that run on electricity!

Next up I'll totally jump the shark and say that it really doesn't seem that complicated to regulate this style of balance after reading here https://www.minus4plus6.com/regulation.php. Would love to give it a go sometime. But I do agree with others, that a customer should not need to BYOT (bring your own tools) to a watchmaker. If the watchmaker doesn't have a microstella wrench himself, you probably want to find a different watchmaker. Or if that doesn't phase you, send it to me and I'll wing it for free ;)

[Dr. Strategy]

The problem here is that even the best watchmakers in the US are unable to secure the Microstella Balancing Wrench / Regulating Tool for Tudor's Caliber MT5652.

My watchmaker theorized that Tudor wants to require all owners of their calibers to be forced to only work with Tudor on servicing issues. Unlike with Rolex which most watchmakers have the Microstella Balancing Wrench / Regulating Tool for and thus in a couple or few visits you can get your Rolex to within a <+1 accuracy, at least my watchmaker always has with my watches I wear 24/7.

So the comments above are off track , the question is,

Where can my professional watchmaker source the Microstella Balancing Wrench / Regulating Tool for the Caliber MT5652?

[007Sub]

Originally Posted by Dr. Strategy

The problem here is that even the best watchmakers in the US are unable to secure the Microstella Balancing Wrench / Regulating Tool for Tudor's Caliber MT5652.

My watchmaker theorized that Tudor wants to require all owners of their calibers to be forced to only work with Tudor on servicing issues. Unlike with Rolex which most watchmakers have the Microstella Balancing Wrench / Regulating Tool for and thus in a couple or few visits you can get your Rolex to within a <+1 accuracy, at least my watchmaker always has with my watches I wear 24/7.

So the comments above are off track , the question is,

Where can my professional watchmaker source the Microstella Balancing Wrench / Regulating Tool for the Caliber MT5652?

This is spot on.
Completely intensional by the brand in order to force servicing $$ back to the brand and out of independents. A real shame.

[offrdmania]

Only 8 months late to the conversation that took place 2 years ago