ID confirmation #16-01

Discussion in '400-Day & Atmos' started by ddMbb, May 28, 2016.

  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  1. ddMbb

    ddMbb Registered User

    May 9, 2014
    24
    0
    1
    Warrington, England
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    Hello,

    Been a while since my last post

    I would appreciate a confirmation/correction on this clock.

    I believe this to be a JUF,

    Plate closest match (according to the Guide) is No: 1617 therefore requiring a .004" suspension

    Pendulum has a very faint number on the bottom that seems to be the same as the back plate 73929 which would place it around 1908/1909.

    Many Thanks

    DSC08423.JPG DSC08430.JPG DSC08426.JPG DSC08429.JPG
     
  2. etmb61

    etmb61 Registered User
    NAWCC Member

    Oct 25, 2010
    2,346
    125
    63
    Retired Avionics Technician
    Mascoutah, IL
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    It is indeed a JUF clock and the matching numbers confirm the original pendulum. Very nice.

    Eric
     
  3. AndyDWA

    AndyDWA Registered User

    Dec 26, 2013
    615
    1
    18
    Western Australia
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    Nice indeed. And beautifully photographed.

    We should have a thread for how people photograph their shiny clocks :)
     
  4. John Hubby

    John Hubby Principal Administrator
    Staff Member NAWCC Star Fellow NAWCC Life Member

    Sep 7, 2000
    12,230
    186
    63
    The Woodlands, TX
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    Thanks for posting your JUF clock, as already noted the pendulum having a matching serial number to the movement indicates it is original to the clock. The pendulum design is correct for the clock, but if possible for complete information it will be appreciated if you would post a photo of the underside of the pendulum disc to confirm the construction details and if possible the written serial number.

    Based on the serial number, your clock was completed in the July-Sept. quarter of 1908.

    Actually I believe your clock has Plate 1146, as there appears to be a small letter "G" at the lower left corner of the back plate. Please check that to confirm (or not). Also for everyone's info, the clock from which Plate 1617 was drawn is actually identical to Plate 1146 except for the serial number. The illustration for Plate 1617 unfortunately has an omission; one of our members owns the actual clock and has confirmed it has the letter "G" at the lower left corner as well. On the other hand there "are" JUF clocks in this period that don't have a letter stamp but are otherwise identical to Plate 1617, those should be represented as Plate 1617 by selecting a clock with an appropriate serial number for a future revision.

    The only thing missing is the suspension guard, which is nowadays getting more and more difficult to find. It should be the tubular guard with the flared bottom as per the original design patented by Andreas Huber and licensed to JUF and several other makers.
     
  5. ddMbb

    ddMbb Registered User

    May 9, 2014
    24
    0
    1
    Warrington, England
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    Hello,

    Many thanks for the replies.

    I have uploaded three more photos.

    It is extremely difficult to the get the number show clearly, unless moving the pendulum around to get a particular angle of light, the first number is confusing looks more like an "8" than a "7" but the rest are clearer which is "3929"

    As regards the plate there is a letter "S" in the corner.

    I have noted in the guide that it recommends different suspension springs for 1617 (.004") and for 1146 (.005"), I am wondering if a .004" would be sufficient or not?

    Many Thanks




    DSC08439.JPG DSC08441.JPG DSC08442.JPG
     
  6. John Hubby

    John Hubby Principal Administrator
    Staff Member NAWCC Star Fellow NAWCC Life Member

    Sep 7, 2000
    12,230
    186
    63
    The Woodlands, TX
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    I would go with the 0.0040. Every time the Repair Guide quotes something other than a 0.0040 spring for a standard JUF movement, it's because the original clock from which the drawing was made had a non-spec pendulum. In this instance it was too heavy, thus requiring the stronger spring. Your pendulum appears to be completely normal and should run well on the 0.0040.
     

Share This Page