Post Your W. Würth & Co. Clocks Here

Pat L.

NAWCC Member
Jul 28, 2003
75
20
8
Country
Region
John,
Here are some pictures of the inside of the pendulum's cast brass shell and the discs that were inside of it. The bottom two discs are steel (one is used as the bottom cover), the next two discs are brass, and the last disc is copper. Note that the inside surface of the cast brass shell is inscribed with the movement serial number. Also, the two brass discs are stamped with the numbers 2055 and 1248.

A number.40 suspension spring was put in the clock yesterday afternoon and it ran approx. 16 hours, gaining only 5 minutes, before being stopped to inspect the inside of the pendulum this morning. So it seems like it will be easy enough to get it regulated now.

Thanks again for the information that you and Eric have provided. Pat L.

Wurth disc shell & discs.JPG Wurth inside disc shell.JPG Wurth SN inside disc.JPG Wurth steel discs.JPG Wurth brass disc 1248.JPG Wurth brass disc 2055.JPG Wurth copper disc.JPG
 

KurtinSA

NAWCC Member
Nov 24, 2014
4,255
244
63
San Antonio, TX
Country
Region
The time gain is essentially 1/3 of a minute per hour, or about 20 seconds per minute. Pretty fast. You will need a thinner spring on the order of 0.0035 or 0.0036 inches. Note that each 0.0001" represents about 4 seconds per minute.

Kurt
 

etmb61

NAWCC Member
Oct 25, 2010
2,760
256
83
Mascoutah, IL
Country
Region
Alas, the original bottom cover is missing so we can't know whether it was stamped with the movement serial number or not. Here is the highest number P20 I have in my data (SN 21996), with the original cover in place:
View attachment 459186
I'm wondering what is inside the disc of your pendulum? It appears that a zinc sheet has been cut to fit, since you are getting yours up and running I'm not asking for you to take it apart now, but when you get an opportunity it would be interesting to see what is there.
John,

This pendulum, 21996, is not consistent with any other Crown pendulum I've seen or recorded. The disc itself is too thick and matches the other gallery style discs in its number range. I would say this is a marriage of two pendulums.

Eric
 

etmb61

NAWCC Member
Oct 25, 2010
2,760
256
83
Mascoutah, IL
Country
Region
Re: Another Pre Restoration Wurth

One point about this clock that is puzzling is the upper suspension bracket. I think I've seen it before but it isn't illustrated in the Repair Guide although a couple of designs are similar. I would very much appreciate close-up photos of the bracket from both sides and the top so it can be documented.

Finally, I think this clock should remain in the Würth thread for educational reasons, to illustrate how to determine if you have a Würth or a Kienzle.
I know this is an old post, but the suspension bracket in question here was used by JUF with their "PA" and "DRP" movements, and when they started numbering their movements again. See this post:
Seeking info: Urania 400-day clock with disc pendulum

and this one:
Jahresuhrenfabrik Angemeldet Clock Info required

The highest number I've recorded with this bracket is JUF 53182.

Eric
 
Last edited:

A5h13y

New Member
Dec 11, 2019
4
0
1
39
Country
Could anyone shed any light on this? I acquired it about 5 years ago, it looks like a Wurth but I am not sure

CBD9B274-70C3-4E5F-B94E-7067A73172F4.jpeg 4D6D786A-6C05-400B-9EBE-35AE5B4BB32A.jpeg D0D4135E-CB8A-44AE-9A05-55B745298C50.jpeg DBE0D9FF-B7E5-49F9-A141-05F967DBEC8B.jpeg FF97DE91-37B3-4DEB-A0CA-9B10A65151ED.jpeg
 

A5h13y

New Member
Dec 11, 2019
4
0
1
39
Country
It is a Wurth. I also notice you have it on Ebay for sale. Shame about the condition of the dial, otherwise a good clock.
Thanks for your speedy reply. I have had so many questions and offers about it. We loved it for the dial, but We know nothing about clocks at all we just liked the aged look. Sadly we have gone for the modern look and having a 2 yo around the house it isn’t practical to have a glass dome within arms reach.
 

etmb61

NAWCC Member
Oct 25, 2010
2,760
256
83
Mascoutah, IL
Country
Region
Could anyone shed any light on this? I acquired it about 5 years ago, it looks like a Wurth but I am not sure

View attachment 560876 View attachment 560877 View attachment 560878 View attachment 560879 View attachment 560880
Yes, a Wurth from 1905. The dial is checked but not the worst I've seen. I could probably be carefully preserved. Wurth changed from 2" dia celluloid or enamel dials to 2.5" silvered brass dials around number 6000 so yours is one of the last in that style. Your hour hand is a good replacement. The originals were very frail and easily broken. The rest looks complete and original. Very nice! Too bad you can't keep it.

Eric
 

A5h13y

New Member
Dec 11, 2019
4
0
1
39
Country
I have this dial that also came with the clock.. as you can see from photos it’s a bit larger in size. It looks a little bit big for the hands but is very similar to the one that is on it

D5C79B34-87CC-48AF-8E5B-07DE816CDAE1.jpeg B6539A55-8D93-47CB-9986-67CF323BAB9C.jpeg 2B78D07E-FB12-43A0-9B7F-6762B1A4C0F6.jpeg
 

etmb61

NAWCC Member
Oct 25, 2010
2,760
256
83
Mascoutah, IL
Country
Region

KurtinSA

NAWCC Member
Nov 24, 2014
4,255
244
63
San Antonio, TX
Country
Region
I have some Gustav Becker and Kienzle dials that look a lot like the script. But one of my Badische Uhrenfabrik dials appears to be an exact match...it's the same dimension as measured above.

Kurt
 

A5h13y

New Member
Dec 11, 2019
4
0
1
39
Country
I have some Gustav Becker and Kienzle dials that look a lot like the script. But one of my Badische Uhrenfabrik dials appears to be an exact match...it's the same dimension as measured above.

Kurt
Thankyou I’ll look it up.
 

MuensterMann

Registered User
Mar 23, 2008
1,444
18
38
I believe I have a Wurth. It matches plate 1427 in the guidebook (Kienzle Clock Factories). The disk pendulum and the back plate have matching numbers: the plate has 017017 and the disk has 17017. Is this indeed a Wurth 400-day clock and what year was it made? The top block rests in a sophisticated mounting system.

back right.jpg back right.jpg back.jpg disc bottom.jpg front.jpg save.jpg
 

KurtinSA

NAWCC Member
Nov 24, 2014
4,255
244
63
San Antonio, TX
Country
Region
Yes, it's a Würth clock...in 2015, John Hubby info suggested that I could scratch out Kienzle in the repair guide...also Würth never made a 4-ball pendulum. Here's my clock that is similar and is a few numbers later than yours:

My Collection has Grown! | NAWCC Forums

Maybe someone like Eric can give us a better date range for the clocks.

Kurt
 

MuensterMann

Registered User
Mar 23, 2008
1,444
18
38
The bottom of my clock back also has a scratched date: 11/27/11

I would take that year as 1911.
 

etmb61

NAWCC Member
Oct 25, 2010
2,760
256
83
Mascoutah, IL
Country
Region
The bottom of my clock back also has a scratched date: 11/27/11

I would take that year as 1911.
I would think that was a date it might have been purchased or worked on or some other event. I'm thinking Wurth was gone by 1911. Your serial number puts it closer to 1908.

The two spacers under the screw heads for the suspension bracket go between the plate and the bracket to put anchor pin deeper into the fork. That compensates for the extra depth of the gimbals. Your support columns are assembled incorrectly too.

Looks nice!
Eric
 

MuensterMann

Registered User
Mar 23, 2008
1,444
18
38
Looking at Kurt's clock I see how the support columns are assembled incorrectly. As for the two spacers I am trying to see which ones you are referring to. I need I little more description. Thanks!! And thanks for 1908 date.
 

etmb61

NAWCC Member
Oct 25, 2010
2,760
256
83
Mascoutah, IL
Country
Region
Looking at Kurt's clock I see how the support columns are assembled incorrectly. As for the two spacers I am trying to see which ones you are referring to. I need I little more description. Thanks!! And thanks for 1908 date.
Easy enough. Your clock has a spacer here:
spacer 1.jpg

When it should be here:
spacer 2.jpg

It moves the suspension bracket towards the front plate.

Eric
 

KurtinSA

NAWCC Member
Nov 24, 2014
4,255
244
63
San Antonio, TX
Country
Region
Just checked my Würth...the spacers on my suspension bracket are also on the wrong side. And I didn't even touch it yet!! The anchor pin is about midway along the fork tines...clock seems to run OK as far as I can tell.

Kurt
 

MuensterMann

Registered User
Mar 23, 2008
1,444
18
38
I didn't work on my clock yet, but it is working as is. However, the pin is about 1/4 the way in from the opening of the fork.
 

KurtinSA

NAWCC Member
Nov 24, 2014
4,255
244
63
San Antonio, TX
Country
Region
Eric -

So this is a situation with gimbal suspensions on Würth clocks only? I see other clocks in this thread which are non-gimbal suspensions and they don't seem to have any spacers between the bracket and inside the back plate. I have three other Kienzle clocks with gimbal suspensions and the support bracket is tight against the inside of the back plate.

Kurt
 

etmb61

NAWCC Member
Oct 25, 2010
2,760
256
83
Mascoutah, IL
Country
Region
Eric -

So this is a situation with gimbal suspensions on Würth clocks only? I see other clocks in this thread which are non-gimbal suspensions and they don't seem to have any spacers between the bracket and inside the back plate. I have three other Kienzle clocks with gimbal suspensions and the support bracket is tight against the inside of the back plate.

Kurt
I've found the spacers only on Wurth clocks with the gimbal suspensions. Most of those clocks I've recorded have the spacers, but a small portion have them under the screw heads rather than between the plates. My Wurth with gimbals is (was) missing its spacers and the bracket screws are cut off, but in my records the clocks on either side of its serial number have spacers.

Eric
 

marylander

Registered User
Sep 9, 2008
870
36
28
Maryland
Country
Region
Easy enough. Your clock has a spacer here:
View attachment 628955

When it should be here:
View attachment 628956

It moves the suspension bracket towards the front plate.

Eric
Eric, the spacer placed between the plate and suspension bracket as shown in your photo will in effect increase the pendulum rotation because the suspension spring is closer to the ankle vertical pin.
Ming
 

MuensterMann

Registered User
Mar 23, 2008
1,444
18
38
Cleaned the case and the movement. All parts are back to where they should be!!

The suspension spring was in good shape and so it wasn't changed. However, the disk seems high above platform and I still need it to run faster. Not sure what the spring size is that is installed. The book says it should be .0038" for the plate. Is that size correctly stated? Thanks!
 

KurtinSA

NAWCC Member
Nov 24, 2014
4,255
244
63
San Antonio, TX
Country
Region
There's no real guarantee that the guide value is correct, but they mostly are. This maybe a situation where you'll have to experiment to find out what your specific clock needs. I hate current suspension springs to length until I know I have the right size. First you need to determine how many seconds/ minute or minutes/hour it is slow. Then using the rule of thumb that 0.0001" in thickness equals 4 seconds/minute or 4 minutes/hour. Next, before cutting the spring down, fashion a setup outside the clock where you can hang the pendulum with a new suspension spring at the new length you want it to be. Then rotate the pendulum say 180 degrees and let it go. Time the number of beats...should be 8 beats per minute. If not that, then you need to figure out what size spring to go to. Repeat until you find the right size...realizing that you may have thin a spring down if you're caught in the middle or if you find that the size has to be thicker than 0.004". Also, be sure your time adjusters are set to the middle position.

Kurt
 

MuensterMann

Registered User
Mar 23, 2008
1,444
18
38
Yes, I may end up doing the procedure. Although I am studying how to remove the top bracket. I thought I could save some time if someone fought this Wurth before and knows the size in the end. I know Becker clocks call for a thinned down .004". Maybe this one is just like a GB.

The pendulum is at maximum (fast side) and the disk bottom height above base is 1.5 cm. The time is a little slow on the dial, although I clock it at just about right.

How do you remove the top block:???:?
 
Last edited:

KurtinSA

NAWCC Member
Nov 24, 2014
4,255
244
63
San Antonio, TX
Country
Region
Is that the gimbal setup? You don't really need the complete top bracket, just the top block, bottom block, and the suspension spring. I clamp a flat board to a the side of a bookshelf. Then I find a small clamp to secure the top block to the board...if necessary, I slide the unneeded suspension spring up above the block and clamp the block down. Then hang the pendulum on the bottom block. I've been making good use out of some mini grips by DeWalt...they're shows as 5-6 inch trigger clamps to hold the top block to the board.

Kurt
 

MartinM

Registered User
Jun 24, 2011
3,091
112
63
El Dorado, CA
Country
Region
<>I know Becker clocks call for a thinned down .004". Maybe this one is just like a GB.<>
I believe you meant .0045", thinned-down. The guess most have made is that it would amount to a .0041" spring, if Horolovar were to produce one of those.
 

etmb61

NAWCC Member
Oct 25, 2010
2,760
256
83
Mascoutah, IL
Country
Region
How do you remove the top block:???:?
Gimbal brackets are a pain! You have to build up the suspension spring around them. To get the top block out I loosen the screw in the center of the back of the outer ring and drop the inner ring an all out of the bracket. Here is the screw that holds the top block in place:
clamp screw.jpg
I tighten the screw just enough to hold the block but still allow beat adjustment.

Eric
 

MuensterMann

Registered User
Mar 23, 2008
1,444
18
38
A .0038 spring gave me 8 clicks per 1:05 minutes. A .004 spring gave me 1:04. A .0045 gave me 0:96. So, had to thin the .0045 just like a GB. Testing now.
 

etmb61

NAWCC Member
Oct 25, 2010
2,760
256
83
Mascoutah, IL
Country
Region
Well I spent my allowance for a while to get this one.
7601.jpg 7601_plate.jpg
number.jpg

I thought it was too nice to pass on. My first round plate movement. Number 1009AA in the guide. The serial number is double struck. Originally it was 7441 and the 4s were struck over by 6 and 0 to make it 7601. The 7601 number puts it in a cluster of these same clocks by Bowler and Burdick, so I think the change was from the Wurth factory. I dont have any 7400 series Wurths in my records to compare.

The pendulum is a JUF part, but seeing as B&B purchased movements from them as well it could be the original for this clock. The other clocks of this model in my records all have Wurth pendulums so it's suspect. It looks nice though.

Eric
 

KurtinSA

NAWCC Member
Nov 24, 2014
4,255
244
63
San Antonio, TX
Country
Region
I like seeing the unusual hands. How do the round plate movements fit into the production series? Did they make a run of them or were they interspersed in the serial numbers? I have a square plate Würth (at least I think it is) SN 7379 plate 1440.

Kurt
 

etmb61

NAWCC Member
Oct 25, 2010
2,760
256
83
Mascoutah, IL
Country
Region
I like seeing the unusual hands. How do the round plate movements fit into the production series? Did they make a run of them or were they interspersed in the serial numbers? I have a square plate Würth (at least I think it is) SN 7379 plate 1440.

Kurt
I think the round plates were made in groups. It just makes sense. The numbers in my records are intermixed with the rectangular movements, but my sample size is very small. The first round plates in my records all went to B&B and all into 4-glass cases.

Eric
 

MUN CHOR-WENG

Registered User
Sep 5, 2000
482
27
28
Country
Hi Eric,

I have an almost identical twin to your clock with s/n 7598, only three units before yours. The pendulum has a slightly larger gallery than yours most probably also made by JUF. The pendulum disc has an inscription showing that the clock was presented by Bowler and Burdick on 25th April 1906 to Camillo Taussig, quite probably one of their employees. Thus it would appear the pendulum was paired with the clock when it was presented by Blowler and Burdick to the new owner. So in this case can we consider this to be a legitimate marriage ?
I believe it was common during those early days around the 1900s that customers were offered different pendulums, especially newly invented ones to match with the 400-Day clock at the point of sale.


Mun C W

20160604_115423.jpg 20160604_114148.jpg 20160604_115159.jpg 20160604_114607.jpg 20160604_114456.jpg 20160604_113708.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: etmb61

MUN CHOR-WENG

Registered User
Sep 5, 2000
482
27
28
Country
I must make a sliight amendment to my above post. The clock was presented to a couple, Mr and Mrs Camillo Taussig, by Bowler and Burdick.
According to Doug Stevenson's comment on a previous post of mine on this clock , Camillo Tausig was born in Hungary in about 1877, and died in Cleveland, Ohio, 1 November 1952. His wife Sadie ( Koblitz) was born in about 1885 and was also a resident in Cleveland.
The clock was probably a wedding present.

Mun C W
 
  • Like
Reactions: etmb61

etmb61

NAWCC Member
Oct 25, 2010
2,760
256
83
Mascoutah, IL
Country
Region
It is pictured in post #54, p. 2, of this thread.
Thanks, I had recorded your clock.

I have 3 clusters, by serial number, of 4-glass Würth clocks in my records. The earliest group has rectangular plates. The second group has round plates with and without baking pins and includes my clock. The third group, also with round plates and banking pins, includes your clock.

I also have another cluster with round plates and no banking pins but in louvre cases.

Eric
 

Forum statistics

Threads
164,706
Messages
1,432,937
Members
85,756
Latest member
jtvx
Encyclopedia Pages
1,101
Total wiki contributions
2,863
Last edit
Rockford's early high grade movements by Greg Frauenhoff