Kind regards,
Arno

Hi Stephen,

Thank you for your comment and your clarification. I’ve updated the article.

Colin

I would like to point out, however, that Swatch Group does not own Incabloc and never has. It was created by Portescap back in 1933 and spun out to become its own company in 1988. It remains independent today.

KIF has also been independent for decades, being a product of Parechoc of Le Sentier. Later renamed KIF-Parechoc, it was purchased by Acrotec in 2006 and remains part of that group.

Considering that ETA and Rolex rely on anti-shock of their own construction and design (Etachoc and Paraflex, respectively), this seems to be correct.

Hello Colin

Thank you very much for taking the time to reply. I find myself researching more and more about watches and movements and will start buying soon, no doubt.

This could well become problematic as my other great passion, photography, also requires deep pockets…

Oh well, as long as I don’r start collecting cars * hehe*

Thanks again, Colin
Kind Regards

Tom

Hello Colin;

Thank you very much for your elaborate reply!
I’ll put the watch aside as I haven’t got a watchmaker’s jewelling set. It was a training watch, N.O.S. for around £5 and doesn’t justify a jewelling set plus, I guess, I need to purchase a whole new incabloc. All a bit too much for a beginner I’m afraid. However the lesson(s) learned: I thought these springs were made out of a kind of spring-steel and could jump away. Concentration too much on holding it down with a peg-wood, I exercised too much force on one leg and broke it. It seemed to me “normal” brass and the “spring action” is obtained out of the “thinness”, combined with the length of the material. Next time I’ll be far more careful now I know, from your explanation, which model hinges, which are “jumpers” and what it all entails if you brake a spring.
If I were to brake another one, on a much more important watch, which does justifies a jewelling set, I’ll revisit this movement. Again as a trainer 😉
BTW: I found on YouTube a very nice video showing how to use a jewelling set and how to do a jewel change-out…….exactly as you described ()

Thanks again!
Roland.

Hi Roland,

Shock springs are very easy to break and so occasionally you will have to replace them. For the Incabloc you can replace either the whole setting or just the spring.

To replace the entire setting you just need to get a watchmaker’s jewelling set and push the setting completely out and then replace it, remembering to depth it correctly afterwards.

To replace just the spring, you need the same set of tools. The spring is locked in place by the side of the bridge, and by raising the setting up slightly the spring will be released and the spring can be easily removemd and replaced.

Push the jewell from the underside of the setting up slightly, but not enough that it will come out. You should then be able to slide the old spring out, and you can then slide the new spring back in its place and close the spring. You then need to push the jewell setting back down, being careful to use the right tool to not damage the jewell or the spring, and not too big that it will bruise the bridge. You will then need to depth the jewell correctly.

The best way to depth a jewell is to see how it is set in the first place before you move it. Most jewells are set up so that they are naturally flush to the bridge/plate from either the top or the underside, and so you can get the rough depthing correct by duplicating this and then just make the extra micro adjustments as required.

I may take some photos the next time I do this, but it would also involve having to explain how to use the jewelling set; which is perhaps beyond the scope of the article.

I hope that helps.

Colin

Hi Tom,

The Novodiac is much cheaper for ETA to produce, and is use mostly on their standard base calibres. Any movement with a high finish tends to still use the Incabloc setting.

Most watchmakers I know don’t like the Novodiac; and most wrongly call it a KIF spring. This is due to the removable nature of the spring which makes it awkward to take out and replace, and can also lead to it getting lost.

But function wise it is, theoretically at least, superior to the Incabloc setting. This is due to the fact that it has rotational symmetry and is secured in place equally at three points. The Incabloc had mirror symmetry and is secured at 4 points, although each point is not held down with an equal amount of force.

The difference is minimal though, and you’ll be hard pressed to break a balance staff pivot in a modern watch that uses any form of shock setting.

Colin