# How do you convert a Pocket Watch into a Wrist Watch



## kc1001

If you wanted to convert a PW into a wrist watch, how can it be done?


----------



## Ozy

Weld a couple of lugs on the case at 12 & 6 o'clock approx 22mm apart, counter sink the insides of the lugs to allow for strap spring bars and go crazy! 

(or find a watch case that the movement fits in and go a little less crazy)


----------



## pacifichrono

You'd also want to have a new dial made that you could rotate 90 degrees, placing the crown on the right side instead of the top. This would make your wristwatch a "nine-eater."


----------



## kc1001

Ozy said:


> Weld a couple of lugs on the case at 12 & 6 o'clock approx 22mm apart, counter sink the insides of the lugs to allow for strap spring bars and go crazy!
> 
> (or find a watch case that the movement fits in and go a little less crazy)


OK thanks, I had a feeling lol. I wonder how hard and how much, it would cost???


----------



## AbslomRob

Depends on the case, really. Bear in mind that most cases weren't really designed to accept much bending force, so there's a risk of the case bending if you tighten the strap too much. 

Also keep in mind that the large, relatively heavy balance wheel running at standard 4bps is going to be far less accurate when you're swinging it around at the end of your arm, and that the general lack of shock protection means you need to be very careful about bumping it.


----------



## ulackfocus

kc1001 said:


> OK thanks, I had a feeling lol. I wonder how hard and how much, it would cost???


If you used velcro it would be pretty cheap! You need hairy wrists though.


----------



## Hartmut Richter

"How do you convert a pocket watch into a wrist watch?"

Simple: you don't!!

<| :-| :-x :rodekaart

(Why trash a piece of history that is becoming rarer every day?!)

Hartmut Richter


----------



## kc1001

Hartmut Richter said:


> "How do you convert a pocket watch into a wrist watch?"
> 
> Simple: you don't!!
> 
> <| :-| :-x :rodekaart
> 
> (Why trash a piece of history that is becoming rarer every day?!)
> 
> Hartmut Richter


Just Curious, I've seen pics online they looked cool. But to be honest, I wouldn't do it, only because the cost would be to much.


----------



## AbslomRob

You'll find a lot of pocket-watch enthusiasts will react that way, and not without reason. If you just want a large watch on your wrist, there's lots of contemporary choices (even in mechanical). It isn't really clear to me why someone would want a "vintage" watch if they aren't interested in its history, and the appeal of the history is kinda diluted if you've modified it. Kinda like taking a Picasso sketch, and cutting off one side so that it'll fit in a certain frame.

The thing with old stuff is that once you change it, even slightly, you can't go back.


----------



## GeneJockey

Hartmut Richter said:


> "How do you convert a pocket watch into a wrist watch?"
> 
> Simple: you don't!!
> 
> <| :-| :-x :rodekaart
> 
> (Why trash a piece of history that is becoming rarer every day?!)
> 
> Hartmut Richter


Hear, hear! Sadly, many have already been trashed, leaving a naked, beautiful movement that wants to be a watch again. (Maybe I'm anthropomorphizing too much?)


----------



## JohnF

Hi -

+1 on not to do this.

Really, there is one very good reason: pocket watches were designed to tell time placed in a pocket, taken out, looked at, replaced. They were NOT designed to be turned and twisted constantly in three dimensions and then to be bumped quite a bit. They do not, generally, have ANY shockproofing, and if you look at the history of pocket watch repairs, you constantly run into broken staffs.

It's sort of like taking an econo-box car and trying to drive a rallye with it: sure, you can do it, but you end up trashing the car and frustrating the drivers no end.

Pocket watches as wrist watches? Same thing.

End of story. As the saying goes, just because you can doesn't mean you should...



JohnF


----------



## Shangas

I agree with JohnF and others like him. In the end...it's not worth it. 

First, it's expensive. You need the right pocket watch and the right case and strap. 
Second, you're destroying a piece of history. People only want QUALITY pocket watches to turn into wristwatches. But have you seen the price of quality lately? Do you really want to buy something that expensive and beautiful just to trash it? And then the price goes up again. 
Third, pocket-watches are not designed to be worn on the wrist. It's like using a straight-razor to slice up your steak. It might work, but that's not what it's meant to be used for. 
Fourth, history already beat you. If you want a pocket-wristwatch, then I suggest looking for a watch called a "trench watch". These were pocket-watches that were converted to Wristwatches back in the 1910s, during the First World War.


----------



## sherwoodschwartz

what a bunch of snobby purists. 

there are thousands of pocketwatches for this sort of project that no purist would even look twice at- humble 7 jewel movements that simply attract no attention from the horological community. and don't listen too much to the "no shock-proofing" crowd. some of the finest wrist movements of the 30s and 40s had none. yes, the balances were smaller, so the risk of staff breakage is smaller, but really, i doubt the difference is enormous enough to warrant this reaction. 

keep it to an average, not-particularly collectible watch and knock yourself out. do it to 992, and even i might frown.


----------



## Hartmut Richter

I have an 8 jewel cylindre escapement pocket watch which is probably realistically worth only a few quid/bucks/"Teuros". I still would not like to see that one converted. *Any* conversion ruins the authenticity of a watch (or anything else). If you want a large sized wrist watch, there are plenty of good alternatives - so in this specific case, the whole exercise is bloody pointless anyway!. Just because you don't see the value of history and a piece representing it (however low quality or common it may be), it doesn't mean that others won't.

I still say: don't do it.

Hartmut Richter


----------



## pej

there are many old movements out there that lost their case and have a messed up dial. They will most likely en up as donors for other watches.
A movement like that is perfect to put in a new custom case. 
Heres a nice example, girard perregaux skeletonized movement in a new case:


----------



## snowfox

ulackfocus said:


> If you used velcro it would be pretty cheap! You need hairy wrists though.


That isn't a problem on this forum. No shortage of hairy wrists here lol


----------



## snowfox

AbslomRob said:


> You'll find a lot of pocket-watch enthusiasts will react that way, and not without reason. If you just want a large watch on your wrist, there's lots of contemporary choices (even in mechanical). It isn't really clear to me why someone would want a "vintage" watch if they aren't interested in its history, and the appeal of the history is kinda diluted if you've modified it. Kinda like taking a Picasso sketch, and cutting off one side so that it'll fit in a certain frame.
> 
> The thing with old stuff is that once you change it, even slightly, you can't go back.


+1

Except...say you have a pocket watch which you really don't like and has absolutely no contribution to heritage (i.e. made by Sekonda).

Wouldn't it be better to tie a retractable elastic band to it so that it be thrown like a boomerang at latecomers so that they fully realise the impact of time?

It would be a bit hit.


----------



## Outta Time

Just as an addition to this thread, there are more and more pocket watch movts becoming orphans because of the high price of gold. I've now got a box full of excellent quality movts, some RR grade, fully jewelled, etc. They were all once in gold cases. Finding the proper cases for them is not as easy easy as you might think, so what I thought was going to be a simple collection of side jobs now looks like a lifetime box. As a side note, some movts are damaged badly because the previous owner or 'shop' has taken a screwdriver to pry the movt out of the case, breaking stems and balances. I have a wristwatch that someone drilled a hole in the caseback to insert a punch and pound the movt out the front with a hammer. The horror.......


----------



## radger

It's ironic that the case, on which the watchmaker relied to PROTECT his
work ultimately causes its demise.
There is no harm in re-casing such orphaned movements but ultimately a good
movement is probably safer in a cheap nickel case rather than a heavy gold case.


----------



## awizemann

GeneJockey said:


> Hear, hear! Sadly, many have already been trashed, leaving a naked, beautiful movement that wants to be a watch again. (Maybe I'm anthropomorphizing too much?)


I have to say (even though this is an old thread) there are many opinions on conversions, for both sides. As a recent purchaser of a professional conversion, I have to say that all sides have ground to stand on. The reason for my post is simple - if you are not collecting pocket watches but love the look and style of a conversion, it makes sense to buy one. Most conversions are about $400 - $1000 depending on the movements used. The Hamilton movements are usually the choice of many of the pros as they are easy to fix and can take a wrist watch style beating (when compared to some other larger movements). Hamilton's, as pocket watches, even though collectable, were mass produced (they made 12,000,000+ units) so parts are available but dial designs were very clean and very suited to larger wrist watches. Most cases were destroyed, aged out or weren't worth keeping.

Simply put - if you like it, will wear it and will appreciate the amazingly large window to a vintage watch movements soul on the back of the watch - go for it. You won't lose money, you won't gain value but you will be happy with it if you picked it for what it is - a beautiful watch with history.


----------



## surelyujest71

old thread, new comment...

I myself recently acquired an Elgin pocket watch for only $36. The movement runs just fine, but the case - still very nice looking - has been mistreated very badly. both front & back fail to close properly, the back dustcover wants to fall off, the springs are missing from the doors, and the case is not only overextended, but quite dented... without showing much wear at all to the intricate etchings.

I think that, lacking the correct replacement case, it seems reasonable to simply transfer the movement into a wrist case.


----------



## HOROLOGIST007

surelyujest71 said:


> old thread, new comment...
> 
> I myself recently acquired an Elgin pocket watch for only $36. The movement runs just fine, but the case - still very nice looking - has been mistreated very badly. both front & back fail to close properly, the back dustcover wants to fall off, the springs are missing from the doors, and the case is not only overextended, but quite dented... without showing much wear at all to the intricate etchings.
> 
> I think that, lacking the correct replacement case, it seems reasonable to simply transfer the movement into a wrist case.


But why bother, you can buy an Elgin wrist watch for $50 and it is designed to work on the wrist


----------



## JohnF

Pocket watch movements are poor candidates for use in wristwatch movements. They were designed to work vertically during the day and lack anti-shock mechanisms.

To provide good time-keeping, your watchmaker will have to adjust in six positions, a rather tedious and time-consuming task, especially if the movement is not of the highest quality level. Otherwise the constant positional changes of wearing it on your wrist will result in very poor isochronicity, i.e. there will be large positional variances in how the watch shows the passage of time.


----------



## Phil Ralph

See a picture of pocket watch which can be easily converted into wrist watch.


----------



## Moon Mullins

JohnF said:


> Hi -
> 
> +1 on not to do this.
> 
> Really, there is one very good reason: pocket watches were designed to tell time placed in a pocket, taken out, looked at, replaced. They were NOT designed to be turned and twisted constantly in three dimensions and then to be bumped quite a bit. They do not, generally, have ANY shockproofing, and if you look at the history of pocket watch repairs, you constantly run into broken staffs.
> 
> It's sort of like taking an econo-box car and trying to drive a rallye with it: sure, you can do it, but you end up trashing the car and frustrating the drivers no end.
> 
> Pocket watches as wrist watches? Same thing.
> 
> End of story. As the saying goes, just because you can doesn't mean you should...
> 
> 
> 
> JohnF


Can a converted pocket watch be shock proofed by a jeweler?


----------



## Eeeb

Moon Mullins said:


> Can a converted pocket watch be shock proofed by a jeweler?


No. Well, with enough $$ anything can be done but you are changing vital characteristics of the escapement. This is way beyond the abilities of most jewelers/watchmakers/ ... and even many manufacturers!


----------



## Moon Mullins

Ok, thanks for your input.


----------



## Hartmut Richter

In theory: Yes. In practice, you wouldn't find a shockproofing large enough to fit. These things are made for wristwatches and the balance cock on pocket watches is rather larger.

Hartmut Richter


----------



## Totoro66

AbslomRob said:


> the appeal of the history is kinda diluted if you've modified it. Kinda like taking a Picasso sketch, and cutting off one side so that it'll fit in a certain frame.


My in-laws did just that to a painting (not Picasso, but a famous painter nonetheless) and destroyed a $10,000 piece of art, even though I told them to protect it in its original condition. Of course my in-laws are morons and have probably destroyed 1/2 million in value over the years. They are on the fast road to...(fill in the blank). One of them (a former oil exec) is already penniless after blowing his fortune on the market and now lives on hand-outs from stupid relatives because he is too lazy to work and nobody wants to hire him as a deadbeat CEO (everything else is below him). [end of rant]


----------



## Eeeb

Totoro66 said:


> My in-laws did just that to a painting (not Picasso, but a famous painter nonetheless) and destroyed a $10,000 piece of art, even though I told them to protect it in its original condition. Of course my in-laws are morons and have probably destroyed 1/2 million in value over the years. They are on the fast road to...(fill in the blank). One of them (a former oil exec) is already penniless after blowing his fortune on the market and now lives on hand-outs from stupid relatives because he is too lazy to work and nobody wants to hire him as a deadbeat CEO (everything else is below him). [end of rant]


Wow... I never would have imagined. Oh well... At least you don't carry the genes!


----------



## onek00lj4y

Heres mine,never had a problem with it,i wear it on average four or five times a month.


----------



## Eeeb

Is that dial even original? If you want a big watch, buy one of the Chinese ones. It won't cost as much and won't kill a vintage timepiece and will last longer. I am sure you can find someone who will put "Omega" or anything else you want on the dial. LOL


----------



## aditya

Years ago, I got this Caravelle pocket watch with a UT6497 inside.










The pendent- crown- stem was all missing, the cannon was loose. I thought it the ideal candidate for a conversion. The new case, dial and hands are all Chinese. Here is the result-




























In any case, Ive still got the old case,dial and hands.

Kind regards

Aditya


----------



## onek00lj4y

Eeeb said:


> Is that dial even original? If you want a big watch, buy one of the Chinese ones. It won't cost as much and won't kill a vintage timepiece and will last longer. I am sure you can find someone who will put "Omega" or anything else you want on the dial. LOL


Do you think this dial is fake Eeeb,i brought it from my local watch maker about four months ago for £300.


----------



## Audemars

Just found this thread. 
I see a lot of this stuff. 
Mostly from Eastern Europe
My answer;
DON'T

Paul
Audemars | Louis Audemars & Cie, Master Watchmakers, 1811 - 1885


----------



## Eeeb

onek00lj4y said:


> Do you think this dial is fake Eeeb,i brought it from my local watch maker about four months ago for £300.


I'm not a big Omeeeeeeega expert. Most of the complete fakes don't use enamel dials so if it has that, it might be off a real watch. The hands would have been lumed originally -- maybe with radium!


----------



## mkws

Audemars said:


> Just found this thread.
> I see a lot of this stuff.
> Mostly from Eastern Europe
> My answer;
> DON'T


+1 to that.

@Eeeb: Nothing about the dial seems fake to me- the Omega font is correct, it was replaced by a new font somewhere in the early or mid 1930s. If the hands are original to the movement and dial, then they once had radium lume on them indeed.

@onek00lj4y: 300 quid? No, really, that's a silly price. Not that the eBay prices are better, they're far worse than that, but keep in mind, that well below that price you can find a really decent Omega pocket watch. Or one by Zenith. Or Longines. It's a piece with hardly any value for a collector.

Saving an old movement by giving it a new case- if it's an "orphaned" movement, the original case of which has been destroyed for the precious metal content- is a good thing, methinks. But I can't really see why would it deserve any price premium over the real McCoy!

I've been "crusading" against PW-to-WW conversions in many of my posts. Against the "Ukraine Special" frankens probably even more often. That's because I cannot stand seeing an original case being fitted with lugs to imitate an "early wristwatch", or, as these sellers put it, "VERY RARE MILITARY VINTAGE GERMAN LUFTWAFFE DH AVIATOR WRISTWATCH VERY VERY RARE". I find these pieces repulsive. Same with the "skeletonizing" of these movements. It's just disgusting. 
And when I see them being sold for $1500-$2000, I tend to employ the language reserved almost exclusively for people, who on the road are forcing the right of way. Or for cyclists, who jump red lights.


----------



## onek00lj4y

mkws said:


> +1 to that.
> 
> @Eeeb: Nothing about the dial seems fake to me- the Omega font is correct, it was replaced by a new font somewhere in the early or mid 1930s. If the hands are original to the movement and dial, then they once had radium lume on them indeed.
> 
> @onek00lj4y: 300 quid? No, really, that's a silly price. Not that the eBay prices are better, they're far worse than that, but keep in mind, that well below that price you can find a really decent Omega pocket watch. Or one by Zenith. Or Longines. It's a piece with hardly any value for a collector.
> 
> Saving an old movement by giving it a new case- if it's an "orphaned" movement, the original case of which has been destroyed for the precious metal content- is a good thing, methinks. But I can't really see why would it deserve any price premium over the real McCoy!
> 
> I've been "crusading" against PW-to-WW conversions in many of my posts. Against the "Ukraine Special" frankens probably even more often. That's because I cannot stand seeing an original case being fitted with lugs to imitate an "early wristwatch", or, as these sellers put it, "VERY RARE MILITARY VINTAGE GERMAN LUFTWAFFE DH AVIATOR WRISTWATCH VERY VERY RARE". I find these pieces repulsive. Same with the "skeletonizing" of these movements. It's just disgusting.
> And when I see them being sold for $1500-$2000, I tend to employ the language reserved almost exclusively for people, who on the road are forcing the right of way. Or for cyclists, who jump red lights.


Its my fault,i never did the research,i was just dropping off a couple of watches to my watch maker,when i saw it,he denied that it was a pocket watch conversion.He saw me coming alright.


----------



## mkws

onek00lj4y said:


> Its my fault,i never did the research,i was just dropping off a couple of watches to my watch maker,when i saw it,he denied that it was a pocket watch conversion.He saw me coming alright.


Well, he lied then. Even if it wasn't him who made the conversion- this case might as well be from the 1950s or the 1960s, judging by the looks of it- then either he has hardly any knowledge of Omega- not everyone has, and I cannot blame them for it, but then overpricing isn't justified either- or he was well aware of what he's selling. If it's the latter, and I suppose that it most likely is, then it doesn't exactly make him look like a trustworthy seller to do any business with- quite on the contrary, I'd say.

Generally, if you see a watch that looks suspicious to you, and you can't at the moment rely on your knowledge- then pass on such a watch. Some sellers are honest and have nothing to hide from the buyer, and some will say nothing except an "encouraging" load of bollocks just to make you buy the watch. Nothing wrong with encouragement, as long as it's honest. The thing is, that it is only by doing your research on the watches that you want to purchase, that makes it possible avoid such situations and learn to tell one kind of seller from the other.

All in all, I think that a bad buy can happen to anyone, and it is not something that happens rarely. This particular case is in a way a lesson- a rather painful one for the wallet alright, but a learning experience anyway.

Keep in mind, that some brands are more often faked than the other ones- and Omega is on the podium, along with Rolex. Third place held _ex aequo_ by Breitling, Patek Philippe, and Ulysse Nardin. IMO, at least. I guess everyone has their own idea of how this ranking looks- it's really hard to say definitely. If you need to verify a watch, then there are forums like this one, and- in case of Omega- the "Fake Busters" section of the Omega forum here on WUS, where you can ask for help.


----------



## onek00lj4y

Thank you for the great advice mkws,i think i need to chill and stop buying watches every other week,ive had a bad month regarding watches,as i lost my steinhart at the airport,sods law.


----------



## Subjeff

I may get flamed for this but I don't see anything wrong with repurposing orphaned pocket watch movements. If you look on the bay there are thousands that have been decased. I have built several of these and wear them daily.


----------



## mkws

Repurposing an ORPHANED watch movment is fine. All I can rant about in this case is that a Panerai-style case is the last thing that can look good with a PW dial with Roman numerals.
But that's just an opinion based on my preferences in watch aesthetics.


----------



## Unsolved_Mistry




----------



## mkws

Oh no. Not Archie "Hello F-ers" Luxury. Probably the most annoying watch guy on YouTube. Not to mention his rather foul vocabulary. But then again, when he swears like a trooper about these conversions, referring to them as "evil, nasty F-ers", I somehow don't mind, since this language describes the practice of selling that stuff as fully genuine pieces quite accurately.


----------



## winwindealman

Thank you


----------



## onek00lj4y

No no no,Don't do it.


----------



## busmatt

Buy an Albert and a waistcoat. 

Matt 


Brought to you by HYPNOTOAD


----------



## Matthew Camargo

Has anyone ever heard of Vortic Watches? They take your PW and put it in a Shock Proof, Water Resistant, Titanium Case. Their PW to Wrist Watch conversations are Beautiful and AMAZING quality. It’s not cheap to have this done ($1500) but worth it if you want to wear a PW on your wrist and eliminate all above listed/previous stated Cons.


----------



## Old Navman

Matthew Camargo said:


> Has anyone ever heard of Vortic Watches? They take your PW and put it in a Shock Proof, Water Resistant, Titanium Case. Their PW to Wrist Watch conversations are Beautiful and AMAZING quality. It's not cheap to have this done ($1500) but worth it if you want to wear a PW on your wrist and eliminate all above listed/previous stated Cons.


If you really have the time have a read of this epic post here: https://www.watchuseek.com/f11/vortic-watch-co-4553771.html


----------

