Need For Improvement in Mainspring Winders Stressed

From Horology magazine, April, 1938

NEED FOR IMPROVEMENT IN MAINSPRING WINDERS STRESSED

Horology, Los Angeles, Calif.
Gentlemen:
If I may be permitted, I would like to say a few words in regard to Mr. Arthur Des Jarlais' article in the February number of Horology, together with editor's note in which Mr. Des Jarlais condemns the efficiency of mainspring winders and describes his method of winding mainsprings.

While I do not care to disagree with or engage in any argument with the editor of Horology, I have. for the purpose of verifying my own opinion of mainspring winders, discussed this article with a number of watchmakers of this city, and all have heartily agreed that Mr. Des Jarlais' article is to a great extent well merited.

We have often heard the remark by watchmakers that they wished the maker of a certain watch had to repair it. For me the same thing goes with mainspring winders and their use. We are all aware that there is an adjustable bracelet mainspring winder on the market which (if the mainspring barrel is not too small) works very well on barrels up to about 6/0 size.
Next we will say comes the 0 size.

If there has ever been a mainspring winder on the market that can be used successfully for 0 size barrels, personally I have never seen it. I have a mainspring winder of a well known make for the larger size watches. It has about eight interchangeable barrels and three arbors.
On an 0 size barrel the tool is useless to me, and, due to the freak sizes of the barrels, I often find it useless on watches of larger size.

Until there is some satisfactory improvement in mainspring winders, I for one, feel we might be better off to throw away the winders we have bought to use on the larger size watches and use Mr. Des Jarlais' method.

Yours truly,

C. WILKERSON, Denver, Colo.