A Nearly Perfect 21st Century BOR bracelet for the Enicar Graphs . . .

[Joe_A]

Here and there, various posts have been made about Beads of Rice bracelets for the Graphs. I also posted 'here and there' a couple of times myself.

I had coveted a genuine period BoR bracelet for some time and I finally had occasion to purchase one some months ago.

It's not certain whether the one I bought came with an Enicar watch straight out of the factory, but it is reasonably clear it was made and sold in the 1960s and is of comparable quality. Mine has the Saturn logo on the face of the clasp, but there is no mention of Enicar on the inside.

Upon receiving the bracelet, and shortly after the glow of acquisition wore off, I was struck by a cold and harsh reality. The quality of the bracelet was poor by today's standards and perhaps barely appropriate for a $300 watch of the day, but not a thing one should install on a watch of value today. I was underwhelmed, to say the least.

The old bracelet is flimsy. Clearly it was cheap to make. The gauge of the stainless material used on the clasp is light. There is no safety catch or mechanism even similar to what may be found on women's jewelry of the day. The method of keeping the clasp closed is a dimple or pimple on the inside part of the clasp and a detent on the outer part. In other words, it is a friction or snap fit subject to wear and likely to loosen over time. As if that were not enough, the end-links are hollow or open, made of formed stainless and the fit to the lug is snug, but movement cannot be completely eliminated. I would refer to this style of end-link as a "scratch-maker" style end-link.

It's crap. There may be some better crap out there from the period, but who aspires to having better crap?

So apart from being cheaply made and carrying the very real risk of dropping or losing the watch and also scratching the watch, these BoR bracelets of the day are quite good.

As I have said elsewhere, I bought a Strapcode Jubilee bracelet for my SARB017 Alpinist a couple years ago and I was nearly ecstatic with the quality of that product. Recently, Strapcode introduced a BoR bracelet in three versions for Orient and Seiko watches, but only in 22 mm lug-width versions.

Nothing suitable from Strapcode as yet, but now there is this:

 

[jbcollier]

Looks great!

Yes, old bracelets are no match for today's. Better materials, better design tools, better manufacturing techniques. Old bracelets are OK for display, not for wearing.

You forgot to tell us where it came from!

 

[Joe_A]

Looks great!

Yes, old bracelets are no match for today's. Better materials, better design tools, better manufacturing techniques. Old bracelets are OK for display, not for wearing.

You forgot to tell us where it came from!

I didn't forget.

 

[jbcollier]

Damn, got us where you want us. Probably holding out for:

<iframe src="https://giphy.com/embed/sEULHciNa7tUQ" width="480" height="296" frameBorder="0" class="giphy-embed" allowFullScreen></iframe><p><a href="

">via GIPHY</a></p>

 

[Joe_A]

I put up a bit of a teaser while I made some time to edit photos needed to illustrate how the solution offered up is a very good one, but slightly less than perfect.

It's pretty obvious that, while searching for a modern replacement BoR bracelet, we aren't going to fine one labeled: "Compatible with Enicar Graph Watches."

The search criteria for a quality replacement included these parameters:

• The lug width must be 20 mm.
• The bracelet end-links must be designed for a nominal 40 mm diameter watch case such that the arc or curvature of the end-link will match the case diameter.
• The bracelet must have a well-designed latching mechanism on a folding clasp.
• The end-links must be of solid milled or forged construction
• It must be possible to adjust the length relatively easily.
• Micro-adjustment of the size would be a real plus.
• Overall fit and finish should be suitable.

I found a solution that was not "plug and play," but required just a bit of fettling that anyone can do:

20mm Stainless Steel Beads of Rice Bracelet for NTH Subs

This "Beads of Rice" style, 316L stainless steel bracelet with curved (fitted), solid end-links and double-locking tri-fold clasp was specially designed to fit the NTH Subs. It has 10 removable links, and 6 micro-adjustments on the clasp. Fitted to the NTH Subs, it should fit wrists up to 8.25"...

nthwatches.com

The company even sells additional links:

Spare links (set of 2) for 20mm Beads of Rice Bracelet for NTH Subs

One pair (2 pieces) of spare links for the NTH Beads-of-Rice bracelet for the NTH Subs. Please note this item is not returnable.

nthwatches.com

I bought mine from Watchgauge:

20mm Stainless Steel Beads of Rice Bracelet for NTH Subs

This "Beads of Rice-style, 316L stainless steel bracelet with curved (fitted), solid end-links and double-locking tri-fold clasp fits the 20mm lugs on the NTH Subs. It has 10 removable links, and 6 micro-adjustments on the clasp. Fitted to the NTH Subs, it should fit wrists up to 8.25", or 21cm...

watchgauge.com

Notice this word of caution:

Please note that the end-links of this bracelet were specifically designed with a lip on the lower edge, to fit a groove on the under-side of the NTH Subs case. We don't know if the the bracelet will fit other watches with 20mm lugs.

Fortunately, the NTH subs are 40 mm diameter with 20 mm lugs, so we are golden, except that some fettling is required which I'll discuss in the next post.

 

[Joe_A]

Let's look at the period bracelet alongside the NTH bracelet:



The period bracelet has the characteristic loose fit as it can be twisted around whereas the NTH is a bit "bendy" but one isn't going to knot it.

The length of the NTH is easy to adjust by virtue of long screws in the side which can be unscrewed to remove links.

The Enicar or period bracelet above is nearly impossible to adjust to a good result. The link pins are pounded into place and are not meant to be removed. One has to open the 'grains of rice' individually and after removing links from the underside shown on the right below, hopefully, bend them back.



So what needs to be done to the NTH bracelet as hinted in the advert?

 

[Joe_A]

High-resolution images taken in bright light are unkind to our vintage watches. Often what looks near-perfect to the naked eye looks quite imperfect under magnified scrutiny.

So here is the 1d Graph with the NTH link held loosely in place:



Is the link too short?

Ideally, shouldn't the link extend to the end of the lug?

Be careful what one asks for, so the saying goes.

Here is the so-called original Enicar open link:



There is a little bit of difference in depth of end-link, but not much. The link is not snugged into place.

Does anyone have an Enicar BoR bracelet known to have been intended for the Sherpa Graph where we may compare end-links?

Upon reflection, I came to realize the following thing:

The lugs on the Sherpa graph are quite long.

When we wear the watch with a leather band, the origin of the band at the springbars is closer to the edge of the watch case, allowing the watch to fit better those of us with small to medium wrists.

If, in the case of the metal end-links, the links extended away from the watch, one may need a 7 1/2" or 8" wrist for the watch to look properly proportioned..

The bracelet would likely overhang my 6 3/4" wrist, had the end-links been extended.

Edit: Notice that the color of the new stainless steel actually better matches the color of the watch case.

Edit #2: The "original" Enicar link has a bit tighter arc, suggesting it may have been intended for a 36 mm watch.

 

[Joe_A]

Now let us look more closely at the links.



Must we compare?

Here is the issue that needs to be addressed.



That ridge is in the way and needs to be removed . . . perhaps.

I tried the link "out of the box" and I observed that, should I not remove the ridge, the link would fit, but it would put pressure on an area of the case that has not as yet been scratched. Better to remove the ridge.

I gave some thought to various methods of removing this ridge. I have a small milling machine at my disposal, but holding the link in place and following the contour would have been a challenge.

So I took the easy way out.

I mounted a Dremel mini drum sander head - nominally 20 mm in diameter in the milling arbor and I held the link by hand and gradually removed the metal as needed without so much as touching the top edge. A drill press or a mini drill press accessory to the Dremel tool would work just as well.

The 316 stainless is quite hard so it took 30 to 45 minutes to grind away the excess metal and about five minutes to polish the result.



If any of our dear readers happen to read palms, and you see something disconcerting in mine, kindly keep your observations to yourself!

The ends which contact the lugs are already well polish out of the box and they do fit superbly:



When all was said and done, there was one more small issue to overcome.

Standard hollow end-links have little "dog ears" on the end that extends past the link width at the rear of the lug to prevent the end-link from swiveling.

I noticed that, after assembling everything, the links would occasionally flip up and reveal their inner edge. The motion was so smooth one need not be concerned about damage.

I thought about this for awhile and I came up with a temporary solution.

I put a tiny dab of clear silicone RTV on the inner edge of he link and no more flipping. The silicone adhesive will not harm metal and peels off easily.

In the end, I may add a "flip stop" to the back of the link, but this is hardly needed now.

The original ridge would have prevented the link from rotating at the possible expense of slightly marring the rear of the case. The temporary method works very well so long as one does not change bands often. I could have experimented with leaving a bit of the ridge while removing most of it had I thought to do so.

There you have it!

 

[Joe_A]

Two more shots . . .

 

[Joe_A]

Almost done here.

Firing up the Wayback machine, this is what the subject watch looked like on what may be a genuine Enicar BoR bracelet probably intended for a 36 mm watch:



I feel a need to avert my glance now.

Here's how the quest for a modern bracelet started, with the SARB017 and Strapcode Jubilee:



It seems to me that the manufacturer that Strapcode uses and the one that NTH uses may be one in the same?





The newer bracelet has a wider central clasp mechanism, otherwise they look like they come from the same source.

 

[mgernhar]

Here and there, various posts have been made about Beads of Rice bracelets for the Graphs. I also posted 'here and there' a couple of times myself.

I had coveted a genuine period BoR bracelet for some time and I finally had occasion to purchase one some months ago.

It's not certain whether the one I bought came with an Enicar watch straight out of the factory, but it is reasonably clear it was made and sold in the 1960s and is of comparable quality. Mine has the Saturn logo on the face of the clasp, but there is no mention of Enicar on the inside.

Upon receiving the bracelet, and shortly after the glow of acquisition wore off, I was struck by a cold and harsh reality. The quality of the bracelet was poor by today's standards and perhaps barely appropriate for a $300 watch of the day, but not a thing one should install on a watch of value today. I was underwhelmed, to say the least.

The old bracelet is flimsy. Clearly it was cheap to make. The gauge of the stainless material used on the clasp is light. There is no safety catch or mechanism even similar to what may be found on women's jewelry of the day. The method of keeping the clasp closed is a dimple or pimple on the inside part of the clasp and a detent on the outer part. In other words, it is a friction or snap fit subject to wear and likely to loosen over time. As if that were not enough, the end-links are hollow or open, made of formed stainless and the fit to the lug is snug, but movement cannot be completely eliminated. I would refer to this style of end-link as a "scratch-maker" style end-link.

It's crap. There may be some better crap out there from the period, but who aspires to having better crap?

So apart from being cheaply made and carrying the very real risk of dropping or losing the watch and also scratching the watch, these BoR bracelets of the day are quite good.

As I have said elsewhere, I bought a Strapcode Jubilee bracelet for my SARB017 Alpinist a couple years ago and I was nearly ecstatic with the quality of that product. Recently, Strapcode introduced a BoR bracelet in three versions for Orient and Seiko watches, but only in 22 mm lug-width versions.

Nothing suitable from Strapcode as yet, but now there is this:

View attachment 3441

View attachment 3442

View attachment 3443

What's the brand of the bracelet do you have a link? Thanks

 

[@horologic2020]

This is a great thread, and I’m all ears about modern bracelet options for Graphs. Kudos for making this work!

I think someone in this community was able to get an Uncle Seiko BoR 20mm that was intended for Speedmasters to fit nicely with the Graphs without modification. Did I make that up?

 

[Joe_A]

What's the brand of the bracelet do you have a link? Thanks

The link to the brand (NTH Watch) is in the post above with the bullet list.

 

[Joe_A]

This is a great thread, and I’m all ears about modern bracelet options for Graphs. Kudos for making this work!

I think someone in this community was able to get an Uncle Seiko BoR 20mm that was intended for Speedmasters to fit nicely with the Graphs without modification. Did I make that up?

I don't think you made it up.

The end-links appear to be hollow on the Uncle Seiko according to the specifications on the site. The close-up photo shows a hollow end-link as well.

The Speedmaster case diameter is 42 mm, so the curvature may not be perfect, but is probably close.

20mm Beads of Rice Bracelet for Omega Speedmaster

20mm Beads of Rice Bracelet for Omega Speedmaster Moon Watch. This bracelet is stainless steel and a high quality 316L material. This watch band is comfortable, stylish and will fit all Omega Speed Masters with a 20mm lug width.

www.uncleseiko.com

Still, it looks like the Uncle Seiko would work . . . and be a safer choice than a period bracelet.

Cheers,

Joe

 

[JimJupiter]

The Speedy bracelets from Uncle Seiko fits perfect on the Sherpa Graphs. Some guys including me love the flatlink on different watches, like the UD but looks great on the Graph as well.

 

[Joe_A]

Time to revive this thread!

I've been quite pleased with the NTH Beads of Rice bracelet I put on the Mark Id Graph.

But . . .

In anticipation of putting the Mark Ia Graph on a modern Beads of Rice bracelet as well, I thought I'd give the Uncle Seiko bracelet a try, selecting the Omega Speedy version as has been suggested.

Here are my initial observations:

As discussed, the end links on the Uncle Seiko are hollow end links, not nearly as fine as solid end links either forged or milled from a stainless steel billet as used by NTH. When hollow end links fit perfectly, without movement, there is really no reason to reject them out of hand as they won't cause any damage if fitted properly. The 20 mm end links furnished by Uncle Seiko measure a width of 19.9 mm which is within tolerance. The 20 mm inside lug shoulder width on the newly arrived Sherpa Graph Ia is 19.75 mm on one side and about 19.65 mm on the other side. So the Uncle Seiko links do not fit unless one takes a jeweler's file to them and then polishes the ends. This I have done.

From my experience, both the NTH and the Uncle Seiko require some fettling to fit a Sherpa Graph.

Next observation . . .

The length of the NTH bracelet and the U.S. bracelet are about the same and each has to have four links removed to fit my 6 3/4" wrist. In the case of the NTH, the pins are screwed in with a very fine thread. A fine screwdriver like one from the Wiha set I have will do the trick.

In the case of the Uncle Seiko, the pins are friction fit push-pins. I prefer the screw type, but the friction pins are widely accepted as well.

Next Observation . . .

Here is where a photo helps:



The NTH offers six positions of fine or "micro" adjustment whereas the Uncle Seiko offers only three positions. Here the NTH is substantially more versatile and should provide for a better fit to the wrist.

In the photo above, you may also see the screw-ends on the links on the NTH bracelet which hold the links together versus the sprung ends of the push-pins on the U.S. bracelet.

One more issue with the Uncle Seiko version which will require a little more fettling before I can but it on the watch . . .

When we install a leather band to a watch, we can set one of the push-pin or springbar fine pin ends into the provided hole in the lug's shoulder, place the opposite end of the leather with springbar above the hole (from the back of the watch of course) and then, using the correct tool, install the opposite end of the springbar pin into the provided hole.

You cannot follow the above procedure exactly or as easily with a metal end link. Why not?

Because a leather band has flexibility whereas a metal end link does not. A metal end link cannot be twisted into place. The end link has to be properly aligned from the back of the watch so that it can drop into place.



Because a properly fitted end link cannot be twisted, one cannot put the end of the springbar into either hole until both are in position. This means that the springbar has to fit inside the shoulder of the lug without either springbar pin-end in place. In the case of the nice large diameter springbars provided by Uncle Seiko, fully compressed it does not fit into a 19.75 mm space. This means that, to get the bracelet installed, I will have to shave the pin tip length a bit, something I prefer not to do, but something I will have to do.

More when the little project is completed!

Edit: An astute observer will notice that the case back is not locked into place in the correct orientation (yet) on the watch above. I'll take care of that in due course. Also, the watch back appears a lot less scratched in person than you see in the photos. High-definition macro shots are not kind to our vintage watches!