Talk:Fusee (horology)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Watches, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of watches on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WatchesWikipedia:WikiProject WatchesTemplate:WikiProject WatchesWatches articles

Time Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Time, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Time on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TimeWikipedia:WikiProject TimeTemplate:WikiProject TimeTime articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Unlike a weight on a cord, which exerts a constant force to turn the clock's wheels

Oh, dear. Very poor physics. Only true (appx.) for very small angles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.101.31.48 (talk) 20:47, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The weight being referred to here is the weight on the end of a cord suspended from a drum which powers the clock's wheel train in weight-powered clocks, not the weight on the pendulum. This weight just descends slowly as the clock runs, it doesn't swing. So there is no "amplitude" or angle. --Chetvorno^TALK 00:18, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup tag

The cleanup tag has been on the article a year. I don't see anything particular about the article which would justify it. Unless someone comes up with something specific, I'm going to remove it. --Chetvorno^TALK 19:14, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Spiral groove?

...........The fusee has a HELICAL grove machined around it...not a SPIRAL...

......Or, to be fair, it could be termed a conical spiral on the cone element, and a helix on the opposite cylinder — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.6.22.95 (talk) 17:50, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I know this is just semantics to some, but the two are entirely different....

I love the quality of Wikipedia articles, and accuracy is part of this.

...Shaun Walton, British Columbia, Canada — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.6.22.95 (talk) 17:30, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's a good point. I replaced it. I hope you don't mind, I put our conversation in a new section labeled with the topic, to separate it from previous topics; this is the standard practice on Talk pages. --Chetvorno^TALK 19:19, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resurgence

The Fusee has seen some resurgence recently in some very high-end wristwatches (such as Breuget and Cabestan) as a constant force mechanism. I think this might want to be noted after the Obsolescence section. --Cshepley (talk) 19:41, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Go ahead and add it, if you have a source. --Chetvorno^TALK 20:53, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fusee (horology). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071018035028/http://www.anthonygrayclocks.com/Horological%20Timeline.html to http://www.anthonygrayclocks.com/Horological%20Timeline.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:58, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]