Illinois Model 105 / 100-S Model 2 ???

[ljrusso]

Well folks my dream was crushed on this one. :frown: I was out of my league....)

Get out your record books and notes and copy the info down. This one was mislabeled and RARE!!!!

http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5003204358 (http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5003204358)

Here are the pics (added June 18):


http://web14.s2.webspaceprofis.de/american-pocket-watch...inois%20105/105a.jpg (http://web14.s2.webspaceprofis.de/american-pocket-watches/nawcc%20board%20pics/Illinois%20105/105a.jpg)

http://web14.s2.webspaceprofis.de/american-pocket-watch...inois%20105/105f.jpg (http://web14.s2.webspaceprofis.de/american-pocket-watches/nawcc%20board%20pics/Illinois%20105/105f.jpg)

http://web14.s2.webspaceprofis.de/american-pocket-watch...inois%20105/105b.jpg (http://web14.s2.webspaceprofis.de/american-pocket-watches/nawcc%20board%20pics/Illinois%20105/105b.jpg)

http://web14.s2.webspaceprofis.de/american-pocket-watch...inois%20105/105c.jpg (http://web14.s2.webspaceprofis.de/american-pocket-watches/nawcc%20board%20pics/Illinois%20105/105c.jpg)

http://web14.s2.webspaceprofis.de/american-pocket-watch...inois%20105/105d.jpg (http://web14.s2.webspaceprofis.de/american-pocket-watches/nawcc%20board%20pics/Illinois%20105/105d.jpg)

Regards

Louis

Congrats barko13

[ljrusso]

Well folks my dream was crushed on this one. :frown: I was out of my league....)

Get out your record books and notes and copy the info down. This one was mislabeled and RARE!!!!

http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5003204358 (http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5003204358)

Here are the pics (added June 18):


http://web14.s2.webspaceprofis.de/american-pocket-watch...inois%20105/105a.jpg (http://web14.s2.webspaceprofis.de/american-pocket-watches/nawcc%20board%20pics/Illinois%20105/105a.jpg)

http://web14.s2.webspaceprofis.de/american-pocket-watch...inois%20105/105f.jpg (http://web14.s2.webspaceprofis.de/american-pocket-watches/nawcc%20board%20pics/Illinois%20105/105f.jpg)

http://web14.s2.webspaceprofis.de/american-pocket-watch...inois%20105/105b.jpg (http://web14.s2.webspaceprofis.de/american-pocket-watches/nawcc%20board%20pics/Illinois%20105/105b.jpg)

http://web14.s2.webspaceprofis.de/american-pocket-watch...inois%20105/105c.jpg (http://web14.s2.webspaceprofis.de/american-pocket-watches/nawcc%20board%20pics/Illinois%20105/105c.jpg)

http://web14.s2.webspaceprofis.de/american-pocket-watch...inois%20105/105d.jpg (http://web14.s2.webspaceprofis.de/american-pocket-watches/nawcc%20board%20pics/Illinois%20105/105d.jpg)

Regards

Louis

Congrats barko13

[Tom McIntyre]

Louis, it really is an interesting watch and I must confess I ignored the auction because of the listing.

The serial number places it in a sequence of Grade 105 model 2 watches, but it is a model 3, not a model 2. It has a 5th pinion.

I cannot see the damaskeening well enough to see if it really matches the unique Grade 105 pattern, but the signature looks correct.

The personalized dial is a really nice feature too.

The other two examples reported from this run are 501,113 and 501,153 both of which are 15 jewel.

The watch also has a Chalmer's regulator rather than the Wheeler's regulator it should have. The watch is most probably 17 jewel from its appearance although it could be 16 jewel. It is certainly not 21J as claimed in the auction.

Greg Frauenhoff, Russ Snyder and I wrote an article on these for the Bulletin a couple of years ago. There are several pages on my web site devoted to this group of watches.

http://www.awco.org/Illinois/Grade105/Grade105.htm

Related watches are shown around the 105 example.

[Jeff Hess]

Extraorinary dial though..

As an aside.. and VERY peripheral (speculative) information just found on the net, there was a John Master, business-manin Illinois at that time that was a big user of the railroads for shipping.. "January 26, 1882

On Friday evening, Jan. 20, about o'clock, the Bureau Valley mills, owned by John Master's Sons, and situated just south of Bureau Junction, on the Peoria branch of the C. R. I. & P. R. R. , were discovered on fire, and before anything could be done to prevent it, the building was in ashes. The total loss is about $10,000, which includes $2000 worth of flour and wheat which was in the mill at the time of the fire. The fire originated from a hot boxing underneath the purifier. The mill had been afire in the afternoon, but was extinguished, and all was thought to be safe. It was shut down about 6:45, and at about 7, Mr. Masters went back to the mill to do something, when he discovered the building to be in flames. He saved all the papers of the firm, but everything else in a loss.

Jeff Hess

[4thdimension]

Nice looking watch! There are a couple of points I noted and perhaps someone can comment.
First, the winding cup seems too big for the barrel bridge. Second, the subsecond indices
seem indented more than normal.

Last, and this is probably just me, the case
engraving appears to show Bambi with wings?
Do I get help here or should I see a professional?
-Cort

[Greg Frauenhoff]

Hi Cort,

I agree that the polished metal ring (escutheon (sp?)) piece around the barrel arbor looks too large, but the screw locations for it don't seem to allow for a smaller ring. Without having it in hand it beats me what's going on with it.

I too like the dial. A runic is always a neat find, and on a 105 it's even better. I'm not sure what you're refering to about the seconds indices being indented too far. Do you mean the seconds bit is a bit farther from the edge than usual? If so, this is normal for 5th pinion model dials. Or do you mean something else?

FWIW, here's a scan of another runic dial that was handy:

http://members.aol.com/gfrauen/illrunic.jpg

[4thdimension]

Greg, Thank you! The dial you posted illustrates what I'm trying to say. The seconds
track that runs around the subseconds disc of the ebay watch seems to be set in a bit far
from the edge. That is just my observation but
the seconds track on your example seems just
right. Thanks for posting it.
I can't recall seeing Illinois with umbrella hands either but they sure look right on this one.
-Cort
p.s.-Can't stop. 9K (British?) case on an Illinois? The big escutcheon looks identicle to one I found on Tom's site that was from the
classic "watch of the month" series. The subsec dial matched too.
I showed the case pic to my daughter and asked her what she saw. She thought it looked like a deer with with wings. It must run in the family. :smile:

[ljrusso]

Hi,

Tom, I had been carry that article around with me the whole week. Always looking at it (you should see the condition it is in....). As it was mis-labeled I really thought I had a chance. I also did not post anything here because of pure "greed".

I was torn back and forth on what it was: 105 model 3 or 100-S model 2. All I knew was it was a rare one... The dial was a winner.

What you guys do not know is that the reserve price was met at 250 GBP (this does not mean though that that was his reserve!!!). For me this means that he had no real idea what he had.... He is probably wondering why this went balistic at the last second...

So the hunt continues......

Louis

[bernie levine]

Another 105 Wow!!
By my records this 105 model 3 indicates
now there are 5:
500,902-929-930-970 and now501,181. Russ do
you have more than these in your data base?
The fact that it appears in a run of model
of model 2 105 movements opens up an exciting
possibility of more 105 model 3 showing up!
It is somewhat interesting to me to see the
hairspring stud attached to the train bridge
rather than on the balance bridge as on later
501,930.
Tom, I also questioned in my mind the mismatched described watch...21`Jewel etc...
not matching the illustrations.
I wonder if the reverse side of the dial has
any fired in markings such as the last three
serial # on 930?
bernie levine

[bernie levine]

Correction to my previous post.
Ser# 500970 is incorrect.It is 500,979
sorry-Is hould have proof read better.
bernie levine

[bernie levine]

Sorry...sorry:
Another grade 105 correction to previous post
in paragraph on hairspring attachment. should
be 500,930 and NOT 501,930.
bernie levine

[Tom McIntyre]

Bernie, the ones Russ listed for our article were:
500 902
500 908 #
500 929
500 930 §
500 979

§ The dial on this watch has the last three digits of the movement serial number written on the back of the center sink under the glaze.
# This number is from an 1889 report on watches used on the Burlington Route

I suppose it is fair to say that 500,908 has not been seen in a long time. :biggrin:

The Chalmer's regulator was the most odd thing about the new example for me. It implies that the plates were not part of the initial plate production operation since the cutout is different for the two regulators.

[Fred Hansen]

Do the jewel settings look just a bit different than usual to anyone else?

Almost as if the flat surface inside the setting screws is a little wider than usual ... anyone have a good photo of another model 3 gr. 105 to compare?

Fred

[Tom McIntyre]

The source of the model 3 picture in the article was anonymous and was a bit too small to work really well. It is the only one I have seen. I really wanted to buy Jim's example, but did not get the chance. :frown:

[John Pavlik]

A few points from mine, # 500592..a lowley 15 jewel............

I have the exact same set of umbrella hands..

The winding cup is identical, the edge does hang over a bit..Why ??don't know..

The jewel settings also look wide on mine..I think it is because of the gold setting? Serial number 502313 are not gold and the dullness of the slant surface makes them appear smaller..

John Pavlik

[bernie levine]

Tom,
Thanks for the ,908 105 model 3 update.I have
a copy of 18 size grades 104 and 105
production runs and known movements dated
9/09/1990 with copies of the original factory
ledger pages for these grades given to me by
Jim Hernick. At 9/09/90 908 was not recordrd.
of course as you know 930 wasfound and added
later.
Tom,are you describing the 501,181 chalmers reg as
different? Such as the round geared disk
appearing different? The round geared disk
appeared to me to be different...I Looked at
some of my Chalmers regulators and those in also in
vol 2 Ill and the geared disks look different
to me than on 501,181.Is the what you have
reference to in your post?
bernie

[Tom McIntyre]

I should have been more clear Bernie. All the grade 105's with patent regulators that I have seen are Wheeler's regulator, not Chalmer's regulator.

As was mentioned in the article, Chalmer's regulator was designed before the watches were actually made but they still have the Wheeler on them because the cutout is different between Wheeler's and Chalmer's.

501,181 is the only one to show up so far with the Chalmer's regulator.

[Russ Snyder]

I must admit I was skeptical when I first looked at the photo of the movement, but I'm now convinced that it IS a Grade 105.

One of the primary visible distinctions between the 105 and 100-S movements (the latter having Chalmer's Regulators) is the location of the "Adjusted" engraving. On the 105 the "A" is aligned under the "n" in "Illinois"; on the 100-S the "u" in "Adjusted" is aligned under the capital "I" in "Illinois", or shifted to the left approx. 1/2 inch. [NOTE: On Grade 104 movements, the "Adjusted" engraving appears only on the balance arm.]

Another distinction is the different scroll-like engraving on the balance arm of the 100-S versus that found on 105's. The pattern on this watch is identical to that found on all other Grade 105 movements, both Model 2 and Model 3.

But the use of Chalmer's Regulator on a 105 is a new one for me. The S/N of this watch (501,181) is among the last 20 of the 105 movements, so it's conceivable that they were machined for use with the Chalmer's rather than Wheeler's Regulator.

In fact, I believe these 20 were the last of all Grade 104 & 105 movements ever produced. The existence of at least two known Grade 104 Model 2 15-jewel movements with higher serial numbers (501,567 & 501,578) doesn't convince me that they were made BEFORE the last of the Grade 105 movements. It is more likely, I believe, that they were made at roughly the same time as the other Grade 104 movements, before the company switched to 105 production, and that the production run which included these two higher-numbered 104's was simply "post-numbered". I have seen numerous other instances where the company set aside serial number ranges "out of order" in the anticipation that they would "back-fill" the intervening serial numbers at some later date. And, as was often the case, market demands and/or special orders caused those "set-aside" ranges of serial numbers to be assigned to other Grades and/or Models.

Having said all that (and none of which I can prove), it seems reasonable to me to assume that the last 20 serial numbers ever used for Grades 104 or 105 were from 501,181 - 501,200. This would help explain the use of Chalmer's Regulator on this watch.

Now all I have to do is find ANOTHER 105 from this run of 20, and my assumptions will be confirmed. Please check that trunk in your attic, look under your mattress, and dig up the back yard -- I'm confident one of you has the watch I'm looking for, but just doesn't know it!

Russ

P.S. Sorry you didn't get this one, Louis.

[Whit Joyner]

Taking a look at the two "M"s on the dial -- at 25 minutes and 35 -- I believe the name to be John McMaster. Anybody else?

This thread is an education! Thanks everyone who put into it.


Whit
The Ol' Tar Heel

[crsides]

I thought it was McMaster also Whit.
And Louis, I thought I had a chance at it too.

It sat ~ $400 for a long time. I was watching it at work, got distracted (from the auction, not the work), and pulled it up 40 secs after it ended. I was really upset until I saw the final bid. Had no chance.

Anybody know who won it.

Charlie

[ljrusso]

Hi all,

Whit: Now that I study the dial with that thought I agree with you!! McMaster is a real possibility. I also find the "." at the 12 after the "R" to be of interest.

Question:
Was the 105 model 3 not normally marked "Safety Pinion" rather than "Patent"?


and a gripe:
I posted the pictures on my server (see my initial post starting this thread) so as to keep the documention here on the message board. I hate researching past posts and finding dead-links. I promised myself about a year ago that any pictures I posted I would keep on my server until "the cows come home" and right now none of them are standing in the yard so the pics will stay.... Everything is in a folder called "nawcc board pics"

Regards

Louis

[bernie levine]

A few minor observations and comments re:Illinois grade 105.

(1) Pages 36 and 185(1) show 105 model 3
with Chalmers Regulator. with serial 500,161
(serial numbers are hard to read) found in the
Illinois vol 2 ,Encyclopedia,Eharhardt and Meggers.
If the numbers are correct they show the movement
as model 3 17 jewel 104.

(2) Patent regulators Wheelers us pat 6,22,1880 #229,215 and
" " Chalmers " " 12,19,1882 #269,385.
Both Wheeler and Chalmers Lived in Springfield Ill. at the time
of patent issuance. I wonder if they were employed by the Illinois
watch co. and if they assigned their patents to the Illinois Watch
Co?
bernie

[Tom McIntyre]

Sorry for the long post, but this is cut and pasted from the Bulletin article.

==================
Wheeler’s vs. Chalmers’ Regulator
Surprisingly, none of the Grade 104 and 105 movements feature Chalmer’s Regulator, which was patented December 19, 1882 (Pat. #269,385). A closer examination of Illinois watch production between mid-1880 and early 1883 may help explain the use of Wheeler’s Regulator and shed some further light on Grade 104 and 105 watches.
Wheeler’s Regulator was patented by Phillip H. Wheeler, an employee of the Illinois Watch Co., and witnessed by its then Secretary of the Board, Charles Smorowski. The patent application was filed April 22, 1880. Chalmer’s Regulator was patented by David William Chalmers, also an employee of the company, and witnessed by George A. Bates, who had replaced Smorowski as Secretary of the Board. In filing his patent application September 9, 1882, Chalmers makes reference to his invention having “… relation to an improvement on the micrometer watch-regulator described in Letters Patent No. 229,215 [Wheelers], dated June 22, 1880; and it consists in the construction and novel arrangement of the parts …” [9]. The main improvement offered by Chalmers consisted in the way the adjustment wheel was rotated. Wheeler’s Regulator made use of a “… graduated arc and pointer of a revoluble circle or wheel carrying a swivel-connection for the pointer, and turned by means of a friction-roller operating against an inner arc of the circle, being held in engagement by the elastic force of the graduated arc …” [10]. The improvement offered by Chalmers replaced the friction-roller with a “… disk being provided with teeth … to engage an operating pinion …” [11].
Clearly, Chalmers’ modification represented a more reliable and exact manner for regulating the balance spring. Wheeler’s friction-roller could fail to engage properly when adjustments were being made, or could permit slippage between adjustments, whereas the teeth-to-pinion connection was more positive and stable.
Why then were Grade 104 and 105 watches not fitted with Chalmers’ Regulator [12]? The Chalmers’ version was certainly available in December 1882, and its development by factory employees with a senior company officer as a witness, indicates that it was well known as early as September of 1882. The authors believe the answer to its absence lies in the production process itself.
The switch from Wheeler’s to Chalmers’ regulator was occurring in late 1882. A gilt Bunn Model 2 (s/n 309,135) from December, 1882, features a Wheeler’s Regulator, whereas a gilt Stuart Model 3 watch (s/n 309,223) from December, 1882, has a Chalmers’ Regulator. However, the Grade 103 watches of a year earlier may shed some additional light on this change and its impact on Grade 104 and 105 watches.
In the late 1880 and mid-1881, Grade 103 watches were appearing with Wheeler’s regulator (s/n 214,754: December 1880 - February 1881; s/n 320,372: June – September 1881). A story in the Springfield Illinois paper from 1881 sheds more light on the Grade 103:
Sixteen grades of watches were being made in 1881 by the Illinois Watch Company. The watches in order of excellence were: No. 1 Stuart, Bunn, Miller, Currier, Hoyt, Columbia, America, 103 Improved, 103 Adjusted, and 103 Patent, all men’s watches; and Mary Stuart, Rose Leland, Sunnyside and Arlington women’s watches.
The “103 Improved” may well have referred to those watches that featured Wheeler’s Regulator, such as the two watches from 1881 noted above. Regardless of an “improved” performance offered by Wheeler’s Regulator, there is more direct evidence to explain the presence of Wheeler’s rather than Chalmers’ regulators on Grade 104 and 105 watches.
The use of Chalmers’ Regulator required at least one additional step in the production process: the drilling of an “… offset recess … holding the toothed operating-pinion …” [14]. Once the train bridge was machined for the use of a Wheeler’s Regulator, it would have been very difficult if not impossible to re-fit it with a Chalmer’s Regulator, due both to the size of the regulator wheel recess and offset recess required for the operating-pinion. Any train bridges already machined for a Wheeler’s Regulator would have had to remain fitted with that version, If indeed, the Grade 104 and 105 movements were already prepared for a Wheeler’s Regulator, then their production must have begun before June of 1882, the date when Chalmers’ device was officially patented. The innovations associated with Grades 104 and 105 quite likely necessitated an early start in the development and preparation of these movements.
==========================
To give due credit, I think this was primarily Russ' analysis but Greg may have done it. I was just the editor on this part of the article.

[Russ Snyder]

Bernie & Tom,

First of all, Tom, these were my comments in the article, so I will absolve Greg of any blame or criticism, should others wish to dispute any part of the text you quoted.

And, Bernie, the pictures you noted (p. 36 and p. 185-1) were "artist's renderings" for sales brochures, and were NOT actual photos of real watches. Notice, for example, that the two watches pictured on p. 183, #2 & #3, both have the same serial number, even though one has a balance arm marked "Adjusted" (#3) and the other has a plain balance arm. There are other instances in the book of the same thing -- using one drawing to show different watches. So ads featuring drawings should not be interpreted as "real" watches -- just drawings.

Russ

P.S. I checked the current exchange rate for EUROs and the price came out to just over $2,700. I know were not supposed to discuss "values", so I'll only refer to this as the selling price. However, I wasn't surprised -- I believe that's a reasonable figure in today's market. Inflated, perhaps, but representative of the interest in 105's.

[bernie levine]

Tom and Russ,
thanks for your reply to my last post re 105.Let me apologize
for Wheelers verses chalmers questions. I completly forgot the
discussion in your wonderful article 104 and 105 movements that
Diana Burnet asked me in a letter March 19 2002 to review before
publication. I felt really honored to be able to review such a
moummental important article;and to this day I am still praising it.
I believe this recent 105 watch is a very signifant addition to our
understanding of this important watch... that I hope it siginals
the possibilty of more to come...that what we now know may not be a
finished story. For we know that this Co. was capable of many innovations.
bernie

[bernie levine]

It is not my intention to "drag on"more
questions about the new found 105...but I am sincerely
puzzled by the "plainly finished appearance"
on the Charlmers regulator geared circular disk.
Other Charlmers reg that I have observed appear hollowed
out rounded like the center of a bowl with a highly polished finished
I wonder if it is probable that 501,181 grade 105 was first fabricated
for a Wheelers Regulator. Therefore a modified custom made Charlmers
geared disk was made to accomadate the fabracation and an additional
hole was drilled and threaded for the geared adjusting screw? If this
is probable that might explain the different appearance of the geared
disk.
I sincerely don't wish to analyze the watch ' to death' ...and maybe
I am getting 'carried away by my imagination' But to me this dull
looking charlmers regulator is 'way out of character' for this prodigious watch.

[Russ Snyder]

Bernie,

There are actually TWO versions of the Chalmer's Regulator -- an earlier version (similar to those found on Grade 4 "Railroader" movements), and a later version found on some very early Bunn Specials and on the two Grade 100-S movements which are damaskeened & engraved like 105 movements.

You are correct: the later ones have a the "bowl-like" and very shining appearance you described, whereas the older ones found on Grade 4 movements are identical to the one on the new 105 watch.

To see the "earlier" style Chalmer's Regulator, check out s/n 704,618 in my Illinois database, and click on "Additional Photos" to see larger pictures of the movements.

To see the "later" style Chalmer's Regulator, check out s/n 301,828 in the database, then look at the larger photos of this 100-S "105-look-alike".

Both of the s/n above are my watches, so I know what the regulators look like close up. I didn't bring this difference up in the article because, at that time, no Grade 104 or 105 had been seen with a Chalmer's Regulator.

Russ

P.S. I, for one, don't view your questions as "dragging on" or belaboring us. The only way to get answers is to ask questions, and the only "dumb" question is the one people DON'T ask. I would be just as persistent in your situation. Thank you, also, for your kind comments about the NAWCC Journal article. My co-authors and I wanted it to be something extra special for an extra special person -- Bill Meggers.

[bernie levine]

Russ,
Thanks for your Chalmers new old clarification.
It certainly seems very plausable to me.
I have two grade 4s...model 3 701606 1887(E),
model 702051 1887(E). both have older plain chalmers
version as yours.
Now "my imaginations starts". Lets assume that
the new 105 has not shown up. The two low grade
model 4's have the plain/older version.
could Illinois have used the plain less labor
intensive for its less expensive models?...
much in the same way that Illinois employed the
finely sculpture ratchet click on model 4
getty grade on 179 and less highly highly
finished clicks on grades such 172? Its just
a "loose" thought.
Thanks again for your clarification.
bernie

[Tom McIntyre]

I think we all agreed that the 100S model 1 that showed up in Orlando in 2004 is also one of the 105 look alikes. It is especially intriguing to me that they would make a KW as late as this one was made in this sequence.

http://www.awco.org/Illinois/Grade100S/mvt1k_small.jpg (http://www.awco.org/Illinois/Grade100S/mvt1k.jpg)

I think this thread is great fun. Thanks Bernie and Russ and all the rest of you. Bernie, I figured you must have been the reviewer for the article but such things are deep dark secrets.

Bill deserved a lot more tribute than we could ever pay him. For me it was his attitude even much more than his knowledge that was so important to the organization and the hobby.

[bernie levine]

Later version chalmers Regulator found on
Grade 4 #705175, 1887E.(a later grade 4 run).
Source:
Railroad Timkeeping book pub by 17th annual
Seminar on railroad timekeeping; page 7 item
14.
Russ, thanks again for your two version
Chalmers regulator clarification in your
previous post.
bernie

[Bob Lindeman]

Hello.
I don´t know if it is to late to pick up an old thread but I,ve been reading and get really puzzled over the watch I own. It is a Illinois Watch co, with keywind and chalmers regulator. Silverine casing(Dueber), and a serialnumber 293609. Can somebody enlighten me.

/Robert

[Tom McIntyre]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">293609 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
The above serial number is for an 11J grade 99/99S made in 1887 or 1888. There were about 6,000 watches made in this grade. (From Russ' database).

[Kent]

Hi Robert:

Welcome to the NAWCC Pocket Watch Message Board!

To add to what Tom has written, the grade would probably be No. 99 if it is a straightforward Illinois grade and No. 99S is it is a privately labeled contract watch. You can see a brief description of the grade No. 99 on this 1887 Distributor's Catalog Page (http://static.flickr.com/27/43570061_f24bcaeb4e_b.jpg).

Good luck,