Model 92 Positional Marking Observation

[Snide]

While huddling over the '92 database, I discovered something interesting about the "5 Positions" marking. I have a photo of a CPR, serial number 12020641, which is marked "5 Positions. I then have a photo of a Vanguard, s/n 12080750, which is not marked 5 positions. Here is a list which includes that watch and some of what happens next;<LI>12080750 VAN Adjusted<LI>12540612 VAN 5 Positions<LI>12541391 C St Adjusted<LI>12563027 C St 5 Positions<LI>12566025 C St Adjusted<LI>12576369 VAN 5 Positions

One would think that once Waltham started marking watches "5 Positions" that it would do so across the board. For whatever reason, that does not seem to be the case. And then, being that the CPR is the earliest serial number I have which carries the 5P marking, I am wondering if the positional marking was required in Canada before it was required in the US. Any thoughts?

Jim

[Snide]

While huddling over the '92 database, I discovered something interesting about the "5 Positions" marking. I have a photo of a CPR, serial number 12020641, which is marked "5 Positions. I then have a photo of a Vanguard, s/n 12080750, which is not marked 5 positions. Here is a list which includes that watch and some of what happens next;<LI>12080750 VAN Adjusted<LI>12540612 VAN 5 Positions<LI>12541391 C St Adjusted<LI>12563027 C St 5 Positions<LI>12566025 C St Adjusted<LI>12576369 VAN 5 Positions

One would think that once Waltham started marking watches "5 Positions" that it would do so across the board. For whatever reason, that does not seem to be the case. And then, being that the CPR is the earliest serial number I have which carries the 5P marking, I am wondering if the positional marking was required in Canada before it was required in the US. Any thoughts?

Jim

[Kent]

Its my understanding, probably as related by Art Zimmerla, that once Hamilton decided to mark their movements as being adjusted to 5 positions (those that were actually so adjusted), whatever was in inventory at the moment received the additional marking (which also included placing the grade number on the movement). Additionally, as individual watches were received back at Hamilton, for repairs or perhaps received back from distributors, they too were so marked.

This is an indication of what may have occurred at Waltham, especially in the 1906-1908 timeframe, although the serial numbers you posted are from a couple of years earlier. Had the change been intended prior to the production of a run, all of the movements would have received the same marking. If there was a change during a run, there would have been a sharp break between the two markings(and this may be discovered in subsequent run). The seemingly haphazard application of the 5 position marking could have resulted from a post-production re-marking of those movements remaining in inventory.

Kent

P.S. Although the serial numbers are in sequential order, is there a good indication that the runs were actually manufactured in sequential order? Most of the serial numbers of the Vanguard and Crescent St. movements that you posted are close enough to have been built simultaneously, or in reverse sequence.

P.P.S. We have two CPR watches (whose marking is recorded), from the same run as the one you mentioned, in our data base. 12,020,725 - marked "Adjusted" and 12,020,823 - marked "Adjusted 5 Positions." Bear in mind that there could be errors in recording the data. We know that sometimes even the most conscientious dealers have written "Adjusted" in their mail-order or internet listings when the movement was actually marked "Adjusted 5 Positions." Also, Ed and I have been known to make occasional mistakes.

P.P.P.S. Vanguard movements 12,576,362 and 12,576,469, are listed in our data base as both being marked "Adjusted." These are numbered just before and after your last mentioned Vanguard serial number 12,576,369 which you note as being marked "Adjusted 5 Positions."

[Kent]

Jim:

Are you sure that 12563027 is a Crescent St.? It seems to be in the middle of some Vanguard movements labeled for Mermod Jaccard.

[Greg Frauenhoff]

Jim,

There may be something to your idea that the "5 Positions" marking on RR approved watches was required in Canada before it was in the US. The so-called Elgin Master grade books have several mentions about mvts being engraved "Adjusted 5 Positions" on pieces bound for Canada.

As for sequential s/n production, the Elgin grade books present plenty of evidence that some grades of mvts sat around at the factory for years before being sold and that during their time there they might have new things engraved on them (such as "No. 274" or "Adjusted 5 Positions" or even have a new barrel bridge with different engraving added). Also, the mvts so "altered" were not necessarily in any particular s/n order.

[Snide]

Kent-

My data seems to indicate the the 5 Positions marking did not become consistent until around 16 million...I have scattered runs from 14 million to 16 million showing the 5 Positions marking.

Greg-

Here is a photo of the Crescent St. in question Crescent St (http://web.mawebcenters.com/teds_gift_and_jewelry/filecabinet//12563027.jpg) There is the possibility that it is a parts watch-I don't own it myself. My data shows "Paragon Timekeeper" and "The American Leader" in this run. It would be interesting to know if these private label watches have winding wheels with the same damasceening pattern as the Crescent St.

Jim

[Kent]

Jim:

We have the serial numbers below reported as having plates marked:
12,562,843 - Mermod Jaccard
12,562,848 - Mermod Jaccard
(these two were reported by a frequent poster on this board, maybe he can be more specific about the markings)
12,563,043 - "Mermod Jaccard & Kings Paragon Timekeeper" This watch was on display in Orlando in 2001.

I view the separate locations of the marking of "Adjusted" and "5 Positons" to be a strong indication of a post-production addition of "5 Positons," at least in some instances, but I have no definite documentation. Meanwhile, the 14-16 million series of serial numbers fall right into the 1906-1908 timeframe when most railroad time service rules changed to require five position adjustments (as a minimum) and the marking as such.

I had come to believe that earlier markings of position adjustments and grade numbers (the requirements for grade marking seem to go together with the marking for position) on individual watches were done to meet the time service requirements of those railroads which were ahead of the curve (not necessarily only those railroads in Canada). In a similar fashion, Ed and I have been trying to associate Keystone-Howard's use of "No. 0" or "No. 10," and etc, on their movements for this same reason. However, we lack a sufficient number of examples to consider it anything more than just a theory. Part of our problem is that in collecting data years ago, we didn't distinguish between those watches which were series x (where x = 0, 1, 4, 5, 10, etc.) from those that were actually marked "Series x" *sigh*

Kent