21j in first run of 17j 92's

[veritemps]

Beautiful 18sz WALTHAM 21 Jewel VANGUARD, First Run!!!! I have #60273669 and have only seen a few of these over the years and all were 17j marked only adjusted with a different plate pattern. Do the experts know if there was an upgrade at the end of this first run or if this watch was held back and finished later, returned and upgraded or maybe was a custumer special request or even someody at the factory upgraded it for themselves? Any input welcome.

[Kent]

Please confirm that serial number?

Here's what's in Ed's and my data base for that run.

Jwls - S/N
17 - 6,027,119
17 - 6,027,215
17 - 6,027,235
17 - 6,027,237
17 - 6,027,239
21 - 6,027,265
21 - 6,027,583
21 - 6,027,717
17 - 6,027,878
21 - 6,027,911
21 - 6,027,968
17 - 6,027,974

I think that a search will yield an earlier thread on this run.

[Fred Hansen]

There was a very good thread on this board about this run last year and this first run is split production between 17 and 21 jewel Vanguard movements. Here is a link to this previous thread ...

http://mb.nawcc.org/showthread.php?t=35709

Also for some more general info on 92 model Walthams, check out NAWCC member Jim Schneider's 1892 model Waltham website ...

http://oswegonet.com/model92/

Fred

[veritemps]

Kent it looks like a mixed run of 17 & 21j if this is true which it appears to be from the numbers you've captured it makes the 17j scarcer than I had thought!

George (that guy up in wa state )

[Fred Hansen]

George -

Did you see Jim Schneider's comments about the 17J Vanguards in the thread I linked?

Fred

[Kent]

George:
So what's the actual serial number of your 21 jewel Vanguard? The serial number you originally posted has one digit too many.