waltham chronographs

[Luca]

From what I've read production records are incomplete (or inaccurate?) on these 14 size watches. I've seen them for sale now and then (fleabay mainly) but it looks like the no. of jewels listed in the database rarely jibes with what is actually (or stated as being)in the watch. On one that I've acquired...sn. 1809058 should I not assume anything as to jewel count unless I take it apart and count myself?

Also, does anyone have an idea as to distribution of Arabic dials vs. Roman and Gilt movements vs. Nickel?

It seems to me that the common Price Guide is less than useful when it comes to these pws. Are there any good guesses as to production runs or totals?

For the record the one I'm waiting on seems to be a mid-grade mdl 1874 nickel w/arabic dial, hunting case (CWC Co gold filled). I say 'seems' since you don't always know for sure till you have it in hand :smile: If anyone is interested I can post pics once I get it.

Luca

[Luca]

From what I've read production records are incomplete (or inaccurate?) on these 14 size watches. I've seen them for sale now and then (fleabay mainly) but it looks like the no. of jewels listed in the database rarely jibes with what is actually (or stated as being)in the watch. On one that I've acquired...sn. 1809058 should I not assume anything as to jewel count unless I take it apart and count myself?

Also, does anyone have an idea as to distribution of Arabic dials vs. Roman and Gilt movements vs. Nickel?

It seems to me that the common Price Guide is less than useful when it comes to these pws. Are there any good guesses as to production runs or totals?

For the record the one I'm waiting on seems to be a mid-grade mdl 1874 nickel w/arabic dial, hunting case (CWC Co gold filled). I say 'seems' since you don't always know for sure till you have it in hand :smile: If anyone is interested I can post pics once I get it.

Luca

[John F]

The Waltham records (and, hence, the database) typically identify the jeweling by reference to the number of holes or pairs, so the "4 pair" listed for SN 1809058 translates to a standard 15 jewel configuration - 7 jewels in the balance/escapement, plus 8 more (4 pair) on the upper and lower plates. However, the records don't count the cap jewels that are present on the higher grades. This is why the actual total may be more than what's listed. (And, of course, the records themselves do contain some errors, are missing some data, etc.)

John

[Luca]

Thanks John. I guess I'll know a bit more when I receive this. I don't think it is a higher grade as I've read the damaskeening is more involved on those. This is just frosted. I guess the incomplete info and such mean that a few surprises are still out there. That's part of the fun of collecting (at least for a newbie like me).

[Luca]

I'll post some pics later today but so far I've discovered that this is jewelled at the pallet arbors as well as the center, 3rd, 4th, and escape wheel on the top plate. So depending on what's on the pillar plate side it could be a 17 jewel watch instead of 15 (especially since it says 4 pairs jewelled in the database). Also it has 3 pat. dates on the movement...one from England, and it says 'Woerd's Pat.' under the balance and Pat. Pinion but doesn't actually say 'Waltham' or 'AW Co.' on the movement. The dial does say 'A.W. Co. Waltham'.

[Luca]

For anyone who's interested here's a pic of the movement (doesn't actually look frosted and seems to have a touch of damaskeening) and links to other larger images:

http://www.lucadicecco.com/watch/walchronsm.jpg

movement larger (http://www.lucadicecco.com/watch/walchron1.jpg)
dial (http://www.lucadicecco.com/watch/walchron2.jpg)
overview (http://www.lucadicecco.com/watch/walchron3.jpg)
front of case (http://www.lucadicecco.com/watch/walchron4.jpg)
Watch needs some cleaning and the case has some wear but not a bad watch overall.

[Jerry Matthews]

I don't begin to have the knowledge of American watches that you guys do. But I am really surprised at this movement. I have never seen one like it, and wouldn't have thought it to be a Waltham. Would be interested to hear any other comments. Did Waltham ship movements without their name on them?

[Luca]

Jerry,
It could be that it was for export though the Waltham dial makes one think that there shouldn't have been an issue in putting their name on the movement. It is a pretty identifiable Waltham movement if you go by the guidebooks and some of the nice pics and demonstrations at this site: AWCO Site - Complicated Walthams (http://www.awco.org/AWCo/Complications.htm)
The chronograph mechanism in this case was invented by Lugrin and was also used by the Timing and Repeating Watch Co. And I think 'private label' or contract watches would maybe have shipped without some of the info normally on the movement...perhaps just serial no. and patents and the jeweller or jobber would engrave their name. Maybe someone more knowledgeable could weigh in on this.

Luca