Ball Stirrup Bows

[Larry Jones 98326]

I'd like to know when the Ball patent stirrup bow first appeared. Do any of you have advertising dates or
a patent date? My guess is 1905-1910.......

[Larry Jones 98326]

I'd like to know when the Ball patent stirrup bow first appeared. Do any of you have advertising dates or
a patent date? My guess is 1905-1910.......

[Kent]

Larry:

Both 1905 and 1908 Ball catalogs show cased RR (and brotherhood) standard watches with plain bows. So does a February 1911 ad from the Locomotive Firemen and Enginemens' Magazine http://www.knology.net/~ksinger/std_bow.jpg . No ads to this date show stirrup bow watches.

The NAWCC Library circulating copies of the Jewelers' Circular - Weekly and Horological Review microfilms cut off in January 1911. This is one of my prime sources of information and I really miss getting to see what follows.

The next Ball ad that I have in my files that depicts a watch is from a 1913 issue of the Railway Conductor. The month is unknown but since upcoming conventions are mentioned, it is probably in the late Spring. At any rate, it shows a stirrup bow watch http://www.knology.net/~ksinger/str_bow.jpg .

So, the stirrup bow was probably introduced some time between February 1911 and June 1913.

Kent

[Larry Jones 98326]

Kent,
Thanks for taking time to check this out and post the images. My new computer has a 20 gigabyte hard drive (compared to my old one's 520 megabytes), so now I have plenty of room to store images.
I've seen enough Ball cases with little wear and non-stirrup bows that I was pretty sure they were original, but it's nice to see the confirmation......

Larry

[Kent]

Larry:

I suggest that you get a CD burner. Every so often, I off-load image files from the hard drive to a CD-ROM. This keeps it from getting choked-up. Sam's club is now selling a pack of 20 CD's with jewel cases for less than $14. Larger, bulk packs, without jewel cases, have an even lower cost-per-CD.

Kent

[Alan Walker]

Looking at the 1919 Ball catalogue, there are images showing the "20th Century Model" case which appearantly is the first case to have the safety stirrup bow.

Appearently the safety stirrup bow was not universally used on lower quality Official Railroad Standard watches. After looking at the price list, one notes that the 19 and 21 jewel Balls are described as follows: In extra quality 20 year screw back and bezel cases...whereas the "Twentieth Century Model" was described with much greater detail: This watch specially cased in a 25 year gold filled case with a safety stirrup bow, which prevents the chain becoming entangled with pendant and crown.

Just in case you're wondering, in 1919 the watches were sold for the following prices (War Tax not included).

19 jewel- $65.00

21 jewel- $72.00

20th Century Model
23 jewel- $90.00

[Larry Jones 98326]

Kent - I probably didn't make myself clear, I just switched from a nearly full 520 megabyte disk to a nearly empty 20 gigabyte disk (~40 times larger), so the storage space problem is pretty well gone. We use CD burners at work now and then because we save way too many 40-60 MB color photo image files. We also put our reports to clients on CD.


Alan, I guess I'm a little confused. The Ball stirrup bow on my 23j 20th Century Model is identical to the Ball stirrup bow pictured in the 1913 advertisement that Kent posted.....which is not identified as a 20th Century Model or anything else. As far as whether the stirrup bow was present on the lower grade Balls after 1912-1913 or so, I don't know. My suspicion is that it was, but that's just based on a general observation that most Balls, except early ones, appear to have the stirrup bow regardless of jewel count.
But, perhaps your safety stirrup bow is different than the stirrup bow? The later style RR Ball cases with bulldog style necks had a different style of stirrup bow. Thanks for the comments.


Larry

[This message has been edited by Larry Jones 98326 (edited 09-08-2000).]

[This message has been edited by Larry Jones 98326 (edited 09-08-2000).]

[Alan Walker]

Ball didn't identify the watch, but it is indeed a 20th Century Model case. The stirrup bow pictured on the watch is indeed what Ball himself refered to as a safety stirrup bow. That your 23 jewel watch was in the 20th Century Model case is not surprising, as it was originally sold in that factory case.

In short, the question that we are asking concerns when the stirrup bow first appears and for what watches would it be appropriate or inappropriate. I would tend to concur with the information presented by Kent and add the information from the 1919 Ball catalogue listed above. Essentially what we know is that the stirrup bow first appears in 1912/1913 and that it initially appeared on watches cased in the 20th Century Model case. Therefore, any pre-1912 Ball watch in such a case is most likely a re-case. The next question is when did the lower jewel movements start appearing with the bow? My educated guess would be later than 1919 based on the information provided by the catalogue. We must consider that a majority of the watches were made after this time, which coincides with the peak of Ball's dynasty. It could have been that up to and after 1919 the bow might have been listed as an extra charge item. I would be interested to see what other items of information surface.

[Kent]

Larry, Alan, et. al.:

First, Larry - I didn't misunderstand you the first time, 20 GB gets filled up faster than you'd think. New program upgrades expand to use all available system resources. The larger size drive may get stuffed with larger application software, or just postpone the inevitable day when you've got to clear stuff off of the drive.

Next - I looked through my files more carefully in light of the continuing discussion of the "Twentieth Century Model" Watch. I can get slightly earlier on the introduction of the stirrup bow case - it appears in the March 1, 1913 issue of the "Keystone" http://www.knology.net/~ksinger/rr_std.jpg . Although the "Twentieth Century Model" Watch is pictured, the ad proclaims only that Ball's "Official RR Standard, ..." watches are sold "... only in Ball Model Cases."

The first ad that I can find that refers to the "Twentieth Century Model" Watch is in the February 1914 issue of the Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen's Magazine http://www.knology.net/~ksinger/20thcent.jpg . Even then, doesn't specify just which ORRS models may be available in the stirrup bow case. It would be interesting to see the booklet "Time Inspection on American Railroads" that is mentioned in the ad.

Another ad, in the July 1914 issue of the Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen's Magazine http://www.knology.net/~ksinger/towerman.jpg isn't any clearer, but it pictures a neat stand that the watch can be mounted in. The stand may very well be the box that the Ball watch came in. One of these is shown in the April 1918 issue of "The Railroad Trainman" http://www.knology.net/~ksinger/ball_box.jpg . Notice that the stirrup bow is referred to as a "Safety Bow" and that the ad is really promoting trade-ins for 16-size watches.

Ball ads in brotherhood journals in the late 'teens show the stirrup bow case, frequently referring to it as the "Twentieth Century Model" Watch, but often not mentioning that term. At no time are the number of jewels mentioned. Nor is the older style case with the plain bow shown or mentioned. As Alan pointed out, what is probably the 1919 or 1920 pocket catalog shows both the "Twentieth Century Model" case and the older style case with the plain bow. The 19 and 21 jewel ORRS watches are offered "In extra quality 20 year screw back and bezel cases" for $65 and $72 respectively. Regarding the 23-jewel ORRS, the "Twentieth Century Model," the catalog states "This watch specially cased in 25 year gold filled case with a safety bow, which prevents chain becoming entangled with pendant and crown." It sold for $90. The catalog is stamped "These prices do not include War Tax."

The ads through the 1920's continue to show stirrup bow cases but do not mention what movements come in the case.

Kent



[This message has been edited by Kent (edited 09-09-2000).]

[Larry Jones 98326]

Gents,

Thanks for taking time to look up and post the ads. For several reasons, I remain unconvinced that only the high jeweled Balls were cased with the stirrup bow up until at least after the 1919 Ball catalogue mentioned by Alan.

These reasons are, first, in my opinion and based only on general observation, the overwhelming majority of Ball cases have the stirrup bow. If this observation is true, and given that the overwhelming majority of Ball watches are "low jeweled" 19 and 21 jewel, most Ball watches must have been sold after 1919. But, and this leads into my second reason, if Ball cases switched over to the later bulldog style neck in the mid-twenties, as did Hamilton and Illinios, then a very large number of Ball stirrup bow lower jewel watches must have been made from 1919 (or later) up till say, 1927 or so. Now possibly the older style case with stirrup bow continued to be available on the lower jewel watches after the bulldog style cases came out. Third, I agree that the 1919 ad implies that the stirrup bow was an extra that went only on the premium 25 year case, but it is not clearly stated that other Balls did not come with the stirrup bow. Regardless, at some point the stirrup bow must have become standard or at least available on the lower jewel watches given that the bow is also common on nickel Ball cases.
I guess the point of my question/comments at this time is, where did all the stirrup bow cases come from if they were only available with the low production premium movements for such a long time (1913 to at least 1919)? Please feel free to speculate, don't let me have all the fun.......

Again, thanks for the discussion, I've learned a lot as always.

Larry

As an aside, I see from the 1918 ad that Kent posted, the term boot, still widely used in trading, has survived in the watch trading business.....

[This message has been edited by Larry Jones 98326 (edited 09-09-2000).]

[Jerry Laux]

Wayne,
It solves a very real problem,but not the one you might think from reading the ad. That problem doesn't exist. The real problem is product differentiation - How can I sell my product for more than my competitors get for the nearly identical item? Create a distinction and advertise it. If you don't think it works check the price difference between Clorox and the house brand bleach.

Cheers,

Jerry



[This message has been edited by Jerry Laux (edited 09-09-2000).]

[Kent]

Hi Again!

Larry makes a good point. The number of stirrup bow cases far outnumber the plain bow cases. However, perhaps we're all envisioning the new style case, introduced on page 291 of the October 1925 issue of the Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen's Magazine http://www.knology.net/~ksinger/newcase.jpg . This is the first ad I have that pictures this new, low-stem case. Think back and try to recall how many of the high-stem, stirrup bow cases that you've seen. Personally, I can't think of all that many, but I may be wrong, see below.

When I check our data base, I find that only a very few watches (i.e. - might have been a recase - original or much later) that have stirrup bows prior to S/N B 250,001 (Waltham). According to the charts in "American Railroad Watches," George E. Townsend, Col. G.E. Townsend, Alma, MI, 1977 (New edition is in print by Heart of America Press), this is around 1912. The Hamilton-Balls have lots of stirrup bow cases starting right in at B 600,001 (ca 1910). But the vast majority (all except for the run B 600,001 - B 601,000) of these are 23-jewel watches until B 609,001 (ca 1922-24).

If ever a brand was subject to case-switching, Ball watches today suffers from it. This skews the information in our data base, making it very difficult to tell what happened. However, there are enough Waltham-Balls starting with B 250,000 (almost all 21-jewel) with both stirrup bow and plain bow cases to believe that you could get either, regardless of how many jewels your watch had.

Going back to that October 1925 ad, it also introduces the "Box Car" dial saying that you can still get the previous design dial as well. Oh, I think this ad has the earliest use of the slogan, "Carry a Ball - and time them all!"

Kent

[Larry Jones 98326]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by wayne:
Pardon my ignorance, but what exactly is the purpose of the "safety bow"? Weren't most (all?) of these watches lever set, so the pendant couldn't be pulled out anyway?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wayne,

One possible advantage to the stirrup bow is that by keeping the chain in the center of the bow, pull by the chain sideways on the bow that can and does sometimes pull the bow off the pendant is reduced. If you haven't done this yet and dropped a watch, consider yourself either lucky or gifted....and I do agree with Jerry that marketing was part of the game on these..

Actually, many original cases for lever set watches had stems that pulled out. In fact, the Ball 20th Century Model case that we've been discussing has a pull out stem. Was this done to make the cases suitable for either pendant or lever set watches, or was it to facilitate the removal of the movement from the case? Don't know. ......


Larry

[Alan Walker]

Regarding the pull out stem feature on the 20th Century Model case, I would tend to believe that it may have been present for both of the reasons suggested by Larry. First of all, it does make it much easier for the jeweler to remove the movement with decreased risk of damaging the movement. Secondly it must be remembered that as late as 1915, there were still many pendant set watches in railroad service. Ball continued to accept new pendant set watches as late as 1906 and it is known that some other time services and railroads didn't require lever set movements until as late as 1919-1920. Then there were the electric railroads which are another case altogether.

[Kent]

Originally posted by Alan Walker:
... it is known that some other time services and railroads didn't require lever set movements until as late as 1919-1920. Then there were the electric railroads which are another case altogether.[HR][HR]

Alan:

Which railroads and time inspections services didn't require lever-set movements until 1919-1920. If you have documentation of this, I'd appreciate a copy.

Also, by electric railroads, I gather that you're referring to interurbans and street railroads (trolleys) as opposed to the LIRR or the CM&StP. I didn't know that they used different cases. - Only kidding, :wink:

Kent

[Don Dahlberg]

I just ran across a photo of a 16S 21J Waltham Ball, serial number B230717 in a Ball Stirrup Bow case. This seems early according to the previous posts. (http://www.tias.com/stores/patswatch/pictpages/ballrrBALL-51.html) On the same page is a Hamilton Ball 23J B604091 without a stirrup bow on a Ball case.

As was stated earlier by others, we cannot be sure if when a watch has been recased. Even if we could see the watch up close, the substitution of a ball watch for a ball watch would not result extra case screw marks.

Don Dahlberg

[Kent]

Originally posted by Don Dahlberg:
... a 16S 21J Waltham Ball, serial number B230717 in a Ball Stirrup Bow case. ..., we cannot be sure if when a watch has been recased. ...[HR][HR]

Don:
Actually, we can be almost sure about this one. According to our data base, about 15 months ago, a Waltham-Ball watch with this serial number was reported to be in a Fahy's Montauk case (Alan may know something about this watch). The thing that keeps me from being positive about it is that the other listing had it as a 19-jewel movement.

Waltham-Ball watches with the following serial numbers, from the range B 230,001 to B 231,100, are in our data base:

B 230,075
B 230,333
B 230,393
B 230,717
B 230,965
B 230,990

All are reported as being 19-jewel which is what is listed in "American Railroad Watches," George E. Townsend, Col. G.E. Townsend, Alma, MI, 1977, as a run of 19-Jewel watches.

I've written to Pat asking him to confirm that his watch, listed with S/N B 230,717, is the correct S/N and is 21-Jewels.

Kent :frown:

[This message has been edited by Kent (edited 09-12-2000).]

[Alan Walker]

To all that are concerned, the information about Waltham-Ball 230717 is correct. I also know that that watch has been recently recased and thus is not a valid specimen for our purposes. I should know that since I just recently sold that watch to Pat. I would be more interested in determining the originality of the case on the 23 jewel Hamilton-Ball as I am uncertain that the case it is in is the proper one.

[Kent]

I received a reply from Pat concerning the Waltham-Ball S/N B 230,717 watch. His reply is:

HELLO KENT
I CHECKED THE SER# ON THE WATCH AND IT IS B230717.AND IS MARKED 21 JEWEL.BUT AS I LOOK AT THE 21 IT IS IN A OFF COLOR CIRCLE LIKE IT WAS STAMPED ON AFTER THE PLATE WAS MADE.IT LOOKS LIKE A FACTORY STAMP.HAD MY WATCH REPAIR MAN CHECK THE PLATES AND JEWEL COUNT AND IT IS ALL CORRECT.
PAT

This may raise other questions about the watch, but as far as the discussion on stirrup bow cases, that connection ended when Alan reported that the watch had been recased.

Regarding the 23J Hamilton-Ball also on Pat's list, but with a plain bow, Ball Model case, we have the following 23-jewel Hamilton-Ball watches in our data base:

B 604,037 Stirrup Bow
B 604,091 * Ball Model Case
B 604,149 Stirrup Bow
B 604,150 Not Stirrup Bow Case
B 604,171 Stirrup Bow
B 604,173 Stirrup Bow
B 604,229 Stirrup Bow
B 604,370 Stirrup Bow
B 604,491 **
B 604,676 Stirrup Bow
B 604,776 Stirrup Bow
B 604,800 *** Stirrup Bow
B 604,879 Stirrup Bow

* Watch on Pat's list
** Best Guess at S/N
*** Last two digits unknown

Kent

[This message has been edited by Kent (edited 09-12-2000).]