Waltham Chronograph?

[Dot]

I was told that this is a Waltham Chronograph movement. Can someone tell me if this is a Waltham Chronograph movement? If not can anyone identify it. Thanks.

The movement is marked Pat. Sept. 28 '80 Eng. Pat. No. 3224.

[RON in PA]

Looks legit to me, I compared your photos with the illustrations in the Grey Book. That's the correct patent number.

[richiec]

Looks like a model 1884 chronograph, can't read the serial number in the center, it is too short to be a full serial number as the model 84 started in the serial number range over 2,300,000.

[ben_hutcherson]

IMHO, it's not a Waltham, although the general design does look similar.

Here's what stands out to me as being not right:

1. The serial number is way too low for a 14 size Waltham chronograph

2. Take a close look at the method by which the lower balance cap jewel is attached-I don't think I've ever seen this on a Waltham(chronograph or not)

3. The markings on the balance cock look all wrong to me, as does the attachment of the top cap jewel

4. The finish looks totally inconsistent to me with even low grade Waltham chronographs

5. None of the markings on the top plate look Waltham to me

I stand to be corrected(I've certainly been wrong before), but I don't think it is.

[DaveyG]

I agree with Ben for all of the reasons that he lists, in fact I was in the process of posting earlier when I got the call for dinner from the boss. You don't argue with that call!

In addition, I've never seen a Waltham that wasn't marked as such on the top plate, although as richiec says it does look remarkably like an 1884 model.

The Lugrin's patent chrono works were fitted to a lot of different movements and I think this is a Swiss made watch with the Lugrin's patent chrono works fitted - and possibly a rip off of the '84.

[Tom McIntyre]

I think I have seen a watch a lot like this from the Timing & Repeating Watch Co. of Geneva. Timing and Repeating had the same rights to Lugrin's patents that Waltham had and I think the two companies may have shared additional intellectual property.

The absence of a signature it the most convincing difference.

[Dot]

Thank You for all the information. I think I have learned quite a bit about this movement. You guys are the best!

[artbissell]

Interesting to me is the similarity. Possibly rarer than the Waltham.