E. Ingraham & Co. Kitchen clock

[TheEmperorCodsaculus]

Howdy ,
I've never had an interest in these type clocks. Mainly because of the size and "guadiness" (for lack of another word) of 'em. So when I saw this one on an auction site, I liked that it didn't have the gingerbread "wings". I've seen past posts about dates and different names the company used. And, as it seems with most clocks I buy, I can't find this particular model online.
My questions are about the missing alarm bell. It is missing, right? Do y'all think the tablet and pendulum are correct? And the dial. Does this look right?
I'm sure the finish isn't original. Oh. The gong base. It does not have E. Ingraham on it as I have seen on some other clocks.
Thanks to y'all. I sound like I know what I'm talking about when telling my wife about the clocks I have.

 

[TheEmperorCodsaculus]

Sorry. I just figured out what I've been doing wrong with the photos.

 

[wow]

Sorry. I just figured out what I've been doing wrong with the photos.

Yes, the bell is missing. Looks original to me.

 

[S_Owsley]

The pendulum looks similar to a Waterbury clock I own, the tablet appears to be a replacement. The case appears to be made of walnut, which is good. Overall, it's a nice looking clock.

 

[Willie X]

Looks like the bell is attached behind the gong on that one?

That hammer wire is about as buggered up as any I've seen ... Maybe we should have a contest?

I would say the (as found) condition of your clock is 'average'. It can be moved up a notch to 'good' with a modicum of TLC.

My 2, Willie X

 

[Dick Feldman]

The only evidence of that clock having a bell may be the empty screw hole in the center of the case back wall below the gong.
Best,
Dick

 

[Steven Thornberry]

The clock is the Onyx. The inscription on the inside base (The E. Ingraham & Co.) suggests it was made between 1880 and 1884. However, Tran Duy Ly's book on Ingraham clocks shows an example from the 1886 catalogue, when the company name was The E. Ingraham Co. A look at the name on the movement might provide another dating clue. The dial looks correct, as does the case finish. I think Dick F. is correct about the empty screw hole having held the alarm bell. The alarm strike hammer has been pretzeled pretty badly.

Below is a link to an Onyx on antiqueclockspricegyuide.com. Just for comparison.

Antique Clock Details (antiqueclockspriceguide.com)

 

[TheEmperorCodsaculus]

Good eye, WillieX. I think some one "bubba'd" this thing. The bell is cast iron and the gong is attached to it. No ringing ....just thudding.

 

[TheEmperorCodsaculus]

Steven,
Thank you so much. Those images give me something to work off of. The gong base looks like this one. The timer mechanism looks the same. However, my timer dial is brass color. I reckon I'll seek a bell and try and do something with the hammers. As for the pendulum and tablet, they'll do. I will post a photo of the info on the front plate tomorrow. E.I & Co Pat. Dock. Oct. 9 79 Nov 11 79 Bristol Conn.
I dunno if one is able to talk price on here...... what I paid for this..... but when it got here, I gave it the eagle-eye, wound it up and it ran and kept time. The alarm worked. I'm tickled with it. The movement has many bushings in it. I noticed one outta wack. Do not have the stuff to install bushings yet. Heck. I'm #37 on the waiting list for my Ollie at Merrit's. Just got into clocks In October.

Which leads me to this. Thx to all of you guys... for all of your help. I'm trying to express my appreciation of each suggestion when I get on here with a question. And the time some of y'all invest in looking for the answers to relay to me. Thank you.

Keith

 

[Peter John]

Howdy ,
I've never had an interest in these type clocks. Mainly because of the size and "guadiness" (for lack of another word) of 'em. So when I saw this one on an auction site, I liked that it didn't have the gingerbread "wings". I've seen past posts about dates and different names the company used. And, as it seems with most clocks I buy, I can't find this particular model online.
My questions are about the missing alarm bell. It is missing, right? Do y'all think the tablet and pendulum are correct? And the dial. Does this look right?
I'm sure the finish isn't original. Oh. The gong base. It does not have E. Ingraham on it as I have seen on some other clocks.
Thanks to y'all. I sound like I know what I'm talking about when telling my wife about the clocks I have. View attachment 687052 View attachment 687052 View attachment 687053 View attachment 687053 View attachment 687054 View attachment 687055 View attachment 687056

Steven,
Thank you so much. Those images give me something to work off of. The gong base looks like this one. The timer mechanism looks the same. However, my timer dial is brass color. I reckon I'll seek a bell and try and do something with the hammers. As for the pendulum and tablet, they'll do. I will post a photo of the info on the front plate tomorrow. E.I & Co Pat. Dock. Oct. 9 79 Nov 11 79 Bristol Conn.
I dunno if one is able to talk price on here...... what I paid for this..... but when it got here, I gave it the eagle-eye, wound it up and it ran and kept time. The alarm worked. I'm tickled with it. The movement has many bushings in it. I noticed one outta wack. Do not have the stuff to install bushings yet. Heck. I'm #37 on the waiting list for my Ollie at Merrit's. Just got into clocks In October.

Which leads me to this. Thx to all of you guys... for all of your help. I'm trying to express my appreciation of each suggestion when I get on here with a question. And the time some of y'all invest in looking for the answers to relay to me. Thank you.

Keith

I think the case has been refinished and the glass is not original. The upper curve of the tablet should be right under the curve of the dial, the lower part of the tablet looks chopped the way it is.

 

[TheEmperorCodsaculus]

Here's the front plate

 

[Steven Thornberry]

Here's the front plate

View attachment 687166

The company name on the movement is consistent with a date between 1880-84, when the company used the name The E. Ingraham & Co. (the definite article was not used by Ingraham on their movements).

 

[shutterbug]

I have seen alarms that use the gong instead of a separate bell. The length of the alarm hammer, as well as its position, leads me to believe this may be by design on this one. But I'm not sure. The position of the gong is wrong for that scenario.

 

[TheEmperorCodsaculus]

After looking at the link Steven provided, I see a difference in the alarm. But I wonder if the hammer could have been manipulated to stike the gong base. I see no evidence of a bell being in the case where that hole is near the bottom. But then .... the base is simewhat bell like (in appearance only) and differs from the one in the link. After I clean the movement. I will put it back together as found.

 

[Willie X]

Wondering if there is a drastic upward bend in the alarm hammer wire, near the hammer post.

I can see two posabilities. One, the bell went at the bottom and was lost so someone bent the hammer up to work against the gong. Two, it came the way it is and that hole at the bottom was never used, maybe something to do with packing/shipping, or a last minute production change.

My 2, Willie X

 

[R. Croswell]

The link to the picture in post # 7 https://www.antiqueclockspriceguide.com/priceguideimages/tomharris6/26271334_4_l.jpg clearly shows the alarm bell at the very bottom on the case. Strange that there are no witness marks other than the screw hole on the wood to indicate that a bell was fastened there.

RC

 

[Steven Thornberry]

Just for comparison, below is a picture of the witness marks left by the bell on my own Onyx. Also a picture of the gong.

 

[Willie X]

No shadow either, that I can see.
Willie X

 

[TheEmperorCodsaculus]

There is the finish wear on Steven's. Got me to thinking. With the case on an angle, there is a dimple in the wood. Tool mark or bell inprint? Not having the bell, I don't know what the back looks like. Also the gong and base in post 14. I've looked at a lot of these type Ingraham clocks since this post started. I have not seen this base on any of 'em. And with the 5 screw holes... is it possible there was the other type with the company name on it earlier?

If you look at the gong hammer in post#1, it has a leather insert. This gong is very thin and flimsy. Is that the case with your's, Steven?

 

[RJSoftware]

Well, you know these ol Grandma clocks can grow on ya. But if you plan to have any buds over just don't display them in your man cave. Else you got sum explaining to do...

 

[TheEmperorCodsaculus]

That's funny, RJ. When a buddy of mine came over and saw all of the clocks, he told me I need to get some cats.

 

[Steven Thornberry]

This gong is very thin and flimsy. Is that the case with your's, Steven?

Yes, it could be called thin and flimsy, but that's kind of par for the course for ordinary gong coils. More to the point is that the extra mounting holes seem to indicate that your gong base is a replacement. It looks somewhat similar to one I have on a Wech 30-hour clock (no picture available).

 

[TheEmperorCodsaculus]

OK then. I can't seem to find a source for parts for this, so back to the way it came to me. Thank you all.
Keith