Fusee Verge London Dutch Fake- Help

[Snyder822]

I have the chance to purchase this watch from a relative, but niether of us knows what the value may be. This watch is in non working condition, missing the chain, and hands. Also several gears are loose, and maybe one or two are missing. I believe there still has to be some base value to this piece. I would also like to know if there is a way to approx. a date, and/ or maker for this movement. Thank you in advance for any that reply.

 

[aucaj]

It is definitely fake, but I find the misspelled inscription interesting. It appears to be signed "R. Rosekeel Leverpool", which would be intent on faking a Robert Roskell of Liverpool watch. The hallmarks appear to be fake to me, but some of the experts may be able to give their assessments. If the hallmarks were authentic, then the captial date letter 'K' would be 1805 for London or 1806 for Chester.

It appears that the plates have been separated on one side and the contrate wheel is loose. I can't tell if the contrate wheel has a broken pivot or if it is just loose.

R/
Chris

 

[gmorse]

Hi Chris,

The hallmarks appear to be fake to me, but some of the experts may be able to give their assessments. If the hallmarks were authentic, then the captial date letter 'K' would be 1805 for London or 1806 for Chester.

Yes, they are indeed fake hallmarks, intended to be English marks, possibly for the Chester Assay Office. The pillar shape is typical of these fakes, and so is the balance bridge and the attempt at an English name in the signature. The style of the watch does suggest a date post 1800. The lion mark for sterling silver is sort of OK if you don't look too closely, as is the date letter, and the maker's/sponsor's mark is in a plausible format, although it isn't listed, but the town mark on the left is very vague, and the one on the right, which often seems to be present in these cases, is probably meant to be a duty mark of the sovereign's head, is the wrong shape and wasn't used after 1798.

The movement is certainly in a very sorry state, and the cost of restoration would certainly exceed the value of the watch.

Regards,

Graham

 

[Chris Radek]

You say the chain is missing but I think I see it on the barrel. It may be intact but just run down.

I read the inscription as R. Rosehedle but agree it's probably meant to be confused with Roskell.

Even genuine English watches in poor condition and needing extensive repairs don't bring much money. I paid $45 for one at a mart recently. I am wearing it now and love it, but I'm equipped to do the repairs myself at my own whim.

 

[Rick Hufnagel]

I gave It a solid effort this morning trying to make out the hallmarks...thanks for confirming my thoughts as well.

The whole set just didn't look right.

 

[gmorse]

Hi Snyder822,

I would also like to know if there is a way to approx. a date, and/ or maker for this movement.

You'll have seen opinions given above on the date, but the people, (plural), who made this watch will remain anonymous; fakers tend not to sign their work, at least not with their real names! On real English watches, the signatures don't represent the 40 or 50 people who were involved with the making, but most often the retailers who commissioned them.

Regards,

Graham

 

[Snyder822]

Hi Chris,


Yes, they are indeed fake hallmarks, intended to be English marks, possibly for the Chester Assay Office. The pillar shape is typical of these fakes, and so is the balance bridge and the attempt at an English name in the signature. The style of the watch does suggest a date post 1800. The lion mark for sterling silver is sort of OK if you don't look too closely, as is the date letter, and the maker's/sponsor's mark is in a plausible format, although it isn't listed, but the town mark on the left is very vague, and the one on the right, which often seems to be present in these cases, is probably meant to be a duty mark of the sovereign's head, is the wrong shape and wasn't used after 1798.

The movement is certainly in a very sorry state, and the cost of restoration would certainly exceed the value of the watch.

Regards,

Graham

Are there any watch repair techs out there that would attempt repair? I would still like to see what it would cost, and maybe get it fixed. Its an interesting piece and my far the oldest one that that I would own in working condition if I could get it done.

 

[Snyder822]

You say the chain is missing but I think I see it on the barrel. It may be intact but just run down.

I read the inscription as R. Rosehedle but agree it's probably meant to be confused with Roskell.

Even genuine English watches in poor condition and needing extensive repairs don't bring much money. I paid $45 for one at a mart recently. I am wearing it now and love it, but I'm equipped to do the repairs myself at my own whim.

Thank you for your reply! I would love to learn the craft, and have wanted to for a very long time, but I can not find anyone willing to teach it in my area. (NW Ohio). In your opinion, would offering to give the owner $20 for it be too much or too little? I've seen estimates on these from $35-$100.

 

[Snyder822]

Hi Snyder822,


You'll have seen opinions given above on the date, but the people, (plural), who made this watch will remain anonymous; fakers tend not to sign their work, at least not with their real names! On real English watches, the signatures don't represent the 40 or 50 people who were involved with the making, but most often the retailers who commissioned them.

Regards,

Graham

Thank you- I figured as much but I always hold out hope for the impossible until someone tells me not to. I appreciate it, now onto figuring out who can fix it for me.

 

[Snyder822]

**Update** I forgot to mention that when I wind this watch with the included key (that doesn't look early 1800's to me) some of the gears move one way then unwind to the origanal position. This would me the chain is intact like You (Chris) Suggested, right?

 

[Chris Radek]

Yep

 

[Snyder822]

Yep

yay! One less thing to get fixed! Now who wants to try to fix it for me ? lol

 

[gmorse]

Hi Snyder822,

I forgot to mention that when I wind this watch with the included key (that doesn't look early 1800's to me) some of the gears move one way then unwind to the origanal position. This would me the chain is intact like You (Chris) Suggested, right?

When you tried the key, what direction did you wind it? Fusees which wind from the back must be wound anti-clockwise, because the winding square is on the fusee arbor and the chain is wound onto the fusee from the barrel, thus tensioning the spring.

The first wheel in the train, (the 'great wheel'), is attached to the bottom of the fusee and the rest of the train runs from that, but to allow the fusee to be wound without driving the whole train backwards, there's a ratchet and click fitted between the base of the fusee cone and the wheel. This allows winding, but is often neglected during routine servicing because it can be hard to dismantle, and so the click mechanism can fail due to lack of lubrication.

There's a lot to learn about these watches that sets them apart from more modern pieces, especially the fact that broken or missing parts often have to be made from scratch, because there was no concept of standardisation or interchangeability when this was made. That's why, if you do find someone who's willing, (and competent), to restore your watch, and there aren't that many who are, the costs may well surprise you.

Regards,

Graham

 

[John Matthews]

In my opinion this is a good example of an 'imitation English verge' from the first part of the C19th. It has many of the features which enable such watches to be identified for what they are. It is worthy of a place in a collection as it is - the fact that it carries a signature that is purporting to indicate that it was made for well known Liverpool maker, rather than a London maker, adds to it its appeal.

As Graham has stressed, repairing a watch of this type in this condition, would be very expensive, but the watch has value to a collector and is worthy of cleaning and preserving as it is.

John

 

[gmorse]

Hi Snyder822,

One less thing to get fixed! Now who wants to try to fix it for me ?

To be honest, this is really not a recommended way to find a competent restorer for your watch; someone 'having a try' at repairing these without the necessary knowledge and skills can often result in further disasters. Believe me, I've seen enough of it! There are members on your side of the pond who will be able to recommend good repairers from their own experience.

Regards,

Graham