Gilbert Parlor Clock

4runnin4life

Registered User
May 19, 2019
6
0
1
31
Country
Everyone,

Here are a few pictures of one of my clocks: a Gilbert parlor/kitchen/mantel clock, which I believe to be circa 1900, based on this website (Dating Antique Clocks By Their Labels And Trademarks) and what's left of the manufacturer's label in the pictures.

This is my first American movement (my two previous clocks are both German, one of which I'm constantly fighting beat issues and the other, a cuckoo, which refuses to run for more than an hour). I paid $35 for the Gilbert and it's been running since I brought it home! The mainspring is worn (sometimes the movement "pops") and I have to wind the movement twice a week instead of once, but it's been reliable otherwise!

I'm mainly posting this just to share, but I'll always welcome additional insight and...
I do question if the hammer is setup correctly... it strikes the outer gong coil and not the base wire like other clocks.

Thanks,

Dan

20190302_133616.jpg 20190302_164136.jpg 20190519_194103.jpg 20190519_194204.jpg 20190519_194254.jpg 20190519_194306.jpg
 

clocks4u

Registered User
NAWCC Member
Sep 2, 2000
682
27
28
Oregon
Country
Region
Your clock looks to be one of the three clocks from the Jewel set. I'd call Jewel it #2. The bad news here is the base looks to be off a Waterbury (Forum) clock and your dial is an obvious replacement. The clock dates to circa 1910.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4runnin4life

owen.or

Registered User
NAWCC Member
Aug 26, 2000
1,168
12
38
Near Portland, Oregon
Country
Region
Dan,
Using a search for "numbers on Gilbert movement" I found some threads which mention the number stamped in the middle of the front plate of many Gilbert movements. According to Steven Thornberry in post #2 from a thread titled "Info on Gilbert Banjo" in May, 2018 "Gilbert began placing the year of manufacture on movements in the early 20th century." Since the movement in your clock shows the number "8", the movement was manufactured in 1908, and the clock was likely manufactured in 1908 or possibly 1909. David, Owen.or
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4runnin4life

Steven Thornberry

User Administrator
Staff member
NAWCC Member
Jan 15, 2004
22,751
1,250
113
Here and there
Country
The clock looks mostly like Pattern No. 12 in Gilbert's Jewel Set. See picture below from the 1910 catalogue, as found in Tran Duy Ly's book on Gilbert clocks.
Jewel Pattern 12.JPG

The base on yours, however, is different, even a considerably lighter color, or so it seems from your picture. I suspect a transplant, more than likely from a Waterbury clock. See below the photo taken from Tran's book on Waterbury clocks, vol.1. The Festus was from roughly the same period and Tran shows a catalogue picture from 1906.
Festus.JPG

The number 18 on the front plate of your movement indicates it was made in 1918; thus the clock would have been produced around that year, possibly later, depending when the movement was cased. The steel plates (rather than brass) are consistent with reserving brass for use in the war effort.

I see a number of us came to similar conclusions.
 

4runnin4life

Registered User
May 19, 2019
6
0
1
31
Country
Your clock looks to be one of the three clocks from the Jewel set. I'd call Jewel it #2. The bad news here is the base looks to be off a Waterbury (Forum) clock and your dial is an obvious replacement. The clock dates to circa 1910.
Thanks, @clocks4u Your description of the base makes sense... it seemed a little off to me. Would you say that Arabic numerals were uncommon for Gilbert back then?

According to Steven Thornberry in post #2 from a thread titled "Info on Gilbert Banjo" in May, 2018 "Gilbert began placing the year of manufacture on movements in the early 20th century." Since the movement in your clock shows the number "8", the movement was manufactured in 1908, and the clock was likely manufactured in 1908 or possibly 1909. David, Owen.or
Thanks, @owen.or That makes a lot of sense and would coincide with the 1910 model date suggested by other posters.

The clock looks mostly like Pattern No. 12 in Gilbert's Jewel Set. See picture below from the 1910 catalogue, as found in Tran Duy Ly's book on Gilbert clocks.
View attachment 533674

The base on yours, however, is different, even a considerably lighter color, or so it seems from your picture. I suspect a transplant, more than likely from a Waterbury clock. See below the photo taken from Tran's book on Waterbury clocks, vol.1. The Festus was from roughly the same period and Tran shows a catalogue picture from 1906.
View attachment 533675

The number 18 on the front plate of your movement indicates it was made in 1918; thus the clock would have been produced around that year, possibly later, depending when the movement was cased. The steel plates (rather than brass) are consistent with reserving brass for use in the war effort.

I see a number of us came to similar conclusions.
Thanks, @Steven Thornberry I will have to double-check the stamp on the movement, as I believe it is simply "8"... which would put the movement manufacturing date just before the 1910 catalogue. Would you be kind enough to check for a model no. 1207 in your book and post a picture if available? My analysis of the poor-condition label on my clock looks like a "1207" to me... although the model 1239 image you've posted is the closest likeness to my clock that I've seen to date.
 

Steven Thornberry

User Administrator
Staff member
NAWCC Member
Jan 15, 2004
22,751
1,250
113
Here and there
Country
I will have to double-check the stamp on the movement, as I believe it is simply "8"... which would put the movement manufacturing date just before the 1910 catalogue. Would you be kind enough to check for a model no. 1207 in your book and post a picture if available? My analysis of the poor-condition label on my clock looks like a "1207" to me... although the model 1239 image you've posted is the closest likeness to my clock that I've seen to date.
The 1239 is simply the illustration in Tran and has nothing to do with the model name. That said, however, Gilbert is known to have assigned numbers as well as names to some of their models. I can't verify as much for the Pattern No. 12. It's a pity that label is not in better condition, and some words and seem to me to have been filled in/"clarified" by someone after the fact.

As for the date, below is an edited version of your second attachment from the left. It seems to show an "18," whereas in photo number 4, the numeral "1" seems obscured by the suspension spring.
gilbert_LI.jpg
 

4runnin4life

Registered User
May 19, 2019
6
0
1
31
Country
The 1239 is simply the illustration in Tran and has nothing to do with the model name. That said, however, Gilbert is known to have assigned numbers as well as names to some of their models. I can't verify as much for the Pattern No. 12. It's a pity that label is not in better condition, and some words and seem to me to have been filled in/"clarified" by someone after the fact.

As for the date, below is an edited version of your second attachment from the left. It seems to show an "18," whereas in photo number 4, the numeral "1" seems obscured by the suspension spring.
View attachment 533689
Good call Steven! I had forgotten about that attachment. I like the factoid regarding steel plates and brass reserves for the war effort.
 

clocks4u

Registered User
NAWCC Member
Sep 2, 2000
682
27
28
Oregon
Country
Region
Your dial should have Roman numerals. It also should have a beauty ring at the center of the dial (see the picture Steve provided above). The replaced paper dial may be covering the holes that the ring attaches to. If you look from the back and see no holes, the pan is also a later replacement.
 

owen.or

Registered User
NAWCC Member
Aug 26, 2000
1,168
12
38
Near Portland, Oregon
Country
Region
I wondered about a 1908 clock with steel plates because I had read or heard somewhere that they were most likely to be manufactured during the WWI because, as Steven stated, brass was being reserved for the war effort. 1918 certainly makes much more sense. David, Owen.or
 
  • Like
Reactions: Steven Thornberry

Steven Thornberry

User Administrator
Staff member
NAWCC Member
Jan 15, 2004
22,751
1,250
113
Here and there
Country
I do question if the hammer is setup correctly... it strikes the outer gong coil and not the base wire like other clocks.
I can't see your set up very well, but it appears that the coil has broken from its original attachment and subsequently been attached directly to the gong base with solder or some such. If so, I can imagine it being thought to be a weak attachment, and that striking on the base wire might put too much pressure on it resulting in another breakage. I would have expected the coil to be attached to a brass or other metal collet and attached to the gong base by a screw, like the one below, which, albeit, is from a somewhat earlier Gilbert clock.

Jet Movement.JPG

So far as the dial is concerned, it could well be a replacement, but I have seen dials with Arabic numerals where the catalogue pictures of the subject clock show Roman numerals. Perhaps a choice was possible, though I cannot rule out someone wanting a dial with numbers he or she was familiar with and having it changed after purchase. Since this clock appears to be from 1918 or later, perhaps Gilbert was using Arabic numerals in great part. The dial does seem to have some age. There seem to be no additional screw holes on the dial mounting board suggesting another dial was there.
 
Know Your NAWCC Forums Rules!
RULES & GUIDELINES

Find member

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
161,012
Messages
1,396,899
Members
82,978
Latest member
cjs3
Encyclopedia Pages
1,099
Total wiki contributions
2,788
Last edit
How to wire a 24 volt secondary for a 12 volt ITR/IBM Master clock system by Toughtool