MARCKS & co ltd bombay and poona

Re: MARCKS & co ltd bombay and poona

Hi Jeff
In my opinion case is 100% original, one that I personally never saw before.
We have a valid patent which helps date this watch 1910/11 or maybe 1912.
But fits correctly in with early Borgel and Hermetic designs looking for the fully hermetic case - not finally patented (achieved) till 1918(A)/1919(G)

So this is an early piece!

Dial is 100% original, and of course marked with the retailers name.

Conclusion (to me)
A 100% original, rare and quite unique piece.

One that I would want in my collection of early hermetics - and I have a pretty good collection

Adam

 

Re: MARCKS & co ltd bombay and poona

See my answer to Jeff above

The dial is 100% correct and original - it is marked quite correctly for the period with the retailers name.

And India needed "hermetic" watches!

 

Thanks Adam. So your contention (guess) is that the aperture on the back is 100 percent legit? If I am reading things correctly, Mr. Boettcher guess is that it is not. And it does look rather crude in the last pics. I look forward to your further research and welcome others opinions as well.

 

Hi Jeff
No. I do not think "guess" - it is my opinion - no better or worse than your or Davids.
No less valid or "conjecture" than yours or David's

I can not respond for David Boettcher - but MY opinon is as stated in my last two responses. You or anyone else reading this thread must make their own decision.

This watch is in my opinion 100% original, genuine and rare. As I stated below, only close examination under a digital microscope can i add more:

PREVIOUS RESPONSES - UN edited!
I still believe you have something quite unique and original. That outer case has never been modded from pin set!

As David Boettcher said
"But this one appears to be a one off, I don't recall ever seeing another. There are no obvious objections to doing this and one has to wonder why it wasn't done."
Hence my original and current feeling, is the same - this is a rare and unique piece and in my terms a "missing link"
Adam



Hi Jeff
In my opinion case is 100% original, one that I personally never saw before.
We have a valid patent which helps date this watch 1910/11 or maybe 1912.
But fits correctly in with early Borgel and Hermetic designs looking for the fully hermetic case - not finally patented (achieved) till 1918(A)/1919(G)

So this is an early piece!

Dial is 100% original, and of course marked with the retailers name.

Conclusion (to me)
A 100% original, rare and quite unique piece.

One that I would want in my collection of early hermetics - and I have a pretty good collection

Adam

 

Thanks Adam. I did not mean to upset you. you may certainly be correct in your learned guess. However, you may have missed Mr. Boettchers note in the thread. In the normal careful researchers verbiage he acknowledged that it "may" be original but said "my suspicion is that it is most likely the work of an Indian craftsman and watch repairer who has altered the original case to take a working stem set movement that he had on hand". Perhaps you missed that? I look forward to more research on this very cool watch and case.

 

Thanks Jeff and yes I 'may' "be correct"
Firstly, I think we both agree that this watch "merits" further investigation and research.
Possible, not possible without it being in one's hands and having a powerful digital electronic microscope, as I now use on my courses.

I did not miss David's comments.
"my suspicion is that it is most likely the work of an Indian craftsman and watch repairer who has altered the original case to take a working stem set movement that he had on hand".

1) "suspicion" is in my opinion 'conjecture'

2) "Indian craftsman" - I see no evidence if any "Indian" or any other persons modifications to the case

3) Remember these Borgel cases were pin set. Again I reiterate there is no evidence that this case was ever pin-set. Absolutely no marks on the outside nor any old holes on the inside.

The more I respond, the more I am sure this case is 100% original, and it is "I" that should be asking you or David to point out where he believes, that this case was not as it left the Borgel's factory

Finally, This is what Horology is all about, people with experience using their knowledge to give opinions based on that, sometimes we never get a conclusion, some times it takes years.
But separate opinions are allowed, and indeed the normal!

Best
adam

 

Hi Pierre,

Thanks for the new images. I am sorry to be slow in replying but it has been a busy weekend.

The new images reveal the essential features clearly, and show definitively for the first time that this case has not been modified and never had a pin set. The threads inside the case throat continue over the place where a pin set would enter, and the movement carrier ring has only holes for the stem and for the movement location pin: there is no hole for a pin set. This is why I asked for better images, these features weren't visible in the original images. This case has not been modified, my suspicion that it had been modified was wrong and Adam's guess based on the earlier images was correct.

The patent number 51482 appears on many Fontainemelon movements, of this period. I describe it on my page about Fontainemelon at www.vintagewatchstraps.com/fontainemelon.php. It is for a stem setting keyless mechanism.

So the case was made by the Borgel Company to take a stem set movement, and the watch left the factory essentially as it appears today. As I said in an earlier post I don't recall ever seeing another case like this made by the Borgel Company, which is a puzzle. One might think that watches with pin setting looked old fashioned and less attractive than with stem setting.

Making a hole in the case back to allow access to the setting lever screw of a movement with a conventional stem and pull to set movement, and then fitting this with a removable plug, would be an obvious way of fulfilling a demand for stem set watches. There are no obvious objections to doing this and one has to wonder why there aren't more Borgel watches like this around. There seems to have been a reluctance within the Company to alter the original Borgel screw case in even a simple and obvious way like this.

Dating this watch exactly is difficult. The Swiss hallmarks of a single bear and 0.935 allow of quite a range of dates. I would guess a date of circa early 1920s, when we know that the Borgel Company under Louisa Borgel and then the Taubert family were experimenting with new and improved designs. It seems likely that this was an early attempt to improve the original Borgel screw case. That this is the only one which appears to have been seen suggests that the project was quickly abandoned in favour of different or completely new designs. I wonder how many more examples are out there, it seems unlikely that only one was made.

It is an interesting watch. I agree with Adam's conclusion that it is 100% original and rare, and one that I too would like to have an example of in my collection.

Regards, David

 

Excellent reply by David
Thanks your time
Adam

 

Thanks so much Mr. Boettcher! Awesome, detailed and studious response. I cannot wait to see where this research leads! A terrific thread that should be subscribed to by all of us for future findings and additions. Thanks to Pierre, Adam and David!

 

In case anyone is wondering, this is a very nice vote of thanks, particularly to Adam Harris, Jeff Hess and David Böttcher, for all their specialised knowledge and help in solving the mystery of Pierre's old watch, which he never imagined was so special. Thanks also to all who participate in this site.

JTD

 

translation software sez: Never thought my old watch was so special, I have to read full admiration how ADAM HARRIS has solved this secret step by step he left
The puzzle together and this with great knowledge of this type of watch. Thank you for being a ruler in this matter, thanks again !!!

Jeff Hess also led everything to the right and has the knowledge to realistically deal with the fact that this watch may be something special or not. Thanks Jeff

And then Mr. Boettcher who looked over Adam's shoulder and saw that what he did was very good and gave his assurance in this matter that
My watch is something special.
Another thanks to everyone who participated in this forum.
Mannaert PierreThank you Jeff.

 

Very nice post
Thanks

 

First you need to research from adverts of the period where "are" the correct hands - maybe David has a better idea.

Then its a long search on eBay I guess.

And thanks your kind words.
Also to Jeff for keeping the "emotional" parts out!
adam

 

The hands should be a style called "poire squelette", skeleton hands that take lume to match the luminous numbers. I am not sure of the origin of the "poire", I think it might mean the pear shaped swelling at the end of the hour hand. There is an example at www.vintagewatchstraps.com/trenchwatches.php#luminous. They are hard to find, Adam's suggestion of eBay is also the best I know. If anyone knows of a source of these I would love to hear it!

And I second the thanks to Jeff for moderating this post, in all senses of the word.

Regards, David

 

Outstanding reply

 

Uitstekend! Well done.

JTD

 

Its the typical style of a ww1 wrist watch.
So,yes.
Adam

 

Just like that
Leather with fixed lug attachments.
A

 

That would look really nice if it had a new clear crystal. That one is yellowed a crazed from age. Original was probably glass. Peter

 

Hi Pierre,

Not only does it look poor, but if it's a nitro cellulose type it will be producing a corrosive gas as it degrades and that's not doing the hands any good. Best to remove it and replace with something more stable, (ideally glass as Peter has commented). That stuff is also very inflammable!

Regards,

Graham

 

Best bet is to find an old watchmaker who has a cabinet of NOS glass lenses.