Need help figuring out brand for this empty clock case

[Gage_robertson_collector]

Hello,

I recently acquired a large collection of clocks and one of them was this empty case. I would like to determine which brand it would have been originally so I can figure out which parts I would need to purchase for it to work. No markings on the case. Also, the bottom and back panel(s) are both missing, and I do not see screw holes on the wood behind the dial where the movement would have been mounted, which tells me it was most likely mounted to the back panel. I have sort of canceled out Seth Thomas because the case is judt enamel not Adamantine and I think Ansonia, becuase they did not make wooden cases at all from what I can tell. My gut it telling me it was a Waterbury at one point, but I would just like to see if anyone could find this model to really confirm this. I am not one to abandon cases no matter how rough or neglected they are, so I would like to make sure this case gets restored PROPERLY. Thank you very much for your help,

Gage

 

[tracerjack]

The spacing of the dial winding arbor holes might help identify the maker. The dial also suggests an open escapement, although the center may have been simply a brass shield. If you get little response here, you might ask the moderator to move it to the general discussions forum.

 

[Gage_robertson_collector]

The spacing of the dial winding arbor holes might help identify the maker. The dial also suggests an open escapement, although the center may have been simply a brass shield. If you get little response here, you might ask the moderator to move it to the general discussions forum.

I am not at home now to check, but I am pretty sure there was no writing of maker underneath the winding holes last time I looked. How do I go about contacting the moderator to move my thread? Thank you,

- Gage

 

[Gage_robertson_collector]

The spacing of the dial winding arbor holes might help identify the maker. The dial also suggests an open escapement, although the center may have been simply a brass shield. If you get little response here, you might ask the moderator to move it to the general discussions forum.

what is also interesting, I might add, is that the columns would appear to be something similar to that of Adamantine, or plastic, but the rest of the case is flaky enamel paint. So that’s why I am stumped as to it being seth thomas. You would think they would have made the whole case with adamantine, not just the columns.

 

[new2clocks]

How do I go about contacting the moderator to move my thread?

Click on the REPORT button within any of your posts on this thread and ask to have this thread moved.

The REPORT button takes you directly to a moderator.

Regards.

 

[tracerjack]

I am not at home now to check, but I am pretty sure there was no writing of maker underneath the winding holes last time I looked. How do I go about contacting the moderator to move my thread? Thank you,

- Gage

No, I meant the distance between the arbor holes is often specific to a maker. Also the distance from the center arbor to the winding arbors will help narrow down potential movements. I assumed the case was wood. Mounting on the back board would surprise me.

 

[Steven Thornberry]

The positions of the winding arbor holes seem right for an Ingraham. I don't see a hole for a speed adjustment arbor; so, the missing center portion of the dial could have had a horizontal slot for Ingraham's thumbwheel regulator. I could not find a similar case in Tran's book on Ingraham clocks, however. So, this is completely a guess, and I don't know that I can completely rule out others.

 

[Gage_robertson_collector]

The positions of the winding arbor holes seem right for an Ingraham. I don't see a hole for a speed adjustment arbor; so, the missing center portion of the dial could have had a horizontal slot for Ingraham's thumbwheel regulator. I could not find a similar case in Tran's book on Ingraham clocks, however. So, this is completely a guess, and I don't know that I can completely rule out others.

Well thank you kindly for looking, I very much appreciate it.

 

[Gage_robertson_collector]

No, I meant the distance between the arbor holes is often specific to a maker. Also the distance from the center arbor to the winding arbors will help narrow down potential movements. I assumed the case was wood. Mounting on the back board would surprise me.

I did not know that. Interesting! I have an Ingraham Reverie and the movement is actually mounted to the back board, terrible design in my opinion, but it is original to the case. It is an earl model, so maybe it was some experimenting they were trying early on. Anyway like I said thank you for your help,

Gage

 

[tracerjack]

Since you have an Ingraham mounted on the backboard, you might check that movement's arbor placement dimensions to see if they are a match for your dial. Too bad the bottom board is missing. A slot at the front side for the pendulum would clearly point to Ingraham.

 

[Gage_robertson_collector]

Since you have an Ingraham mounted on the backboard, you might check that movement's arbor placement dimensions to see if they are a match for your dial. Too bad the bottom board is missing. A slot at the front side for the pendulum would clearly point to Ingraham.

Yes I agree. When I return home, I will check this. Thanks again!

 

[Steven Thornberry]

At Gage’s request, I have moved this thread to the General Clock Discussions forum.

 

[Gage_robertson_collector]

At Gage’s request, I have moved this thread to the General Clock Discussions forum.

thank you very much

 

[Arthur Cagle]

Gage, I checked Tran's Ingraham, Ansonia (which did make wooden cases), Welch, New Haven, Sessions, Gilbert, Waterbury and Seth Thomas books, and didn't see a match. Does the case look like it had feet or side ornaments?

 

[Willie X]

The 'tip off' (for me) would be the single, fat, tall and simple collums. But all the companies made a ton of variations on these clocks.

I think Sessions changed there cases on a weekly basis!

Willie X

 

[Gage_robertson_collector]

Gage, I checked Tran's Ingraham, Ansonia (which did make wooden cases), Welch, New Haven, Sessions, Gilbert, Waterbury and Seth Thomas books, and didn't see a match. Does the case look like it had feet or side ornaments?

I do not believe it did

 

[Gage_robertson_collector]

The 'tip off' (for me) would be the single, fat, tall and simple collums. But all the companies made a ton of variations on these clocks.

I think Sessions changed there cases on a weekly basis!

Willie X

haha

 

[Arthur Cagle]

I do not believe it did

If you look at Tran's Ansonia book, you'll see many wooden cases, page after page of them.

 

[Arthur Cagle]

If you look at Tran's Ansonia book, you'll see many wooden cases, page after page of them.

Sorry, Gage, I misread your post. That case will most likely remain a mystery unless someone on the forum has that one with a movement.

 

[Gage_robertson_collector]

Since you have an Ingraham mounted on the backboard, you might check that movement's arbor placement dimensions to see if they are a match for your dial. Too bad the bottom board is missing. A slot at the front side for the pendulum would clearly point to Ingraham.

Okay, I measured the distance of the arobor holes from each other, and the winding arbors of the other Ingraham movement and they match perfectly. Also, the other Ingraham I have with the rear panel mounted movement never had a bottom, and after looking at the bottom of the empty case, it doesn’t look like it ever did either. So I think this concluded the mystery, the empty case was originally made by Ingraham. Now to find a movement for it, and rebuild the missing back panel!

 

[Thomas Sanguigni]

You can contact Merritts antique clock division, and ask them if they have an old movement. There should be an abundance of old movements there.

 

[Gage_robertson_collector]

You can contact Merritts antique clock division, and ask them if they have an old movement. There should be an abundance of old movements there.

Thank you for the advice I will do that.

 

[Arthur Cagle]

Gage, I just saw a rear mount Ingraham movement offered on eBay.

 

[Thomas Sanguigni]

Make sure to tell Merritts you want a good, rebuildable unit. I would use Merritts before Fleabay. There could be lots of hidden damage, and Gage is just starting out in Horology. Remember front mount not rear. It is a mantel clock. The mounting plates should be on the same side as the cannon pinion.

 

[tracerjack]

Make sure to tell Merritts you want a good, rebuildable unit. I would use Merritts before Fleabay. There could be lots of hidden damage, and Gage is just starting out in Horology. Remember front mount not rear. It is a mantel clock. The mounting plates should be on the same side as the cannon pinion.

Like you, I would expect a front mount in a mantel clock, but Gage indicated there were no screw holes on the inside front and actually owns a different Ingraham mantel whose movement is mounted on the back board. Ever since that post, I’ve been curious as to how it was done that way, since it would seem so cumbersome to have to take the movement out with the backboard. I don’t expect Gage to take his clock apart just to satisfy my curiosity, but I’m still stuck trying to envision what it might look like. I have come to the conclusion though, that the case would have to be quite shallow.

 

[Thomas Sanguigni]

Thanks Tracerjack sorry Art. I did not catch that. It might be good to get a lot more photographs to see what Gage is up against. The case does not look all that shallow in the photo.

 

[tracerjack]

No, it doesn’t. Perhaps closer inspection of the interior might help.

Thanks Tracerjack sorry Art. I did not catch that. It might be good to get a lot more photographs to see what Gage is up against. The case does not look all that shallow in the photo.

No, it doesn’t look very shallow to me either. Perhaps another inspection and yes photos of the interior would help.

 

[Steven Thornberry]

If a back mounted movement, possibly mounted like the one in this thread.

e.Ingraham Information. | NAWCC Forums

 

[demoman3955]

Thank you for the advice I will do that.

If yours is a rear mount. For at least the last 5 years, ive had an Ingraham movement but nothing for it to go into. I couldnt get myself to get rid of it, because if i even look at it wrong, it wants to run. I put a pendulum on it and it keeps running, but im not sure if the suspension spring is the correct length, because i just put on on without knowing what it came out of. It may be what you are looking for though, because its rear mounted. Its not the cleanest movement ive even seen, but it runs like its no bodies business. its 3-1/8 between the arbors, and 2 to the middle where the hands go. I dont see a way to adjust it though. I couldnt tell from your photos if there was a speed adjusting hole in the front.
I wonder if it could have been an open escapement.

 

[Dave T]

From that picture, I can't see that it would be anything but a front mount. The proportion of the sides to the front would indicate that it's most likely at least 4 or 5 inches minimum.

 

[tracerjack]

If a back mounted movement, possibly mounted like the one in this thread.

e.Ingraham Information. | NAWCC Forums

Thank you so much for that link. My curiosity is completely satisfied. I never thought about the backboard having an extension in order to position the movement towards the dial. Neat!

 

[rmarkowitz1_cee4a1]

It's a derelict common unmarked black mantel case. Does it really matter which movement is placed in the case as long as the winding arbors line up with the holes and it runs?

Not sure what all the hubbub is about.

Ok, I'm ready for the harangue.

RM

 

[tracerjack]

It's a derelict common unmarked black mantel case. Does it really matter which movement is placed in the case as long as the winding arbors line up with the holes and it runs?

Not sure what all the hubbub is about.

Ok, I'm ready for the harangue.

RM

In the grand scheme, no it’s not important. But, I assumed it was to the OP.

 

[demoman3955]

In the grand scheme, no it’s not important. But, I assumed it was to the OP.

I view it as more of the interest of knowing, and making it as close to original as possible, but im pretty sure the cost will over run the value, but i do that all the time with many thing. I do have to wonder why hes not wanting to post pics...lol

 

[Steven Thornberry]

It's a derelict common unmarked black mantel case. Does it really matter which movement is placed in the case as long as the winding arbors line up with the holes and it runs?

Not sure what all the hubbub is about.

Ok, I'm ready for the harangue.

RM

It's not unheard of for different persons to have different interests. Let the young man have his. Top of the first post, right of center, is the word "IGNORE." Click on that to put any thread that does not interest you on your ignore list. It will noy show up in your Forum List.

 

[rmarkowitz1_cee4a1]

It's not unheard of for different persons to have different interests. Let the young man have his. Top of the first post, right of center, is the word "IGNORE." Click on that to put any thread that does not interest you on your ignore list. It will noy show up in your Forum List.

Typical and very expected response.

And therein lies the problem.

RM

 

[Steven Thornberry]

Typical and expected response.

RM

Ditto.

 

[Thomas Sanguigni]

I certainly hope Gage can take his new clock, and even though it is a challenge, make it into a viable operating clock. I have rescued many a clock from the isle of misfit clocks. There is a certain charm, and a lot of education for a young man to gain. As a group of old fuddy duddy clocksmiths, we need more people like Gage.

 

[rmarkowitz1_cee4a1]

I certainly hope Gage can take his new clock, and even though it is a challenge, make it into a viable operating clock. I have rescued many a clock from the isle of misfit clocks. There is a certain charm, and a lot of education for a young man to gain. As a group of old fuddy duddy clocksmiths, we need more people like Gage.

Certainly curiosity and even a desire to tinker are welcomed.

But when I and my peers were "coming up" in the hobby, and even now, it was really about learning about clocks, their movements, their makers and their stories, the case styles, best repair and restoration practices, connoisseurship, if you will, and so on.

And yes, sometimes we would study an interesting empty case because it was of an uncommon type or of an unusual style or once contained a rare movement, etc. As an example, a knowledgeable collector recently shared with me and a few others a most wonderful empty unlabeled miniature P&S case which once contained a miniature Ives time only weight driven movement: VERY rare. By the way, I bet if were posted on the MB, it would get just a few views, a handful of responses at best, and then be quickly buried the same day.

Call me a fuddy duddy if you like. But I don't subscribe to the notion that everything is valid because it's posted here. Sort of like when everyone in a kindergarten class gets an award when they graduate.

I do realize now the trend is that everything has to be validated and any attempt to suggest otherwise is frowned upon.

Is it very subjective? Yes. But as one moderator has said frequently, we're all entitled to our opinions.

And I'm not going to ignore posts. I will comment as I see fit and when I'm feeling resilient enough. Again, as one moderator has said frequently, we're all entitled to our opinions.

RM

 

[Thomas Sanguigni]

RM, I myself am in the old fuddy duddy club too. You should be ballsy enough to post your rare Ives time only. IF it does get buried, at least it is archived for others that follow. I have posted clocks I rebuilt from pure trash, and they only get a few views. At least, it may be an inspiration to a young clocksmith just starting out.

I am with you on constant validation of the young. Not everyone is a winner, but in our day, that is what made people tough. They did not want to be a loser, and it taught people to reach inward to become strong people and leaders. Opinions do shape our world, but they can also cut. I look forward to your Ives entry.

 

[demoman3955]

RM, I myself am in the old fuddy duddy club too. You should be ballsy enough to post your rare Ives time only. IF it does get buried, at least it is archived for others that follow. I have posted clocks I rebuilt from pure trash, and they only get a few views. At least, it may be an inspiration to a young clocksmith just starting out.

I am with you on constant validation of the young. Not everyone is a winner, but in our day, that is what made people tough. They did not want to be a loser, and it taught people to reach inward to become strong people and leaders. Opinions do shape our world, but they can also cut. I look forward to your Ives entry.

Im here more often then id like to admit. Its more about learning and seeing what others are doing and going through. I know virtually nothing about most clocks, yet found "experts" that make a living repairing clocks seem to either have a bad attitude or cant fix one simple clock that i have. That being said, i take everything with a grain of salt, and look at many opinions and take what i can from all of them.

 

[rmarkowitz1_cee4a1]

RM, I myself am in the old fuddy duddy club too. You should be ballsy enough to post your rare Ives time only. IF it does get buried, at least it is archived for others that follow. I have posted clocks I rebuilt from pure trash, and they only get a few views. At least, it may be an inspiration to a young clocksmith just starting out.

I am with you on constant validation of the young. Not everyone is a winner, but in our day, that is what made people tough. They did not want to be a loser, and it taught people to reach inward to become strong people and leaders. Opinions do shape our world, but they can also cut. I look forward to your Ives entry.

Alas, Ives P&S isn’t mine, so not mine to post.

Speaking of Ives, I have recently posted one of his mirror clocks…it’s buried somewhere. Shared many pix & research. Consider it typical of my postings of a # of types of clocks I have been “ballsy” enough to post & watch sink.

RM

 

[Thomas Sanguigni]

39 replies with a 1000 views does not sound buried and ignored. One of my resto projects had 6 replies 216 views.

 

[tracerjack]

My opinion is that the entire lower portion of this thread is completely useless to the original poster.

 

[rmarkowitz1_cee4a1]

39 replies with a 1000 views does not sound buried and ignored. One of my resto projects had 6 replies 216 views.

What thread was that?

RM

 

[Gage_robertson_collector]

Thanks Tracerjack sorry Art. I did not catch that. It might be good to get a lot more photographs to see what Gage is up against. The case does not look all that shallow in the photo.

more photos!!

 

[Dave T]

So what are the dimensions of that case?

 

[Willie X]

I worked on a similar clock about a year ago. It had the usual back board with the grain running horizontally and as thick as the datos at the sides. Attached to the back board was a very thick and large block of wood with the grain running
vertically. The clock feet were attached to this block with the usual 4 wood screws.

Disregard if you already have this info.

Willie X

 

[Schatznut]

Nothing of value to add, but Gage, my hat is off to you for caring enough to take on this project and salvage an orphan! I'm sure it will look proud when you get it finished.

 

[Paul Arsenault]

Can't wait to see the finished project