- Dec 20, 2007
Re: Another Pre Restoration Wurth
It's a Kienzle
It's a Kienzle
This one was listed as a JUF on Ebay, so I hope I didn't mess up and actually buy a JUF. The serial number 109103 seems high, and I haven't seen fabric in the groove for the dome before. Any info on it would be great!
Looks like it is original then. Still a bit mystified about the suspension bracket. Would have expected the gimbal like Eric's or the C bracket type like the picture enclosed. Forgot I had these two some time ago
Mark, thanks for posting! As already identified, your clock is a Kienzle, back plate is Plate 1435 in the Repair Guide. Based on the serial number it was made in the April-June quarter of 1910. The serial number is a "first indicator" that the clock wasn't made by Würth. Their highest recorded serial number to date is 24341, and the lowest Kienzle serial number is 100465. Würth possibly made more than 25,000 clocks, but so far none have been found with that number or higher. For Kienzle, my data and research shows that their lowest serial number was likely 100001, and so far the highest number found is 187250 (made in 1929).This one was listed as a JUF on Ebay, so I hope I didn't mess up and actually buy a JUF. The serial number 109103 seems high, and I haven't seen fabric in the groove for the dome before. Any info on it would be great!
Mark, that is what I thought your clock had to begin with. However, look closely at bracket No. 18 in the Repair Guide; which is the bracket used for those three clocks. That bracket also forms the base for the Kienzle version of the Huber patent "C" gimbal, that I have designated No. 18C. You will see that the main bracket has more slender legs, and the sides of the main bracket are "stepped" to match the shape of the platform that holds the upper block. The sides of the main bracket on your clock are curved in the same manner as the JUF "C" gimbal bracket No. 15, and appear to possibly extend above the upper block platform. Photos should prove what it is (or isn't).I believe it's the same suspension bracket as postings 258, 262, & 278.
Ming, you are correct. I should have included that point in my list, so I'll go back and edit it. One more difference between Würth clocks and others made by JUF, Hauck, etc that have the ratchet and click on the back plate is that Würth used a stamped ratchet bridge where the others all used a machined or fabricated piece for that part.In addition to those differences mentioned earlier, the Kienzle clock placed main spring ratchet set between two plates while Wurth placed the ratchet outside of back plate. This is my observation, If it is not correct, please let me know.
Mark, Great Job!Finally finished this one. I only wish I could photograph without reflections.
Same serial number? Where and for how much?
Mark, thanks for posting! As already identified, your clock is a Kienzle, back plate is Plate 1435 in the Repair Guide. Based on the serial number it was made in the April-June quarter of 1910. The serial number is a "first indicator" that the clock wasn't made by Würth. Their highest recorded serial number to date is 24341, and the lowest Kienzle serial number is 100465. Würth possibly made more than 25,000 clocks, but so far none have been found with that number or higher. For Kienzle, my data and research shows that their lowest serial number was likely 100001, and so far the highest number found is 187250 (made in 1929).
Actually this clock is what I call a Kienzle masquerading as a Würth. The back story relates to both companies being located in Swenningen not far apart, although in late 1906 Würth moved their offices to Villengen, a short distance away. When Würth started making 400-Day clocks in 1903 Kienzle had already been in Swenningen (as Schlenker & Kienzle) for many years. It may have been Würth's innovation and early success that convinced Kienzle to start making year-clocks in 1907. Kienzle very evidently worked closely with Würth, adopting their patented features for their initial production, and then enabling Würth to do the same. Here are the known features to look for:
In covering these details, I must point out they are all based on observations made from actual clocks known to be made by Kienzle and Würth. We don't know (yet) whether these two companies licensed their improvements to each other or just used a "gentleman's agreement" based on mutual respect and support. Someday we may know the rest of the story.
- The pediment. As seen on this clock, Kienzle copied the general Würth design but did make subtle changes, straightening each end and forming the "T" to be a little wider and thinner. Kienzle used this on all their glass dome clocks documented to date from 1907 to the end of 1910 at which time they introduced their own design that looks for all the world to be a JUF copy. Some Kienzles are found with this "Würth" look-alike to the end of 1911.
- The scalloped edge movement support plate. This plate is virtually identical to the Würth version that was used from their initial production in second half 1903. Kienzle used it from 1908 to 1910 and may have purchased them from Würth. A rounded corner version was used for Kienzle's initial production in 1907 through the January-March quarter of 1908, and their straight edge design was introduced in second half 1910 and used thereafter.
- The Kienzle double ring suspension guard. The Kienzle design with one threaded machine screw plus a fixed pin to position the ring was first used by Kienzle in 1907 and continued through 1910 when using upper bracket No. 14 (Würth patent). Würth adopted this design in mid-1908 (Plate 1423) but changed it in 4th quarter 1908 to eliminate the fixing pin and use two machine screws to hold the rings in place. This design was used by Würth for the remainder of their production until they closed in late 1910. When Kienzle started using the Huber patent "C" gimbal in late 1907, they also used the Huber patent tubular suspension guard. That upper bracket became the only one used in normal production by Kienzle during 1911 and even though the back plates continued to be made to use the ring guard, it was abandoned completely by 1912.
- The No. 14 Gimbal Upper Bracket. This design was patented by Würth in 1906 and used by them for many of their clocks from 1906 to 1910. Kienzle adopted it in 1907 and used it on nearly all their clocks made from then to the end of 1910, phasing it out in favor of the Huber patent "C" gimbal during 1911.
- Front plate escape arbor pivot bridge. This feature was invented by Würth and used from about September 1904 to mid-1908. When Würth started using Plates 1423 and 1427 in 1908, this feature was discontinued. However, Kienzle's first production in 1907 adopted this design and used it for all production of their Graham escapement solid pinion movements until they sold the business to Kern & Link in 1909.
- Winding ratchet, ratchet bridge, click, and click spring. All Würth movements have the winding ratchet, ratchet bridge, click, and click spring mounted on the back plate. This is a key indicator that Plate 1423 and 1427 were made by Würth instead of Kienzle as shown in the Repair Guide. Kienzle rectangular movements do not have a ratchet bridge, but the winding ratchet, click, and click spring are mounted between the front plate and the front of the mainspring barrel. Early Kienzle movements (serial numbers 100001 to 104500) have a leaf type click spring mounted to the inside front plate, later movements have a coil spring between the click and the lower left movement post (viewed from the back). Both Kienzle and Würth round plate front-wind movements have the ratchet, ratchet bridge, click, and click spring mounted on the front plate behind the dial.
- Pallet Inspection Holes. Kienzle introduced these for all their movements starting with their first production in 1907 and continued until production stopped in 1929. Würth adopted them with Plates 1423, 1427, and 1008 from mid-1908 to end 1910.
- Fancy base design. Wurth introduced a fancy, heavy beaded base with brass-plated steel center cap at the beginning of 1904 and continued using it for most of their glass dome clocks to about April-June 1909. This base has a deep concave annular section just below the heavy bead. Kienzle adopted this base design and used it with most of their "Würth look-alike" clocks to the end of 1910, including the clock discussed here. None have been found with later clocks.
- Disc Pendulum. Würth patented multiple varieties of disc pendulum designs including the one found with this clock. The Wurth DRGM is documented to have been around mid-1906, and the pendulum appears with Kienzle clocks from their first production in 1907. These had a snap-fit bottom cover that is frequently lost as with this clock. The cover would have had a serial number identical to the movement number if it was the original pendulum. Kienzle improved the design around 1911, replacing the snap-fit cover with a cover having a "dished" center that could be held on by the nut fixing the disc to the pendulum center shaft. Otherwise the design continued as originally made, including having guide pins on the adjustment weights with corresponding slots in the top of the pendulum disc. I need to point out here that pendulum No. 13 in the Repair Guide is "NOT" by Kienzle, but designed and exclusively used by Würth for about one year from 4th quarter 1908 through third quarter 1909. This pendulum has not been documented with any other maker's clocks.
One point about this clock that is puzzling is the upper suspension bracket. I think I've seen it before but it isn't illustrated in the Repair Guide although a couple of designs are similar. I would very much appreciate close-up photos of the bracket from both sides and the top so it can be documented.
Finally, I think this clock should remain in the Würth thread for educational reasons, to illustrate how to determine if you have a Würth or a Kienzle.
Actually, my view is that this is not an error. One day ago I would also have said it is an error, as I had much earlier concluded about the serial number shown on Plate 1603 in the Repair Guide. However, in review of Adrian's clock and the illustration of Plate 1603 as well as the information in my database, there are multiple reasons to conclude that the serial number is legitimate.I believe that its a mistake that instead of 2 should be 1 so the serial is 17333
Rob, thanks for posting the info and photos of your clock. As Kurt and Eric have already noted it was made by W. Wurth & Co., and Plate 1440 is the correct back plate. That plate is incorrectly identified in the Repair Guide as are ALL of the Wurth back plates, either being shown as by JUF or by Kienzle.Well after looking through quite a few books and a lot of digging online, I have failed to find a clock with the same pendulum as this one. I initially suspected that this might be a Philip Hauck, but now I am thinking it is a JUF.
When you rotate the disc, weights move in and out from the centre and the two indicators show the approximate rate adjustment. I haven't started on this one yet, just wanted to get some background for the customer if possible.
Thoughts? Many thanks in advance.
Rob, thanks very much for posting the internal works photos for the pendulum. One thing that our users can't see without a complete disassembly is the spiral cut plate on the bottom that moves the weights in or out from center. That plate is part of the bottom cover; if one looks closely at the side view and bottom view of the pendulum you can see the knurled edge. That bottom plate can be turned and is what actually changes the position of the three weights to regulate the time.Here is the pendulum in question, as you can see it is made from steel and not much care and attention is paid to appearance or quality. The central wheel has very shallow 'teeth' that engage the shallow pinions of the two arbors that the hands of the indicators are on. There is no need for two of these, and the reason they designed it with two is for symmetry and weight I'm guessing. The two arms that are spring loaded to hold the shallow pinions to the larger wheel are meant to move freely, and in this case they were bent and not functioning properly. The indicator arbors are easily displaced, there is nothing to stop them being lifted out of their lower bearings, and then the indicator will cease to work and sit at an angle. Despite being riveted, they are functional even now, and after adjusting the arms and the clearance for the tension spring, both are moving freely.
Ming, thanks very much for posting the information and photos about your Würth clock. You have done an excellent job of cleaning and preparation, it will be good to see the finished clock when you have it back together.John, I have a piece of data for your record if you did not already have it. I just finished restoring this W. Wurth clock. It is running strong. The back plate is #1603 and the serial number is 11054. It has an adjustable pallets anchor. Inside front and back plates all stamped 44. the pendulum has an aluminum bottom cover which can be ply open. But the serial number was destroyed by some kind of tool. Looks like it was purposely taking off the number. The clock was messed up by previous repairer(s). Anyway, It is restored and running very well. I am very please with the addition especially with the crown pendulum.
Ming, thanks very much for posting the information and photos about your Würth clock. You have done an excellent job of cleaning and preparation, it will be good to see the finished clock when you have it back together.
Based on the serial number your clock was made about April 1907. The back plate you mention is correct. Thanks for the detailed photos of the plates, this will enable our users to see the removable anchor pivot bridge on the front plate that allows you to assemble the movement, do the "click test" to be sure there is little resistance in the gear train, then install the anchor arbor without spreading the plates. Würth introduced this about Sept.-Oct. 1904 and it was present on all their clocks until the end of 1907..
Did you do some work on the dial on your clock? It looks very nice. I acquired a very similar clock and at the time I wasn't really sure who made it. John provided info that it was a Würth dated in 1906.
My Collection has Grown!
My dial seems to be discolored. I've not taken it down for cleaning jus yet, but should be ready to address the dial when the time comes.
Excellent! Great job on restoring your clock and also thanks very much for the detailed photos.These are the photos for completed clock.