Well, I haven't been on the site in quite a while (busy with kids and job) and now I find myself posting twice in two days. Tomorrow I have the option of buying a Victor Kullberg 2 Day Chronometer locally, and I am hoping that based on these pictures, some of the experts can tell me what to look out for. I don't have a picture of the movement, but will inspect it well before closing a deal. Apparently it was running, but has been sitting in an estate of a collector, and the person selling it has been very accommodating. From the pictures, the box looks like a replacement to me, or it is missing the correct bone/ivory plate on the front with the name and serial number which would typically match the movement. Does this mismatch, or lack of a plate impact the value of the total package greatly? It looks like one from the same batch sold at auction in 2014. http://www.jones-horan.com/1401/html/1401_308-334.htm
I suspect you know that this chronometer was not made by Victor Kullberg, who died in 1890. Kelvin and White were important ships outfitters and most of their chronometers were made by Mercer, which in the 1920's was about equivalent to Kullberg. An 1860 to 1880 Kullberg would be rather more valuable. I do not think the plaques on the box have very much impact. If you want to discuss values explicitly, you can repost in the "What is it worth" forums at the bottom of the screen. (free if you are still an NAWCC Member).
Tom, I don't know about this one, but the Jones Horan #9606 chronometer appears to have a reverse fusee, which I always attributed to Kullberg. I have Wilfred O White 9203 and it is reverse fusee. I believe the Kullberg firm continued until the mid 30's. Ralph
I agree the reverse fusee is a Kullberg feature. But it was the company, not the man who made them in the 20's.
Well, here are some pictures of the movement. Tom is there any way to identify the actual maker? Thank you!
Apartl from Journal articles,Tony Mercer's Chronometer Makers of the World is your best bet to understand early 20th century chronometer makers. It appears that the firm was under the direction of some second generation chronometer makers including Wennerstrom and Lundquist. As I read it, George P. Kullberg was centered on the watch portions of the business. I do not believe they were buying in, but their last top finish at Greenwich was 6673 in 1900.
That balance bridge and fusee dust guard are Kullberg pattern. According to Mercer, Lundquist and Mercer traded things back and forth in the 20th century. As Tom points out, this was after Victor's death. Kelvin and White, like almost all chronometer shops aroundthe world, purchased instruments with their own names on the dial. Mercer balance bridges are wider and "squatter". The question is does it have a plain balance or one of the Kullberg balances. They continued to be made into the early 2oth and I think I read that Mercer used some.
Thank you Tom and Dewey, That is good information. Here are some pictures of the balance. Regards, Grant
One other interesting aspect of this chronometer is its silver balance spring, which usually means that it is non-magnetic. These also had very different temperature characteristics from steel and that might be related to it not having any auxiliary temperature compensation.
Interesting movement Grant, a very unusual balance wheel from what i am used to seeing. Glad you got it.
