Waltham Sweep Second Model & E Howard #1 Banjo Clock

Discussion in 'Your Newest Clock Acquisition' started by George Schuetz, May 18, 2020.

  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  1. George Schuetz

    George Schuetz Registered User
    NAWCC Member

    Apr 28, 2016
    31
    3
    8
    Male
    Retired Prosthodontist
    Charlotte, NC area
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    I would appreciate some feedback about this clock which is new to me as of Feb 2020. The movement is marked “Waltham Clock Co. Sweep Second Model”. See picture. I think that this clock started life as an E. Howard #1 Banjo Clock. The size is the same as a #1 and the shape of the case is the same as a #1. I think that at some time in its life someone skillfully fitted the Waltham movement with a sweep second hand. Another curious thing is the “secondary winder” at the 9 o’clock location. What’s it for? While examining the clock case I found a “trap door” in the bottom of the pendulum box. Check out the picture. Could it be that for some unknown reason the “skillful horologist” that fitted the Waltham movement wanted to be able to adjust the weight drop. The weight drop could be adjusted using the “secondary winder” after opening the “trap door” on the bottom of the case. This clock came from the Andy & Bea Copeland Collection in Texas. When I set up the movement to test run it the movement was seized – not because it was dirty – but because there is insufficient end play for the arbors. I loosened the pillar screws a half turn and, bingo, all parts of the movement turned freely. I look forward to your feedback. Thank you.


    01.JPG 02.JPG 03.jpg 04.jpg 05.jpg 06.jpg 07.jpg 08.jpg 09.JPG
     
  2. bruce linde

    bruce linde Technical Admin
    NAWCC Member

    Nov 13, 2011
    6,569
    739
    113
    oakland, ca.
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    i would say:

    - the movement and case did not start life together (yes, i'm just that good! ;))

    - the waltham logo is factory... the 'sweep second model' was stamped by a subsequent owner... who was less than careful about centering, or aligning letters on a uniform baseline

    - the second winder thing is bizarre... but leads me to think you will find that it does not run for a full eight days... hence the trap door for more weight drop

    when you can, would you please post clock dimensions and let us know how long it actually runs? a #1 would have been roughly 50 X 19 1/2 X 6 inches, with a 12 1/2" dial.

    (also... if it were mine, i would immediately remove the second winder thing, patch the second winder hole in the dial, and get the dial repainted (already a repaint, so no big deal)... and get tom moberg to re-do the glasses to something more (sorry!) attractive.)
     
  3. Andy Dervan

    Andy Dervan Registered User
    Gibbs Literary Award NAWCC Star Fellow NAWCC Member

    Oct 23, 2002
    2,504
    61
    48
    Male
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    I do not believe that is a movement from Waltham Clock Co. It is very crude and Waltham Clock Co. never signed their movements like it. I have seen phony Waltham banjo movements.

    See my article on Waltham Clock Company in April 2005 NAWCC Watch and Clock Bulletin that I provide examples of correct Waltham Clock Co. movements.

    Andy Dervan
     
  4. gleber

    gleber Registered User

    Jun 15, 2015
    1,732
    193
    63
    Male
    Underwater Robotics Expert
    Downingtown, Pennsylvania USA
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    It would be nice to see the movement from the right side (facing the clock). The right hand arbor looks like is has sustaining power and was probably the original. Does it have a standard size drum? Which all makes me thing the outrigger was added, but... why? Definitely a conversation starter.

    Tom
     
  5. George Schuetz

    George Schuetz Registered User
    NAWCC Member

    Apr 28, 2016
    31
    3
    8
    Male
    Retired Prosthodontist
    Charlotte, NC area
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    Hello Tom, thanks for posting comments. Attached are two pictures of the movement from the right side (facing the clock). Let me know if you can see what you are looking for. As for the size of the drum – I can’t help with that one. I have some other Waltham banjo clocks and this drum looks larger. What do you think? Another item that I forgot to mention in the original post is that I think this movement has a deadbeat escapement. I’m attaching 2 pictures of it – what’s your opinion?


    10.JPG 11.JPG 12.jpg 13.JPG
     
  6. brian fisher

    brian fisher Registered User
    NAWCC Member

    Jan 20, 2017
    1,468
    326
    83
    houston, tx
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    that winding arbor looks to me like it was removed from the going train of a good sized hall clock. i've not seen one like that in any banjo. i'm pretty sure i attended this auction about 3 months ago? i remember a big banjo similar to this hanging on the wall. if i remember right, my sensei mentioned that he thought it would have been originally faux painted to look like rosewood? i also remember prices at that sale were not cheap.
     
  7. gleber

    gleber Registered User

    Jun 15, 2015
    1,732
    193
    63
    Male
    Underwater Robotics Expert
    Downingtown, Pennsylvania USA
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    As I suspected, you movement is set up with sustaining power. Here is a photo of my Waltham with a similar set up (logo is in the upper right, but hard to see without zooming in and even then, it is a little blurry). Mine is also a deadbeat.

    20190507_195017.jpg 20190507_195414.jpg

    I suspect at one point in the life of this movement, it was the only winding arbor and like other clocks, completely traditional.

    After pondering the "why" question about the outrigger, the only hypothesis I can come up with is to try to extend the run time:
    • If a clock weight is hung directly, the length of cord unwound (and run time) is equal to the height of the drop.
    • If you add a single compounding pulley, the length of run is 2 times the height of the drop (you need to double the weight).
    • So by adding a second pulley above the movement, was the owner trying to add additional run time by compounding the section above the clock rather than having the cord hard mounted to the seat board?
    It sounds like a good theory (at first), but the only way it would work is if the outrigger arbor also provided power somehow. If it is wound in its present state, how would it unwind and provide any power to the movement? It is essentially the same as if it was hard mounted and the upper compounding pulley would have no value since the cord would never unwind from the outrigger. Was it made by someone who thought they had a good idea, but didn't realize it would not help?

    Maybe Bruce is right about the trap door? If it is open, the run time can be extended. In that situation, when winding, the cord could be released from the outrigger and all wound on the movement's winding arbor and take full advantage of all of the cord. If the trap door was closed, the excess cord length not needed could be wound on the outrigger. But again... Why?

    This is indeed a puzzle.

    Tom
     
    Jmeechie likes this.
  8. brian fisher

    brian fisher Registered User
    NAWCC Member

    Jan 20, 2017
    1,468
    326
    83
    houston, tx
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    Hmmm.... some good points there tom. I am also unable to look at the photos and grasp any advantage to the shenanigans installed with this movement

    Do you have a lathe George?

    If you were to re-make the winding barrel to a smaller diameter....say .75” to 1” or so, that should greatly extend your run time. It will reduce your mechanical advantage though. Perhaps it might need a heavier weight.
     
  9. George Schuetz

    George Schuetz Registered User
    NAWCC Member

    Apr 28, 2016
    31
    3
    8
    Male
    Retired Prosthodontist
    Charlotte, NC area
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    Hello Bruce, thanks for your response to my post. I would like to confirm that the measurements of this clock are roughly 50 X 19 1/2 X 6 inches. The diameter of the metal dial is 12.75 inches. The OD of the wooden dial bezel is 15.25 inches. I cannot tell you how long it runs because it’s still “on the bench” awaiting its first test run. I’m not inclined to remove the “side winder” because it’s part of this clock’s history. If you would like to see any additional pictures just let me know and I’ll get them for you.
     
  10. Jmeechie

    Jmeechie Registered User
    NAWCC Member

    Dec 8, 2010
    197
    17
    18
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    Hi,
    I too have been pondering the outrigger winding attachment!?!? and agree with Tom’s comments above.
    In chronological order, I believe these were the modifications:
    1st the additional winding setup (on the left) was Added trying to extend the run time to whatever amount they were looking for. They discovered once wound they had to manually unwind ? as I don’t see some form of letdown attachment? It looks to be nothing more than a winding assembly (arbor, drum and reduced gear) attached to a bracket.
    At that point the 2nd decision was to add the trapdoor to allow full drop of the weight!
    Had they understood a pulley system, the additional pulley above the in-line with the lower would have reduced the distance of the weights drop!
    I’m curious as to the pendulum length (gearing change) to suit the case vs 8 day weight drop? Modified?
    Again, failure as there’s no point in the door as they just needed the opening!
    Just my thoughts.
    Cheers,
    James
     
  11. George Schuetz

    George Schuetz Registered User
    NAWCC Member

    Apr 28, 2016
    31
    3
    8
    Male
    Retired Prosthodontist
    Charlotte, NC area
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    Hello James, thanks for responding to my post. The pendulum length, suspension spring to tip is 42 inches. I won’t know the 8-day weight drop until I have the clock running. I will post that when I know it. Thanks very much for your observations, comments, and suggestions. I appreciate it. George


    14.JPG 15.JPG
     
    Jmeechie likes this.
  12. George Schuetz

    George Schuetz Registered User
    NAWCC Member

    Apr 28, 2016
    31
    3
    8
    Male
    Retired Prosthodontist
    Charlotte, NC area
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    James, et al - The pendulum bob diameter is approximately 4.5 inches. The bob weight is 2 pounds 6 ounces.


    16.JPG 17.JPG
     
  13. George Schuetz

    George Schuetz Registered User
    NAWCC Member

    Apr 28, 2016
    31
    3
    8
    Male
    Retired Prosthodontist
    Charlotte, NC area
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    Hello all, while we’re at measurements and weights I thought I’d show you the weight for this clock as well as an original weight from an E Howard #1 banjo clock. The weight for this clock weighs 9lbs 12ozs. The weight for the #1 is smaller.


    18.JPG 19.JPG Weight #1.jpg
     
  14. Andy Dervan

    Andy Dervan Registered User
    Gibbs Literary Award NAWCC Star Fellow NAWCC Member

    Oct 23, 2002
    2,504
    61
    48
    Male
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    George -

    Waltham Clock Co. did not make that movement. It made much higher quality movement and would never punch out information like that on a movement.

    Take a look at my April 2005 Watch and Clock Bulletin article on the company to see examples of legitimate Waltham Clock Co. movements.

    Andy Dervan
     
  15. Jim DuBois

    Jim DuBois Registered User
    NAWCC Member Sponsor

    Jun 14, 2008
    2,823
    565
    113
    Male
    Magnolia, TX
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    Andy, while I am in full agreement that Waltham did not add the punched in description, it appears the movement is a real Waltham sweep second hand movement, much like the one pictured in your Bulletin piece. It is too bad that Uncle Fix-it had his way with the case and the movement. It is difficult to ascertain what he had in mind other than a minor nightmare? From the clues seen it seems the movement and case did not start life together. Hence the many kluges seen attempting to make it something that is was not. A guess, and it is just that, was the movement came out of a regulator case and got re-homed.

    waltham sweep seconds.jpg
     
  16. George Schuetz

    George Schuetz Registered User
    NAWCC Member

    Apr 28, 2016
    31
    3
    8
    Male
    Retired Prosthodontist
    Charlotte, NC area
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    Hello Jim, thanks very much for posting your opinion. I am in agreement with all that you said. I haven’t been able to find any information online about Waltham Sweep Second Movements. I don’t have a copy of Andy’s April 2005 article – wish I did. As you say, I wonder what Uncle Fix-It was thinking of when he cannibalized the E Howard #1 case. I would also like to know what the Waltham SS Movement looked like in the case that it was originally in. What did the whole clock look like? What year was the Waltham movement made, got any idea? Thanks again for taking the time to enlighten me. George
     
  17. Jim DuBois

    Jim DuBois Registered User
    NAWCC Member Sponsor

    Jun 14, 2008
    2,823
    565
    113
    Male
    Magnolia, TX
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    The entire article done by Andy is an excellent read and is available at no charge to all NAWCC members. It does show a lot of Waltham clocks. I can't with a clear conscience download copyright materials, in this case, the entire document, contrary to that "right." Given your interest, you might consider membership in the organization. I think new memberships are available at reduced rates these days?
     
  18. George Schuetz

    George Schuetz Registered User
    NAWCC Member

    Apr 28, 2016
    31
    3
    8
    Male
    Retired Prosthodontist
    Charlotte, NC area
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    Hi Jim, I am a member of the NAWCC. Member Number 0017941. George
     
  19. Jim DuBois

    Jim DuBois Registered User
    NAWCC Member Sponsor

    Jun 14, 2008
    2,823
    565
    113
    Male
    Magnolia, TX
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    Glad to hear that. Sorry I was not aware, could I suggest adding that to your profile?

    You will need to sign into the nawcc.org. to access this document. After doing that, go here https://docs.nawcc.org/Bulletins/2000/articles/2005/355/355_193.pdf Andy's entire document with a lot of previously unavailable stuff is there, including a couple of candidates case wise for your movement.
     
  20. George Schuetz

    George Schuetz Registered User
    NAWCC Member

    Apr 28, 2016
    31
    3
    8
    Male
    Retired Prosthodontist
    Charlotte, NC area
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    05-21-20 @ 11:09 AM
    04.jpg E Howard #1.jpg
    Hello Bruce, I want to say that my clock, which started life as an E. Howard #1 Banjo clock and which now has a Waltham deadbeat movement, will be called the Copeland clock going forward. That being said I don’t want to put glass in it that resembles the E Howard #1. I don't want anyone to think it's still a #1. I’m quite satisfied, at least for now, with the glass that’s in it now. Thanks very much for your reply to my post. I appreciate your effort. Attached is a picture of the Copeland Clock next to an E. Howard #1. George
     
  21. George Schuetz

    George Schuetz Registered User
    NAWCC Member

    Apr 28, 2016
    31
    3
    8
    Male
    Retired Prosthodontist
    Charlotte, NC area
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    Waltham Clock Company
    By Andrew H. Dervan
    April 2005 NAWCC Bulletin


    Jun 5, 1894
    Waltham Electric Clock Co directors voted to change the business name to Waltham Clock Co

    Feb 27, 1914
    Waltham Clock Co becomes Waltham Watch Co

    Hint about “Trap Door”
    Waltham movements with Graham deadbeat escapements are: Standard Regulator, Office Regulator, and Dining Room Regulator. On page 198 of the April 2005 NAWCC Bulletin author Dervan says that the Waltham Regulators are between 57 and 94 inches tall. The E. Howard #1 is 50 inches tall. It, therefore, might be that the person who fitted the Waltham Clock Co regulator movement to this E. Howard #1 case made the trap door so it could be opened to allow additional weight drop for a Waltham Regulator Movement which meant the movement would be able to run for a greater number of days – perhaps 8. Attached is part of the aforementioned article making reference to the height of the Waltham regulators. Can it also be deduced that since the Waltham Clock Co existed between the years 1894 and 1914 that this Waltham Clock Co movement was manufactured during that 20 year period?
     
  22. bruce linde

    bruce linde Technical Admin
    NAWCC Member

    Nov 13, 2011
    6,569
    739
    113
    oakland, ca.
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    i wasn't saying the glasses should necessarily match an original #1... but i do like seeing pendulum bobs in motion... which i can't see on the copeland.

    the current glasses are not to my taste, but if they work for you, great.

    i've been shopping banjo clocks a lot lately, and have seen some cool glasses... BUT... the design of the e. howard case style (imho) does seem to limit workable designs to more basic/simple/geometric gold leaf designs on black backgrounds.

    have you verified that it will run for 8 (at least 7) days without having to open the trap door?
     
  23. bruce linde

    bruce linde Technical Admin
    NAWCC Member

    Nov 13, 2011
    6,569
    739
    113
    oakland, ca.
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    just read back where you said it's still on the bench so you don't know how long it will run... keep us posted!
     
  24. Andy Dervan

    Andy Dervan Registered User
    Gibbs Literary Award NAWCC Star Fellow NAWCC Member

    Oct 23, 2002
    2,504
    61
    48
    Male
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    I keep repeating the movement is not up to the quality that was produced by the Waltham Clock Co. through its entire history.

    You need to be careful when you are discussing Waltham regulators as there two sizes - large and medium and they used completely different movements. I illustrated large regulator, medium regulator, and Willard banjo clock for approximate differences. The large regulator movements could be fitted with different escapements and the medium size regulator movements were roughly the same size but there were a number of variations.

    I don't appreciate you extrapolating without any data and miss quoting my article.

    Waltham Clock Co. did make a sweep hand movement that was installed in plain rectangular case and was retailed by business that sold regulators to schools and colleges that wanted a sweep for classrooms. It was never pictured in company catalogs, I have seen them noted as No 18 case.

    Andy Dervan
     
  25. Jmeechie

    Jmeechie Registered User
    NAWCC Member

    Dec 8, 2010
    197
    17
    18
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    For my money it certainly looks like the movement picture in Jim’s post above! The “sweepsecond model” certainly is a later add on! As well as the pendulum leader! I always get pushback when I point out, 70+ years ago, clocks and watches were utilitarian items (like a 1990 pickup truck) and not so much collectibles as we covet them now! Imagine all the clocks that ended up in the trash just because they were old! So, hand me downs, and go find something to do in the garage with the old junk! Was common! This clock strikes me as a business utilitarian movement, say a factory With in house servicing of multiple clocks (hence the added stamping) that found it way to a marriage with a banjo case (Howard?) by someone, who knows where!
    Personally, it’s not that serious, and it’s fun to see the wild modifications on this clock, and I can’t wait to hear run time (my guess is 5 days)!

    87D850CF-C321-4BC2-A0D2-7A23D6CD0A1C.jpeg
     
  26. bruce linde

    bruce linde Technical Admin
    NAWCC Member

    Nov 13, 2011
    6,569
    739
    113
    oakland, ca.
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    here are my somewhat random thoughts after re-reading the entire thread yet again:

    - it looks very much like a waltham movement... except for a variety of red flags (for me) that include: no end shake in the arbors, funky stamping of logo (wrong location) and supposed model name (both weaving drunkenly across their respective font baselines... not good), and other signs of hard living and/or less than stellar craftsmanship (note the screws holding the verge to the collet, as well as the screws securing the front plate to the posts)... and a judgement call made by our waltham expert

    - coincidentally, i read andy's waltham article just a couple of weeks ago... and even with somewhat funky black and white images you can see a level of craftsmanship that isn't evident here. i defer to his expertise... and his immediate and unambiguous call. i see no reason to doubt him and would think it far more likely that someone created a repro movement and revealed their hand when it came to (among other things) the engraving. repros and counterfeits happen.

    - i like tom's suggestion about the compounding, which would go toward explaining the heavier weight

    - a little bit of googling circled me back to this message board thread ( Waltham Regulator ) with a reference to another bulletin article by andy ( https://docs.nawcc.org/Bulletins/2000/articles/2007/368/368_291.pdf ... you'll need to be logged in to read it). the difference in craftsmanship in the movement discussed in the just mentioned article is notable... note the placement and quality of the manufacturer's mark. the mention of a 15lb compounded weight seems germane. :cool:

    i probably wouldn't have thought to put a sweep second hand movement in a banjo clock case, but a #1 case is special, and a sweep second hand movement is special, and why the heck not since whatever happens it's going to be a franken-clock.

    looking forward to the next report from the bench....
     
  27. Andy Dervan

    Andy Dervan Registered User
    Gibbs Literary Award NAWCC Star Fellow NAWCC Member

    Oct 23, 2002
    2,504
    61
    48
    Male
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    I finally remembered the company that retailed the sweep second hand clock - Chicago Scientific Company! The case would have contained a Waltham medium size regulator movement, but the case was 36-40 tall unless larger floor or wall regulator cases that were much longer.

    That is why it does not make sense why the case needed the bottom case opening as the medium size Waltham regulator fitted into cases less than 40 inches long.

    Andy Dervan
     
  28. new2clocks

    new2clocks Registered User
    NAWCC Member Sponsor

    Apr 25, 2005
    2,284
    247
    63
    Pennsylvania
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    Andy,

    To avoid confusion, which post(s) are you referring to with this statement?

    Regards.
     
  29. Andy Dervan

    Andy Dervan Registered User
    Gibbs Literary Award NAWCC Star Fellow NAWCC Member

    Oct 23, 2002
    2,504
    61
    48
    Male
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    It was post # 21 that he extrapolated information from my article.

    Andy
     
  30. Andy Dervan

    Andy Dervan Registered User
    Gibbs Literary Award NAWCC Star Fellow NAWCC Member

    Oct 23, 2002
    2,504
    61
    48
    Male
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    Here is an example of Waltham Clock Co. sweep hand movement cased, dial, and movement

    Andy Dervan

    Wal15.JPG Wal15 dial.JPG Wal15 movement.JPG
     
  31. bruce linde

    bruce linde Technical Admin
    NAWCC Member

    Nov 13, 2011
    6,569
    739
    113
    oakland, ca.
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    no one here thinks that movement is original to the case.... right?

    are we sure it’s an e. howard case? are there unique elements such as the definitive tifft door and bezel latches?
     
    Jmeechie likes this.
  32. brian fisher

    brian fisher Registered User
    NAWCC Member

    Jan 20, 2017
    1,468
    326
    83
    houston, tx
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    #32 brian fisher, May 22, 2020
    Last edited: May 22, 2020

    just now noticing the winding arbor is at the 4 o'clock position in these and the op's pics instead of the obligatory banjo 2 o'clock.

    i wonder if it is possible that someone used (most of) the internals from this movement and made custom plates with re arranged gearing in order to get a longer pendulum swing?
     
  33. bruce linde

    bruce linde Technical Admin
    NAWCC Member

    Nov 13, 2011
    6,569
    739
    113
    oakland, ca.
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:

    the 2 o'clock winding was a simon willard thing to allow enough weight drop for the smaller, re-geared banjo clock movement and case size. i would think all bets are off with a seconds beating movement. my gilbert, seth thomas and jewelers regulator movements with sweeps have the winding arbors near 6 o'clock.

    i think the compounded weight thing needs to be cleaned up and run-time established. and, george needs to confirm that the pendulum length is right and the movement keeps good time.

    what is the pendulum length for a waltham sweep second hand movement, and is there enough room in that case?
     
  34. brian fisher

    brian fisher Registered User
    NAWCC Member

    Jan 20, 2017
    1,468
    326
    83
    houston, tx
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    perhaps bruce. afaik, just about every williard, howard, waltham, (fill in the blank manufacturer) time only banjo has the winding arbor at 2. i presume they were just copying williard for "authenticity". it almost seems like a rite of passage for this type of clock in my opinion.

    honestly, it was just an observation anyway. the real point of my post was the second paragraph which i edited to make it more clear to read after you quoted me.
     
  35. bruce linde

    bruce linde Technical Admin
    NAWCC Member

    Nov 13, 2011
    6,569
    739
    113
    oakland, ca.
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    based on the funky mounting of the movement, it seems clear to me that movement and case did not start life together... do you disagree?

    i'm just reacting to little details noticed on subsequent readings. :cool:

    based on the dimensions provided, there is enough room for a seconds beating pendulum... i don't think they'd have to go to the trouble of remaking plates and moving gears... but i do think someone thought, oh, i have this case and this movement would work in it.

    after 'measuring' (in photoshop!) there appears to be enough room for a seconds beating pendulum... i don't think they'd have to go to the trouble of remaking plates and moving gears... but i do think someone thought, oh, i have this case and this movement would work in it.

    more will be clear when george confirms accuracy and run-time.
     
  36. rmarkowitz1_cee4a1

    rmarkowitz1_cee4a1 Registered User
    NAWCC Member

    Nov 26, 2009
    5,085
    838
    113
    Country Flag:
    Coming late to this party.

    Overall to me seems to have turned into a bit of a tempest in a teapot with a touch of hissy fit.

    Someone messed around & got creative with available stuff. That is, a Waltham movement with a seconds bit, a Howard style case, some die stamps, and so on. The result is this Frankenclock. Has some age.

    I’ve seen lots of stuff like this over the years. What about the confabulation banjo with a moon phase?

    Appreciate it for what it is or more for what it tried to be.

    RM
     
    Raymond Rice and Jmeechie like this.
  37. bruce linde

    bruce linde Technical Admin
    NAWCC Member

    Nov 13, 2011
    6,569
    739
    113
    oakland, ca.
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    hey, now... that's MY confabulated banjo clock with moon dial! :cool:

    am i reading you correctly that you accept the movement as original?
     
  38. rmarkowitz1_cee4a1

    rmarkowitz1_cee4a1 Registered User
    NAWCC Member

    Nov 26, 2009
    5,085
    838
    113
    Country Flag:
    If I understand your question correctly, no, the movement & case are a marriage. Someone was putting pieces together to create something.

    RM
     
    Jmeechie likes this.
  39. bruce linde

    bruce linde Technical Admin
    NAWCC Member

    Nov 13, 2011
    6,569
    739
    113
    oakland, ca.
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    no... i'm asking if you think it's an authentic waltham movement. andy doesn't. i (based on spectacularly uninformed gut and mostly andy's opinion) don't.

    i agree that the clock is a marriage.
     
  40. rmarkowitz1_cee4a1

    rmarkowitz1_cee4a1 Registered User
    NAWCC Member

    Nov 26, 2009
    5,085
    838
    113
    Country Flag:
    Yes, I do believe it may have started out as one & got monkeyed with.

    RM
     
  41. bruce linde

    bruce linde Technical Admin
    NAWCC Member

    Nov 13, 2011
    6,569
    739
    113
    oakland, ca.
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
  42. brian fisher

    brian fisher Registered User
    NAWCC Member

    Jan 20, 2017
    1,468
    326
    83
    houston, tx
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    #42 brian fisher, May 22, 2020
    Last edited: May 22, 2020
    i believe i personally inspected this clock at the auction house before it was sold. it was located in the middle of the left wall as you walk in the door. and, no, none of us saw the movement there as the dial would have been screwed in place. i also believe(though not 100% sure as there were several hundred clocks in this sale) the pendulum bob hung at the proper position in the bottom part of the case. at least i can say for sure that i remember opening up the doors on a massive howard banjo with un original glasses and not noticing the pendulum hanging in the throat. andy says this movement would have been mounted in a cabinet 40 inches tall. as you and george have already stated, this cabinet a good deal longer. all of this combined with andy's opinion that the movement is, well, odd.....i am simply trying to formulate a reason as to where that extra 10ish inches come into play. (insert "thats what she said" joke here)

    a few less teeth on a gear here and there = longer pendulum....perhaps?
     
  43. bruce linde

    bruce linde Technical Admin
    NAWCC Member

    Nov 13, 2011
    6,569
    739
    113
    oakland, ca.
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    ah... i see where you're going.

    in husher's willard book he says "with the narrow waist section of the banjo clock, the pendulum bob could hit the sides of the case. by modifying one of the three popular english one second pendulum gear trains in which seven tooth pinions were substituted for eight tooth pinions on the intermediate and escape wheel shafts, willard obtained a pendulum length that placed the bob within the box section, with ample clearance for a large pendulum bob." (to brian's point)

    just to clarify... andy was questioning why the case needed a bottom door, because waltham made a medium movement with a sweep second hand that worked in a 40" case... but he didn't say specifically say this was the medium sized movement. if we had photos of the disassembled movement we could count teeth and confirm pendulum length... but wouldn't a sweep second hand movement more typically beat seconds and want something bigger than a 40" case? hmm...

    in fact, this case DOES accommodate a seconds pendulum:

    04.jpg

    the bottom door is kind of funky, and could potentially accommodate an even longer pendulum... but the bulk of the door is toward the back of the case, where the weight would drop. i keep thinking someone was working on trying to get the clock to run a full eight days... hence the compounding. and, we don't know if the door happened at the same time the case and movement got married.... what if the door was already there?
     
  44. Andy Dervan

    Andy Dervan Registered User
    Gibbs Literary Award NAWCC Star Fellow NAWCC Member

    Oct 23, 2002
    2,504
    61
    48
    Male
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    Bruce

    It was size of medium size movement! I had examples of different size movements together so readers could visually see the different sizes.

    Andy
     
  45. bruce linde

    bruce linde Technical Admin
    NAWCC Member

    Nov 13, 2011
    6,569
    739
    113
    oakland, ca.
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    ok, i'm now confused. sorry!

    so you're saying the OP's movement is the medium sized one... which means it would have a pendulum length of how much? or did they make the medium movement in variations so that it could support a pendulum for a 40" case OR a tall case?
     
  46. Andy Dervan

    Andy Dervan Registered User
    Gibbs Literary Award NAWCC Star Fellow NAWCC Member

    Oct 23, 2002
    2,504
    61
    48
    Male
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    I don't know what is "OP movement".

    I looked at my 5 Waltham medium size regulators and estimated the pendulum length (suspension spring to adjusting screw) was approximately 24 inches.

    No, Waltham Clock Co. would not have have used medium size movement is a longer case, because they had a larger regulator movement that used approximately 1 m pendulum rod for that application. Their first weight driven products were high quality wall and floor regulators.

    Andy Dervan
     
  47. bruce linde

    bruce linde Technical Admin
    NAWCC Member

    Nov 13, 2011
    6,569
    739
    113
    oakland, ca.
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    sorry... OP = ‘original poster’. should have at least said OP’s...

    if the movement is as you say a waltham medium wanting a 24" pendulum, then the marriage being discussed here makes no sense... but you've also stated that the movement was not made by waltham, and the simple truth is we just don't know. i would say that means all bets are off until such time as we can see photos of the movement internals... so we can a) count teeth and pinions to assess desired pendulum length and b) see if any of the individual gears look out of place or mucked with... or george verifies that the clock keeps perfect time with its seconds pendulum.

    my best guess is still that someone had a seconds beating waltham (or not) movement with sweep second hand and a e. howard (or ?) #1 case and decided to marry them... and that the door in the bottom is to allow the weight to drop further for longer run times because the movement gearing math and barrel size require a longer weight drop to run for eight days.

    here's a photo showing a 24" pendulum, which would be appropriate for a 32" howard #4 (he said, have just joined in marriage a noah pomeroy movement wanting a 24" pendulum with a howard-style #4 case):

    04-1.jpg
     
  48. Andy Dervan

    Andy Dervan Registered User
    Gibbs Literary Award NAWCC Star Fellow NAWCC Member

    Oct 23, 2002
    2,504
    61
    48
    Male
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    Photograph comparing 3 signed legitimate Waltham Clock Co. movements (large regulator, medium regulator, and Willard banjo clock).

    Andy

    Waltham regulator movements.jpg
     
  49. bruce linde

    bruce linde Technical Admin
    NAWCC Member

    Nov 13, 2011
    6,569
    739
    113
    oakland, ca.
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    cool... but those are not with sweep second hands, yes?

    do you happen to have a similar photo comparing their sweep second hand movements?
     
  50. Andy Dervan

    Andy Dervan Registered User
    Gibbs Literary Award NAWCC Star Fellow NAWCC Member

    Oct 23, 2002
    2,504
    61
    48
    Male
    Country Flag:
    Region Flag:
    No they are not second hand sweep movement

    The second sweep hand movement being discussed is same size as the middle movement - medium size regulator movement.

    Andy Dervan
     

Share This Page