According to the Shugart, Engle, and Gilbert book, there were three variations of your watch. Variation 1 serial numbers ran from 2B001 to 2B700. All from circa 1943. The rest of production had s# starting with 1, and according to Col. George Townsend in his book American Railroad Watches, the second series (beginning with #1B001, ran to 1B27,500, produced between 1943 and 1954. According to the Shugart book, the third variant ran from 1B 26,900, to 1B 27,600*. *Townsend says the series ended a 27,500. I don’t know who was correct. Townsend doesn’t mention a third variant, and he implies that the third variant was lumped together with the second variant. The third series had straight line damascening, rather than circular. Your handsome 999B (I was going to say handsome BALL😁) is likely from the second variant.
Now, aren’t pocket watches a whole lot more interesting than wrist watches?
An interesting video on the Waltham Watch Co.
Also, one on the Illinois Watch Co.
https://youtu.be/vTQT6PwgJTA
Another submission. I bought this one in the mid 1980s. I don’t remember exactly when. But it was some time after I bought my first Keystone Howard series V. This one is a bit of an anomaly, in that I am not certain which series it is! If I go by my Keystone Howard 1919 parts list, it is a series IX. I always though it was a series VII, but there isn’t a Keystone Howard series VII. If I go by the pocketwatchdatasheet.com data, it indicates it is a series IV. But my 1919 parts list doesn’t show a series IV! Very little about this watch matches the pocketwatchdatasheet.com listing for this watch. So here’s what I know about it.
- 16-size
- stem wind, stem set.
- 17-jewels
- single roller
- adjusted (likely, but not marked).
- temperature compensated
- blued steel Breguet hairspring.
- single sunk vitreous enamel dial
- Keystone rolled gold plated case
- railroad grade? No
- railroad approved? No
Every time I look at the movement in this watch, it reminds me of the layout of a Hamilton 992, which it is not. When I took it out of the vault this morning, it was fully wound, but wouldn’t run. Might it be that it was over 30 years ago since it was last cleaned? I conditioned it this morning, and it is now fine.
This watch has had little use since it was made about 110 years ago. The butler finish on the case back has minor marks, but it is as original. Today and for the next few days, I have it on my @DaveK lanyard, and I’ll likely wear it fo a few days.
Any opinion on this, friends? Getting it for $400..
You don’t give enough details for me to come to a hard edged conclusion. But this is a modern watch. The absence of “QUARTZ” on the dial tells me this likely has a mechanical wrist watch movement in it. Parts of the case appear to be die-cast, and the case, electroplated. The surround on the front and back of the case is likely acrylic “enamel”. Sort of cute, but most assuredly, not my cup of tea. Especially at $400!
T tedoJust thought I would check one more time to see if anyone has some insight on this one they can share?
You provide two terrible pictures of a watch, absolutely no information about it, whatsoever, and you think we should be able to give an opinion and an evaluation on it? What material is the case made of? We need pictures of the markings inside the case back, the weight of the case without the mechanism, diameter, and information regarding do you own it, or are you considering buying it, or if yours, are you wanting to sell it? If it’s yours, and you are wanting to sell it, you won’t be able to do it here! And don’t be surprised if any evaluation amounts to only scrap value!
T tedoBelonged to my wife’s father in Iran who passed away. Will try to find someone locally who can open it up. Hardly think an Audemars Piguet like this will amount to scrap!