Folks, I've been looking at watches since 9 this morning and it's now 8pm ... I have to stop and eat. Below are a few photos of the watch I've spent the last hour (2? more?) trying to work out. It's issued to the Indian Army and the serial # puts it in 1939 .... but the dial and movement are unsigned. If you zoom in, you'll also see that the movement has not been well looked after. The stem is broken but at least we've kept the correct crown (even if it is just held there by a couple of threads). Balance staff is intact, though and everything moves freely with a puff of air.

Am I right in identifying this as a 700 movement? (Dr Ranfft doesn't seem to have an image for that movement but has the 710 which is similar but with a centre seconds). Has anyone seen them unsigned or is it that the ratchet wheel would have been the only signed part and that has been swapped out? I measure the movement at 23.4mm which is close enough for my measuring to make it 10,5'''.

I am trying to assess two pieces for a customer and while I've fully researched one this is going to have to wait ... I'm tired and have to eat .... any pointers will be gratefully received.

 

The best reference I know of for identifying Rolex movements up to the 3035 caliber is the Ehrhardt, Demesy & Specht book 2, Vintage American & European Wrist Watch Price Guide. ISBN 0-913902-56-X. Long out of print. It lists this movement as caliber 700. Same as Gruen caliber 825, 826, 827. This caliber was made in a number of different grades. I have a chronometer grade one with 18-jewels, adjusted to six position, heat and cold, and has the patented Rolex Super-balance. The movement is fully marked, as is the ratchet wheel. Dial marked Rolex Royalite. These are usually marked on the ratchet wheel. I suppose if your friend collects military watches, and is prepared to accept one that is not marked, this one would do. But if it were me (and if I didn't already have one), I'd hold out for a higher grade one that is fully marked.

 

Thanks for the confirmation.

Maybe I wasn't clear but this (and another) belong to a customer already ... he's looking to sell them. The problem is, they're in a state - broken balance staff on one along with a damaged centre wheel ... the missing teeth from that are probably floating around somewhere inside; this one's much better but there's the broken stem. The issue with this one is that it's mostly unsigned. I wonder if this was a thing on some of the lower grade movements?

Edit: I was concerned that it was a movement that had come from another maker, like Gruen, but I think this one's beyond my current knowledge base ... going to have to do a fair bit of reading on these.

 

The aforementioned book lists the caliber 700 movement as available in 7, 11, 15, and 17 jewel versions. The subject watch has 15-jewels. So, yes, that movement was made in a number of different grades. I have never seen one with less that 15-jewels, and I don't recall ever seeing this movement which was not marked Rolex. The true test would be to pull the dial to see if the pillar plate behind the dial is marked Rolex, or Oyster. There are some things about this watch that are not making sense to me. The case is marked OYSTER, not Rolex! Oyster was the little brother line to the Rolex, and I have never seen this particular movement used in an Oyster. The fact that neither the dial or movement are clearly marked Rolex or Oyster, and the movement is in an Oyster case, I am led to believe this is a marriage of some sort. The same basic movement was also used in Gruen, but I don't know how this movement would have been marked in a Gruen.

Here are two pictures of my caliber 710 Rolex Oyster Royalite Observatory chronometer. Same basic movement with sweep seconds hand, and markings that give a better idea how this movement would have been marked in a Rolex. This one is identified on the ratchet wheel, and the markings on the other plates indicate its other specifications. This particular chronometer movement is not listed in the aforementioned book. This one has 18-jewels.

 

Thanks for the information and photos @Canuck

I'm leaning towards the thought that this started out all original but a series of "repairs" on the subcontinent has left us with the watch as it is. It's sitting in front of me again as I type and the handset obviously didn't start life together either. I wonder if the Indian Army were as happy to swap parts as other militaries were ... I think this piece is little more than its parts though. It genuinely makes me sad to have a watch in the sort of state this one is ... it shouldn't have been allowed to happen.

 

In putting my Rolex chronometer back together after the pictures, I noticed the inside case back is marked OYSTER Watch co. Like that of the subject watch. The plot thickens!

 

Yes, I've seen plenty of casebacks marked Oyster Watch Co, often with a rolex stamp as well. I don't know where that stands with accepted "cannon" but I've never thought it was a problem.