I loved the watches pictured and the discussion prompted by the recent post "Who did it better? Omega, Longines, or IWC?" by Modest-Proposal. I thought I would ask the same question about 4 American watches. I am going to post movement pictures in chronological order with the approximate dates of the first production of the movement style. The question is the same...Who did it better? Obviously the question is not really fair because the initial production of these movements ranges from 1872 to around 1940. It would all be subjective anyway. They are all from my collection. I certainly have my favorites.

JohnCote

Circa 1872, Waltham model '72, American Grade, 21 jewel:



Circa 1879, Elgin grade 72 "Convertible" 21 jewel



Circa 1896, Illinois Watch Company grade 187, 17 jewels:



Circa late 1930s, Hamilton Watch Company, grade 950b, 23 jewels:

 

Well...Here goes Lou. This explanation can turn into a science project with all of the exceptions but I will keep it simple.

Let's start with one fact which keeps the American Model/Grade discussion somewhat different from the Swiss Reference/Caliber discussion. Generally speaking, until the mid 1920's the American watch manufacturing companies did not case their watches at the factory and they certainly did not case them in factory marked cases. Again, generally speaking, when a jeweler or a distributor/jobber bought an American pocket watch to re-sell he was buying a movement with dial and hands. I will deal with a couple of early exceptions later.

So...to grades and models. The model, for most American companies was used to designate a basic movement design. Take for instance, in the above group of 4 watches, the Model 72 Waltham is a basic movement design. it is characterized by being 16 size, by the two winding wheels visible on the train/barrel bridge with that bridge having a sort of question mark shaped cutout for the balance cock to fit in. The balance cock of this model is characterized by having a step down with the screw which attaches it to the dial plate. Now, within this model designation there were many grades which designated more or less the quality of finish. At the bottom level of this grade there were 11 jewel cheapo grades like the "Park Road". At the top of the line was the "American Watch Company" or simply "American" grade which you see pictured.

What is complicated is that sometimes grades were names and sometimes they were numbers. Waltham, for instance had both. The Illinois Watch Company, within the 16s Models 4 and 5, (Hunter and Open Face) had, among many others, the numbered grade 187 pictured above and the named "Sangamo" grade.

Anyway, simply put, the model is a basic design and the grade designated something about the way the movement was finished and adjusted.

Now, back the case thing for a minute...The exception to the rule about watches being cased at the factory were the highest of the high grades from a couple of companies. Two good examples are pictured above. The Waltham '72 American grade and the Elgin Convertible grade were the top of the line and were actually slightly different in thickness. These watches were generally cased at the factory although not in factory marked cases. As the flagships of both companies, the production was low and they were only sold in heavy special cases. They were for the very wealthy and cost 5x or more than the standard high grade Railroad watch of the day. They will both sort of fit in some of the thicker generic 16s cases of the period but a knowledgeable collector can almost always spot or at least be suspicious about a switch.

In my opinion, there has never...ever been a better made, better finished time only watch produced than either the American Grade Waltham or the grde 72 Elgin pictured above. I suppose there are those who would argue that in pocket watches that Patek and Vacheron made some watches that were equal and that may be true. However, if you take the Waltham or the Elgin above apart and look at the insides you might be dissuaded from this equal idea. Both the Waltham and the Elgin are damaskeend as well on the undersides of the plates as on the tops. Every part both top and bottom is polished and chambered. The particular Waltham pictured above has a non-magnetic balance with a platinum pallet fork which is polished and chamfered to look like a little piece of jewelry all by itself.

The Illinois above was a dead end design commonly called the Getty model after the engineer who designed it. There are enough grades of the Getty model to make a nice big collection. They are almost universally very pretty to look at.

The Hamilton 950b picture at the bottom of the list above is probably the ultimate expression of the goals of American watchmaking. It was factory cased in a Hamilton marked case and is about as close to being machine made and from interchangeable parts as an American pocket watch got. It is very high grade and precision and is quite comparable in precision and time keeping ability to the highest grade Pateks of the day. It is not as pretty as its earlier American brothers but it is more functional than most. It is a breeze (much easier than a Patek) to take apart and clean and re-adjust. Around the time of its manufacture, the American watch business started to go to hell in a hand basket.

Sorry about the long post. I am a watch nerd Lou...kinda like you.

JohnCote
Watch Nerd
Lover of Pocket and Wrist
American, Swiss and an occasional Japanese.

 

I think you are sort of correct here Gator but for the fact that most of the American pocket watches Lou asked were not cased at the factory like Swiss watches...(see my detailed explanation above).

I agree completely. However, the context of the question was "Who did it better?" I said up front that the response would have to be qualitative and subjective.

JohnCote

 

In modern times the new Rolex etc with the ceramic hairspring and the Omega with the Coax balance and some others are probably more advanced and better time keepers. They are not better finished...or, I would argue, more soul satisfying.

JC

 

Gator, again the ad you show refers to wrist watches. American wrist and pocket watch production were different in that most of the big company (Hamilton Elgin Illinois etc) wrists came factory cased. They were named as to movement grade, and model. This is really somewhat different than the pocket watches Lou asked about.

JC

 

What is more difficult about the Patek to service than the Hamilton? Although I agree these are nicely made and finished watches, having serviced many American pocket watches and also some Pateks, this really doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Both are very simple movements to service in the big picture...they are just time only watches.

And with regards to the earlier comments about the Longines and Omega being made from the same ebauche, do you have some proof of that? Of course the layout is similar, because there are only so many train layouts possible for a open faced pocket watch movement. Unless you have some direct evidence these are the same base....

Cheers, Al

 

Al, you have probably taken down more Pateks than I have and if you read my post, I wasn't talking about "American pocket watches" when I made the easy to service comment. I was talking specifically about the Hamilton 950b. This would apply to the 21j Hamilton 992b also. Find one of these and take it apart and in particular put it back together. Then tell me that anything else is as easy. Or let's do this. We get 10 contemporary time only Patek movements and 10 of the same jewel count 9xxB Hamiltons. We will get 2 good watchmakers each to clean oil and adjust both sets and we will keep time. We can bet a watch on which 10 will take the least time.

As I said, I have no proof. The Longines and the Omega are certainly not exactly the same ebauche but as I said, there are too many similarities not just of layout but of the parts to make me think different. Do you have proof that they aren't. I could be wrong by degrees but I doubt I am completely wrong. If I am it won't be the first time.

Best

JohnCote

 

The time needed to service any vintage watch has far more to do with it's condition than who made it or what model it is. I have had two exact watches take very different amounts of time to service, because their conditions were very different. With any American pocket watch, in my experience the ease of service is directly related to how many times it has been worked on previously. The fewer times it has been touched, the better by far!

Rather than post challenges, please tell me why one is easier to service, if it's that obvious, you should be able to just say it.

On the Omega/Longines question, you made the claim, so proof is up to you mate.

Cheers, Al

 

Gator,

This is barely worth arguing about...but there is still a difference. On the page above we are talking about whole watches. There are three "Names" involved. There is the Name of the whole watch "Wheatland", "Cleveland" etc. Then as with earlier American watches there is the model and grade of the movement only. Again, Lou...who is probably rolling his eyes right now was asking (I think) not about these late production whole watches. None of the watches I originally posted were "named" whole watches. Even the 950b which was sold as a whole factory cased watch was not "named" as a whole watch. It was refereed to by the name of its movement.

Patek, Vacheron and Zenith and probably all of the contemporary Swiss companies also had contractors produce cases for them even up into modern times.

You are correct my friend...I think this is my point throughout.

 

The reason I made the challenge using 10 instead of 1 watch was to take some of the condition issues statistically out of it. I know from the Hamilton factory records that they gave considerable thought to the future ability to service their product. Any old time American watchmaker will tell you that the Hamilton was the easiest.

My challenge and my bet still stands...anytime. But just to end the argument...I will just concede that you are right and give up.

Al, I stand by everything I said. I still believe that a lot of these very similar sort of low to medium quality Swiss named pocket watches were in good part made from common parts. Again, just look at the hair spring studs and the regulator arms. Many of the screw, plate screws, case screws etc are interchangeable.

Again, how about if I just admit I am wrong just to end the argument.

JohnCote

 

Its not about winning an argument mate. We all like technical discussions, but there is a difference between facts and opinions.

Not asking you to admit you are wrong, just provide some proof of what you claim.

I have serviced a lot of Hamiltons, and they are nicer to work on than say Walthams or Elgins are. I don't tend to see many Howard's or Rockfords, so those are sort of on the fringes. But although say Hamiltons are nice to work on, they are all easy in that they are simple movements. They do have differences for sure bit they are not really significant in my view in terms of saving time. So on a Waltham I know I'll have to do some work on the new mainspring hole end, or it won't reliably catch on the barrel wall. But small things like this that take an extra minute here or there can easily be eclipsed by the time needed to get the timing decent. I don't know if you are a watchmaker or not, but something as common as dynamic poising a balance to eliminate a poise error can take far longer than the simple differences in a simple movement.

Cheers, Al

 

Al,

I am not a watchmaker. I learned from my father and a bunch of watchmakers how to take down clean etc and re-assemble a watch. Although I don't do it too often, (I tend to leave it to a real watchmaker) I have cleaned a bunch of watches in my life. I will never be good at it (too ADHD). For me, a rank amateur, a Hamilton 992 or 992b is much easier than anything else. When putting them back together the plates almost fall nicely onto the pinions with no manipulation. I know from talking to real watchmakers all of my 60 year life...a bunch of my life from the time I was a kid has been spent in the vintage watch biz that they loved working on the Hamilton 16s watches. Many of these watchmakers have told me that working on the 20/21j Pateks and Vacherons was much more difficult. Maybe it was because they didn't have easy access to parts. Who knows? If you say doing a 20/21j Patek is just as easy...I will believe you.

Best,

JohnCote

 

Gator,

You are of course correct. I was doing the original post off the top of my head. Hamilton first started talking about the new B type watch in the 30s. They outfited some prototypes, both Illinois Bunn Specials 992 with the un-cut balance and Elinvar Hairsprings and made the Bunn Special 161b with pressed in jewel settings in the late 30s but the introduction of the 992b and 950b was delayed until '41 just before the war and not many were sold before the war as Hamilton turned almost all of its production to Military use watches during the war years.

I guess I will have to be more careful with the details here.

JohnCote

 

...and Gator....before you call your ADHD brother out on the production dates on the other 3 watches you might take note that I was talking about first production dates for the model....and not the specific watch. ...still technically wrong for the 950b but....

JC