Joined
·
3,518 Posts
Ummm...I've got a feeling most of those "jewels" are non-functional, perhaps including the ones around the perimeter. :rodekaart
![]()
![]()
![]()
Gruen 65-jewel automatic!
-
Hello WatchUSeek! We are hosting an Ask Me Anything with Ian Schon of Schon Horology and Schon DSNG beginning on Tuesday, February 23rd at Noon, EST and closing on Thursday, February 25th at Noon EST. If you don't know of him, Ian is a desginer maker and was a senior product designer at IDEO. He is an engineer, designer and machinist who manufacturers his own watches, and also pens! If you've ever wanted to ask a question directly to a one-man watch maker, don't miss out! You can find the AMA here.
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Joined
·
9,654 Posts
Hi -
Of course they're not functional. There was a time in the late 1950s when a couple of companies went waaaay overboard: if I remember correctly, there was a 99 jewel Bulova.
In this particular watch, there are 40 superflous jewels on the periphery. Now, the only real reason for these there would have been to provide a very nice jeweled bed for the edge of the automatic rotor, but this is not the case at all: pure marketing hype.
By the way, I've bought from that vendor before (I know those pictures!) and he's basically good: the watches are taken apart and properly taken care of before selling them on eBay, but I've got one at least which has a problem with isochronism (i.e. being somewhat variable in its timekeeping properties), which while not his fault per se (he doesn't advertise them as keeping accurate time!), still is a risk. But it's also a risk with any vintage watch as long as the seller doesn't document how the watch is keeping time...
It's a horological curiosity, and I've put low bids on either this one or another like it just to see if I could get it as a curiosity: however, there are people out there more curious than I am (my "curiosity" bid lies around $30 or so: that's the price I'd be willing to pay (w/p&h) to actually see something like that and have it to play around with...once.
Happy new year, Tom, and may the force always be controlled by the escapement!
JohnF
Of course they're not functional. There was a time in the late 1950s when a couple of companies went waaaay overboard: if I remember correctly, there was a 99 jewel Bulova.
In this particular watch, there are 40 superflous jewels on the periphery. Now, the only real reason for these there would have been to provide a very nice jeweled bed for the edge of the automatic rotor, but this is not the case at all: pure marketing hype.
By the way, I've bought from that vendor before (I know those pictures!) and he's basically good: the watches are taken apart and properly taken care of before selling them on eBay, but I've got one at least which has a problem with isochronism (i.e. being somewhat variable in its timekeeping properties), which while not his fault per se (he doesn't advertise them as keeping accurate time!), still is a risk. But it's also a risk with any vintage watch as long as the seller doesn't document how the watch is keeping time...
It's a horological curiosity, and I've put low bids on either this one or another like it just to see if I could get it as a curiosity: however, there are people out there more curious than I am (my "curiosity" bid lies around $30 or so: that's the price I'd be willing to pay (w/p&h) to actually see something like that and have it to play around with...once.
Happy new year, Tom, and may the force always be controlled by the escapement!
JohnF
Joined
·
619 Posts
Happy New Year!
Regardless of the superfluous jewel count, that is a handsome watch. Looks like a solid gold case? And I love those lugs.
I saw a supposedly 93-jewel watch on fleabay recently (a Roamer, what else?) that I am pretty sure was purely, as in only, hype. If it had more than 23 Jewels I couldn't see them.
Waltham had a 100 jewel movement didn't they?
Regardless of the superfluous jewel count, that is a handsome watch. Looks like a solid gold case? And I love those lugs.
I saw a supposedly 93-jewel watch on fleabay recently (a Roamer, what else?) that I am pretty sure was purely, as in only, hype. If it had more than 23 Jewels I couldn't see them.
Waltham had a 100 jewel movement didn't they?
Joined
·
9,654 Posts
Hi -
Bingo. 100-jewel Waltham it was. At least they tried to use the extra jewels (i.e. non-movememt jewels, in this case 25) to give the automatic rotor something to move smoothly on.
Nice idea. In reality the critical bearings were at the hub, and there weren't any ball bearings in that particular caliber. The use of jewels as bearings for the outside of the rotor was also just a plain bad idea: rotors have to have a certain amount of play/flex in order to handle the effects of gravity on the rotor (small, but there!), and that particular calibre. Take a look here for more info...
JohnF
Bingo. 100-jewel Waltham it was. At least they tried to use the extra jewels (i.e. non-movememt jewels, in this case 25) to give the automatic rotor something to move smoothly on.
Nice idea. In reality the critical bearings were at the hub, and there weren't any ball bearings in that particular caliber. The use of jewels as bearings for the outside of the rotor was also just a plain bad idea: rotors have to have a certain amount of play/flex in order to handle the effects of gravity on the rotor (small, but there!), and that particular calibre. Take a look here for more info...
JohnF
Joined
·
3,518 Posts
The case, unfortunately, is 10K RGP. :-(
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!