Nothing on outside case back except "OPEN" Inside case back: Bulova Quality Pat. Jan. 11 1927 1127945 - Single hinge case w/ dust cover intact. Movement 21 Jewel 6 adjustments Bulova Watch Co. Dial stamped Swiss - Bracelet: Hallmarked "Sternite" - Case Deminsions: 26.7mm (not counting crown) by 36.4mm lug tip to tip. Crystal: 15.6mm by 21.4mm measured in case at bezel/crystal edge. First digit of case serial number used to determine production date.
Edited 2012.08.26
Closest to the Conrad. Case shape and jewel count are there. Not right hands for Conrad and I am unable to see the engraving on the advert well enough to say yes. If I were on the panel I would have to give a tenative for a Conrad but I am not on the panel so My best guess is a Conrad with newer hands until I see better advert.
Very nice watch regardless of what you choose to call it.
John JP
Not Conrad. Might work out better for testing if we had some easy ones. This is one of those that will probably remain unknown.
Jay
In reply to Not Conrad. Might work out by vintagebulova.com
In reply to so can we post comments or by Ellierose
Hi Dave I see your comment. These mechanics are being worked on/out. Don't know what it will be like after some tweaks, but it looks like any registered member can comment, while "guests" to the site- those who have not created an account, user name and login can only view w/o commenting.
Unknown
Without an ad, another example, or other info, I can only use "style" to guess about a redial or dial swap, since I don't have a clue which dial(s) may have come on this watch originally.
I'd like to see a couple more pictures of the watch, since this is a new user who entered it. Maybe there is something on the case back besides the word "OPEN". This won't necessarily help w/ ID, but would be nice to have with this record. So if I/we have a request for more info, and the owner isn't following the post, should I make the request here AND PM him saying we have a question about his watch?
In reply to Unknown Without an ad, by William Smith
Since this is "my" watch, I'm not voting on model ID. Is that correct? I'm not sure if we should follow this protocol, but if that's the method, that's fine w/ me. I realize if the owner is not a panel member, then they wouldn't vote on ID (although any suggestions from them would be considered by those who do vote). Many of the watches are listed by owners who are also voting panel members. I guess the "owner" not voting for ID on his "own" watch may somehow cut down on a real or perceived conflict of interest, but with only 9 panel members, I'm not sure that the potential conflict of interest outweighs the benefit of the owner voting for their own watch?
Confused yet? :)