Trying to identify an unusual 1955 mens mechanical watch

My guess would be that is the original crystal, as it is complimentary to the case. Fancy or faceted crystals are not unusual in watches of this vintage, but the movt in your watch is a good one. This was the base calibre for automatics that were to follow, like the BPAC. Do you have a picture of the entire movt? This watch would be easy to restore, as it it is already in overall very good condition. I strongly recommend not running it until it is properly serviced, as it can be damaged by running dirty or dried out.

What Year is the Movement?

Thanks for the quick replies!!

How do I tell what year the movement is?

Can you recommend a shop in the Houston area where I could take the watch for restoration/repair?

I meant to attach this to the last message

the Movement Datecode is the 2 digit stamp showing at 6 0'Clock in the image above.

L9 ?

Bill,

Can you measure the crystal lengthxwidth in millimeters to the tenth? I've found a crystal in a catalog that appears to be the correct shape listed for a Bulova "Pelham". I don't see a Pelham listed in the model db nor the ad db btw.

Darren

Hi Bill The date code should be visible in the area circled below

The main picture is taken from so close that it's difficult to tell what we're looking at, but it may be a Hadley.  There are a couple in the database to use for comparison.

Both Hadley's in the db are cushion or rectangle/4 curved sides. The subject watch appears to be tonneau shaped. Otherwise they do appear similar.

The textured Dial has been seen in the 'SENATOR' but the 21 Jewel movement is incorrect.

'56 Case with a 1959 movement: I'm thinking non-conforming.

Originally, possibly a 'SENATOR'.

I will do my best to measure the crystal. I've got a metric ruler around here somewhere!

Indeed, the marking on the movement is L9 and the case says L5.  The watch belonged to my Dad, who had it since new. Mom has no recollection of it ever being needing repair, of course that could be a long time ago...    Non conforming sounds so ominous, especially when in italics!  The metal, stretchy band says Foster on it. Could this be orignal?  I'm inclined to put a nice leather strap on it when I have it serviced.  Do you know a shop in teh Houston area that I could use?

Here is a better pic of the whole front view

BTW..  I would like to say, that I have been a member of a number of online forums over the years..  mostly for cars, and you fine folks are by far the most responsive, knowledgable and professional people I have dealt with.  Especially to a non horologist like myself.   Thank you !!!   

The Case looks like the 'RUXTON'

IMO

Hi Bill   Try not to be put off by a "non-conforming" watch.  I think of them as customized or otherwise modified from the "original" configuration of the watch model at date of production.  The site is working on a category in which these watches will fit which denotes their uniqueness as Bulova which are non-conforming to the model exemplified in the vintage ads we have to date. There are some "rules" to be in this category. Generally some combination of: Bulova signed dial, Bulova movement, Bulova manufactured case. We would not consider a Bulova movement in a case manufactured by another company as a "Bulova", so that configuration would not be listed on this site at all.  Sometimes folks get one of these "marriages" and they are not aware it's not all Bulova parts, so to speak.  Those are often listed here in a forum or as an unknown until folks here can help the owner determine that the parts are not all Bulova. Then they can either be deleted from the database or remain in the forum threads if the details of the non-bulova watch are a common issue folks run into (but this is the exception for them to remain on site, and would only happen if the particular marriage is often misidentified as a "Bulova" - to help new members learn).

There are myriad reasons for a "non-conforming" Bulova watch.  Perhaps the owner was doing the dishes and his Ruxton got wet.  He went to the corner jewelry store to try to get it serviced.  The jeweler could have said "this is your lucky day. I have another bulova movement w/ 21 jewels and it's a more accurate movement then your original 17jewel which came in the Ruxton.  I can put it in the watch for the same price it would cost to service your old movement".  Maybe at this juncture, the owner saw a Bulova signed dial which would fit the Ruxton case, and they liked it's looks more than the "original Ruxton configuration" and asked the jeweler to add this dial while swapping the movement. 

Since all "parts" are Bulova, this new "Bulova" customized to the owners preference would end up in the non-conforming category on this site.  While the owner searches for a model name for the entire watch, one doesn't exist.  It's been customized.  But in the thread of the discussion,  things like "looks like a Ruxton case" or "nicer movement than the original 17jewel movement" help the owner determine what their unique Bulova watch is made of.  In many examples, in my opinion, some of the nicest looking Bulova watches are these unique customized watches. 

Hope this takes a little sting away from the often misunderstood "non-confirming" title. 

Will,

That is possibly the most encompassing and pleasant description of "non-conforming" that I have heard presented recently.  My compliments on your wordsmithing ability.  

Hi All,  after viewing this thread, http://www.mybulova.com/watches/1953-ruxton-2819,  I'm sure that my watch isn't a Ruxton A.  Very similar though. There is a model mentioned called a Moonbeam.  I haven't been able to find a picture of one. Does anyone have a photo of a Moonbeam? Thanks again for all of the input I have received.  Bill

               1955/59 'UNKNOWN                                                 1953 'RUXTON'

The Case of the 'UNKNOWN is the 'RUXTON. The numeral type and placement on the Dial is also a match as are  the 'open' Minutes and Seconds registers...... which doesn't change the fact that there is a 1959 Movement in a 1955 Case.

They are very similar, I agree,  but mine has completely flat sides, (see image above, I don't know how to put them side by side) where the 1953 has detail shaped into the sides that continues from the corners. Someone said the Moonbeam looked a lot like the Ruxton, which is why I asked.  If the 1953 is a Ruxton A,  maybe mine is a Ruxton B...   if there is such a thing. Interesting that this Ruxton also  has an odd shape crystal. I bet I've looked at hundreds of '50s Bulovas online and have not seen one other with a crystal like mine.  Is it THAT unusual?

Bill,

If there is a 'RUXTON' "A" then there is a "B" and possibly a "C", "D", "E" and "F" ect and no, fancy Crystals are not unusual in fact they were very popular in the 1950's.