Skip to main content

Bulova 1934 Oakley

4/10 votes
Model ID rating explained.

Manufacture Year: 


Movement Symbol: 


Movement Model: 


Movement Jewels: 


Movement Serial No.: 


Case Serial No.: 


Case shape: 


Case Manufacturer: 




Additional Information

I picked this one up from the NAWCC meeting this past weekend. It hasn't been serviced yet, so the movt does look dirty.

The bonus for me in this case is the original bracelet, which I rarely find in this kind of condition. Most, in fact all of the 13AT's I have ever come across are in the Jump hour or direct read "White Prince" types of watches.

Not For Sale
Bulova watch
1934 Bulova watch
1934 Bulova watch
1934 Bulova watch
bobbee's picture
Posted May 2, 2014 - 7:38am

Date on this one still wrong.

1934 Oakley.

Club 5000Panel Member
Posted May 4, 2014 - 4:08am


We need another avert showing the Oakley. The avert shown previously has a slightly different case than that of the subject watch. The lugs are different. I'd be ok with Oakley if we had another avert showing a better match for the case.

bobbee's picture
Posted July 12, 2014 - 3:57am

Vote is four for Oakley, Bourg01, Geoff Baker, ReverendRob, me.

Unknown, one vote. Admin.

Club 5000Panel Member
Posted April 18, 2018 - 12:29am

I think the Kirkwood...

The Morning Call Allentown, PA 21 Aug 1936 - Kirkwood & Chancellor

Geoff Baker
Club 5000Panel Member
Posted April 18, 2018 - 5:21am

I think so too

1934 Bulova Kirkwood

Geoff Baker
Club 5000Panel Member
Posted April 21, 2018 - 9:30am

Panel - what say you?

Reverend Rob's picture
Reverend Rob
Panel Member
Posted January 12, 2019 - 10:19am

Except for the sub second, the dial looks correct. I don't think the hands are original at all.

I was going to say Kirkwood, but possibly Oakley is the right call. I think we should disregard the hands.

1934 Oakley.

neetstuf-4-u's picture
Panel Member
Posted April 22, 2018 - 5:33pm

I am more inclined to say subject watch is an Oakley and case differences are the drawing and case wear on watch. It appears to me that in the Oakley ad, the slight step can be seen in the lower right side of drawing. I think the perspective is a little off in the artist rendition.

Another possibility is that what we are seeing here is a Kirkwood case housing a swapped movement and face from an Oakley.

Case best matches drawing in Kirkwood ad, face best matches Oakley ad. Hand don't match either ad.The absence of a seconds subdial in the Kirkwood ad is a potential ID issue for me.

My vote is Oakley, noting the movement might be a replacement (15/17 J discrepancy)