Bulova 1955 Senator

Submitted by bruce on June 26, 2012 - 1:17pm
Manufacture Year
Movement Model
Movement Jewels
Movement Serial No.
Case Serial No.
Case shape
Additional Information

manual wind
sub second

11.5''', Dm= 25.6mm
H= 3.6mm
17 jewels
f = 18000 A/h
power reserve 45h

Balance staff U2479

Stem W2774

Main spring / battery
1.35 x 9.0 x 0.10


family: 11AC

Bulova watch
Bulova watch
Bulova watch
Bulova Watch
Bulova Watch
Bulova Watch
Posted June 29, 2012 - 3:07pm

In reply to by mybulova_admin

According to G-S Crystal catalog no. 60, the Champion and Senator "A" take different crystals, Senator "A" hexagonal (CMH406-60), and Champion has a tonneau crystal (CMT350-40) which it shares with the 1950's Minute Man. This indicates totally different shaped cases.

As for evidence of "lumping" different watches together under the designation "similar", you say "it makes no sense, and we have no evidence of it being done before,"  yet you yourself put evidence in another post, namely my 1953 Seabee.  Also, there is the 1936 ad for the Commodore which mentions the Apollo as if it were the same watch, which it was definitely not. Also, the 1942 ad showing the Brewster and listing the Attorney below it as though the only difference is the metal colour, when they both have different case/crystals as shown in other ads and crystal catalogs.

Please note the 1955 "red" ads for the Senators "B", "C", "D" and "FW" as well as the "A". Try and ignore this, if you so wish.

Replies on the back of a $100 bill to...  : )

EDIT: I have just been looking at the ad that Admin posted and there is a"Bulova23", with 3 different bands available. No Different letter designation, just different  prices. 

Regarding the Bulova 23 in the mid 1950's, check out the different letter designations, all for different case shapes.  : )

Posted June 27, 2012 - 9:06am

Have fun

Posted June 27, 2012 - 10:42pm

In reply to by bobbee

Bobbee, what's your thought on the advert above?

Whilst it shows that the band does indeed make a difference to the model ID it also highlights the challenges we face here when trying to be accurate with the ID process.

It would be good to hear the thoughts of other panel members on this one.

Posted June 30, 2012 - 12:48am

In reply to by mybulova_admin

Sorry, but the above statement about the band making a difference to the model ID in this ad is incorrect.

William Smith
Posted June 28, 2012 - 1:42am

Stephen et. al.  In this instance, the mount may indeed indicate a different model (not variant).  On models (or variants of models) for which we have an ad that brings up this possibility, I would say tentative two ticks is appropriate.  If we don't have an ad or other documentation indicating this possibility, I would say three ticks, as I don't think we should ID based on what "may be" if/when we find another ad.  The models for which we have this discrepency are not many, so it's OK to have as tentative in these few instances- IMO. 

The ad above does raise questions, like "plain case" for "Champion".  If there exists reasonable doubt based on ads like this, two ticks tentative helps indicate these discrepencies.

1955 ad for Senator "A"

Other "new" 1955 Senator "A" ad snipped.

EDIT:  Top ad is a B, not an A.  Thanks OT

Posted June 28, 2012 - 6:51am

interesting Will, the ads above are showing 2 different Case designs for the 'SENATOR' "A".

Posted June 28, 2012 - 7:57am

In reply to by FifthAvenueRes…

Top advert is actually for the Senator "B" but does show that the letter variant was based on the case design.

William Smith
Posted June 30, 2012 - 11:36am

In reply to by FifthAvenueRes…

Time for an eye checkup for me is more like it. I just had them checked two months ago, but I think I'm gonna go to a different Doctor. I go to my current Optimist's office twice a year for a checkup, but he just keeps telling me "...don't worry, your vision will get better..."