Skip to main content

Bulova 1973 Minute Man

5/10 votes
Model ID rating explained.
3

Manufacture Year: 

1973

Movement Model: 

None

Movement Serial No.: 

None

Case Serial No.: 

T004178

Case shape: 

Round

Additional Information

Dimensions 35mm wide x 42mm lug to lug.

Not For Sale
Bulova Minute Man watch 1973
1973 Bulova watch
William Smith's picture
William Smith
Club 5000Panel Member
Posted May 14, 2012 - 1:59am

Great watch.  NOVA has one- an unknown w/ 11OAOCB and some interesting inside case markings.  The serial numbers between the two are very close. Lisa's is T002468.  What does that darned "T" mean......

NOVA
Posted May 14, 2012 - 11:37am

I consider mine an "unknown", as I have seen no evidence in the advertisements that anything was still called a "Bulova 23" as late as 1973.  The latest mention I have found of a "Bulova 23" in the adverts is 1962.

FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
FifthAvenueRest...
Posted May 14, 2012 - 1:09pm

'73 ad shows 2 potential suspects, the 'PRESIDENT' or the 'SENATOR'.

Both are shown as 23 Jewels with Day/Date - it's unclear what the determining factor is:

Automatic vs Manual ?

NOVA
Posted May 14, 2012 - 1:49pm

I'm not sure what 1973 ad you're referring to.  The only ad labeled 1973 in the database is for the 17-jewel Jet Star.

There is a 1972 ad that shows the President and Senator.  Both are 23 jewels, both are automatic, and both have the whale symbol on the dial. 

The closest in looks to the subject watch is the Jet Star, but the jewel count is wrong for that model (at least per the ads that we have).

FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
FifthAvenueRest...
Posted May 14, 2012 - 1:59pm

Looks don't mean anything. - Case and Movement type / Jewel count are the determining factors

The 'PRESIDENT' We know was 23 Jewels from prior ads, could the 'SENATOR' entry be a typo?

NOVA
Posted May 14, 2012 - 2:16pm

I am fully aware that looks are not the sole determining factor, but I also would not say that looks mean nothing.  A mere glance through the 1970s adverts--or my own collection--reveals some very distinctive looks.  Take the Diors, for example.  You can spot one of them a mile away just by the case design.

Guessing that we're talking about the 1972 ad that I referenced, why assume that the Senator listing is a typo?  By assuming that only the President could have 23 jewels?  Based on what?

IMO, we have far too few ads for the 1970s to draw many conclusions, and I'm just not interested in basing a model ID on pure assumption, particularly if it involves assuming that one of the few ads we have is wrong.

William Smith's picture
William Smith
Club 5000Panel Member
Posted May 14, 2012 - 3:28pm

Agreed- we don't have enough ads.  and I would think there were many models available during this timeframe which may not have been advertised period.  The magazines where we are finding 60's-70's ads are usually available in most larger libraries in hard copy.   It requires sitting in the library and just going through the magazines looking for Bulova.  My library has a scanner, or I've simply taken a hi res photo of the ads and post-processed at home w/o scanning.

Geoff Baker
Club 5000Panel Member
Posted June 15, 2015 - 6:14am

Reopened for further identification at request of Panel

Andersok's picture
Andersok
Panel Member
Posted June 15, 2015 - 6:31pm

Not finding this in any available ads, likely an Unknown

William Smith's picture
William Smith
Club 5000Panel Member
Posted June 15, 2015 - 11:11pm

Yep, unknown from me.  Distinct case shape and dial should make it easier to spot if/when an ad does appear.