I realize that the Database is a work in progress, and may never be entirely reliable, but I just looked up a silver-cased Hampden that I bought at a small auction months ago, apparently never having looked it up previously, because I think I would have noticed the Database oddness.

All the data given is correct except for the first line, as the dial on this one says Hampden Watch Co., not a private label, if that means anything in the scheme of things.

I would guess the watch to be all-original. It's not likely that anyone swapped in a better dial than what was originally there, because this dial isn't pristine.

Is there really a connection between this Hampden and Ball Standard?

One owner wrote in to the Database to say that his watch agreed completely with it, and that these models should be considered RR grade. Well, I'd really like to know what that watch dial - and movement - look like.

Grade: Unknown

Private Label: Ball's Standard High Grade

Movement Serial Number: 444875
Estimated Production Year: 1887
Size: 18s
Jewels: 15j
Movement Configuration: Openface
Movement Finish: Nickel
Model: 3
Movement Setting: Lever
Plate: Full Plate
Regulator: Teske
Adjusted: Yes
Adjusted to Positions: 0
Railroad Grade: Unknown

here's the movement photo...

Nice watch, Ken, did some snooping in another database, it states your watch is Grade 59, total production of 3750, yours is from a run of 1000. No mention of private label. Hope this helps.
Gary

Ken, if you have the Arnold/Hernick book,on pg. 22 they show a Hampden Ball ,close in SN (444731) to yours.The dial is also shown, which I think is called a "Moorhouse" Arabic that is marked Webb C. Ball, Cleveland O. Yours I think has no connection to Ball, other than being made at roughly the same time.It probably would have been RR grade, being adjusted and with the Teske regulator.Nice watch!Hopefully some of the others will have a better answer...I have looked up a Hampden of mine on that database and it was way off, other times it's right on . Regards, Ted.

Thanks Gary and Ted. It IS a nice-looking watch - especially with a fine sterling case and nickel movement, but it would be a bit nicer if it was a Ball Standard timepiece. Ah well. It wasn't represented at time of sale as anything but a Hampden. It came with another coin-silver Hampden with a gilt movement.

But it makes one wonder what distinguishes the Ball from the grade 59 made near the same time, but without the same markings etc.?

Anyone?

In my opinion, Ball bought (probably at a discount) from older existing stock and then had Hampden replace the barrel bridge. I note that all Ball's Standard Hampdens that I have seen do not have serial numbers under the barrel bridge and the damaskeening does not always match!

Ball Standards occur quite randomly and not in significant runs with Hampden which gives rise to the theory that they were unsold inventory.

I note also that the serial numbers seem earlier than the Ball ADs for Hampden Ball Standsards that first appeared in late spring 1890, which also supports the premise that the movements were obtained from unsold older stock.

happy hunting

Bill -- Is the barrel bridge with its engraved name the only difference between a grade 59 such as the subject of this thread and a Ball Standard watch?

Any qualitative differences? Or all just naming convention?

kh

Ted Brown is correct, any so-called "database" on Hampden watches found on the Internet is based upon latter day speculation and for that reason fraught with considerable error. There are no surviving Hampden records so the only reliable information on Hampden movements is in the Hernick-Arnold Hampden Watch Company book which contains actual sightings listed on many pages in the back of that highly authoritative volume. If you collect Hampdens you can rely on it as a tried and true reference.

I have seen various makes of watches with "Webb C. Ball, Cleveland, O." on the dial and the general consensus seems to be those were watches sold in the jewelry store operated under that name, not unlike any other jeweler that sold watches with his name on the dial. Some, but not all of those seem to be rather ordinary and not of any particular significance.

Don

Ken,

I have about 39 known survivors "Ball's Standard" Hampden marked movements in my list which is linked from

Ball Hampden Thread

I don't know if any of them are model 89's but I don't think the model was the criteria used by Ball.

One of mine is a model 59 serial 410538 and another comes up on the database as a new railway
(761845)

I doubt that any particular model was favored in Ball's selection of movements from Hampden.

Thanks Bill. I meant model 59, and I just corrected that before reading your answer.

I saw in previous posts that the Ball Hampdens were, at least according to adverts, adjusted to five positions. I don't know what would indicate that a movement is adjusted to that degree, but the number of adjustments might be something that separates a Hampden Ball Standard RR watch from just a Hampden lever-set, 15J 'adjusted' watch - other than some writing on the barrel bridge.

The answer to that might come from someone who could look inside both a Hampden Ball Standard and a not Hampden Ball Standard within the same base model.

Ken

I am not sure what A physical inspection would tell you.

I believe Ball was quite capable of doing his own adjustments and would buy unadjusted movements and perform his own adjustments.

My list of Hampden Ball's known to me can be seen at if you scroll down

Hampden Ball list