Why do some of the so-called "experts" hate on Hampden?

I collect pocket watches from all the major makes but technically know more about Elgins. I am willing to say that I know little to nothing about military watches no matter who made them, nor do I have much of any knowledge about keywinds. Sometimes if do searches about information on watches especially Hampden you hear stuff that I have never seen with any of my Hampdens, like they used worn out dies, they were a 2nd tier watch company and such.

When I go back and look at sales catalogs from the same timeframe and look at pricing you see this basic trend Elgin and Waltham were the price leaders, Illinois pricing was a bit below those two, then came Hampden and Hamilton. If you look at the bread and butter RR 16s 21j RRA watches for Hampden the 105/McKinley/Deuber were all $34.20 in the 1917 Oskamp-Nolting cat, in the 1916 Hamilton time book $32.50 (all movement only), the 940 was $28 in the same catalog, in the 1917 O-N catalog Hampden in the 18s 21j SR for 35.40, the John Hancock for 33.20 and the Deuber Watch co for 26.60. The Hamilton time book did not show the 942 but I would consider the 942=SR and 940=John H but clearly in pricing Hampden other than in regards to presentation watches and such was not second tier in pricing to the bread and butter watches such as the 992 or the 940. I really don't get into the post 1928 argument what was the best watch but in the era before 1928 and before I have never seen a Hampden that I saw signs that they were using bad dies, poor engraving or such.

I would also say this I have several model 5 Hampden 21j NR 16s and the 23j SR 16s and I would put any of them up against the bread and butter equivalents that Hamilton, Elgin, Waltham or Illinois made (no Lord Elgins, Maximus or Premier Maximus allow). I appreciate my South Bends and Rockfords as much as I do my other watches, but for the life of me why people say this which diverts collectors away from good watches to add to their collections is beyond me.

Mixed feelings about that Claude, for as long as the 'experts' continue to diss the great watch company Hampden, those of us who can't afford the rarified air of the high jeweled Hamilton's can still afford a watch that is in many ways superior in construction.

Heck, even the men who STARTED Hamilton came from Dueber-Hampden, according to the history of the company.

A great watch company, and a great watch.....but one of the best kept secrets in the watch collecting world.

I hate it for old John Dueber, but let's keep it that way for those of us who quietly collect them and carry them.

Personally speaking, though the Cross railroad men carried Elgin's, the Mittendorf railroader side of the family were Hampden men.

Regards! Mark

Too bad we don't hear much from Deacon anymore. (Richard M. Jones) I'm sure he would have some thoughts on this. He was a Hampden collector and held high regard for them.

Agreed, Dave.

Regards! Mark

Its mostly the age old topic like cars and trucks. There are the Ford & Chevy lovers and then the Dodge boys !!

I will say this per my own observations, the polished high steel parts such as winding wheels, ratchet wheels and regulator parts on the Hampden's seem to usually have more carbon spotting and rusting issues than the other makers. And I have found that a lot of the great repairmen don't particularly care to work on the Hampdens for whatever reasons.

There was major competition among the different companies back in the day and they all were fairly close in quality and pricing.

regards,
bb

Buster, spotting and such probably could be metal composition and environment and as a rule you see this on all brands. I would could add that it appears that South Bends dials were a bit suspect, we definitely know that Hamilton's melamine dials are suspect and tend to go to pieces depending on their exposure but in this case I would not call either of these cases poor or shoddy workmanship/production.
But to go so far as to say a company was basically using worn out dies and creating blurry engraving is what I am saying people toss out there about Hampden.
In the case of Hamilton I don't think they were thinking lets make a crappy dial (melamine) I just don't think they knew that the melamine would break down like it has and I doubt they ever envisioned or designed the dial to last 50-60 years. The were probably looking for a material that could be used that provided a good basis for a dial, save some production and material costs and was easy to produce, much like metal dials which all brands produced that also have issues, again using the paint materials at the time they produced the best quality they could.

The relative qualities of the various makes is certainly an interesting subject for discussion.

I find difficulty in judging because of the many unknowns that may have affected a century-old watch since its production. The increasing unavailability of correct replacement parts (e.g. mainsprings and good balance staffs) is also an issue of relevance.

Of course, the more plentiful watches will be more easily collected and there will be more chance of finding a good one.

When I first joined this group way back when I was a Hampden collector and still am. I am also a Hamilton collector. Hamilton is a bit easier to collect because there in my opinion fewer and more distinct models to collect and the information on Hamilton's is readily available and very well documented. Hampden made a lot of watches and a lot of them were PL's. The beginning of Hampden from New York in PL's is spotty if you ask me. The later New York's and the early Hampden's (18s) look identical so you have only the serial numbers to go by and everyone I speak with has a different serial number to use to go by when they determine which company it came from. Hamilton is different. When Hamilton was formed their movements did not look like their predecessors. As for the others I have Rockfords, Seth Thomas, Columbus, South Bend, Waltham, Elgin,NYS (Yes NYS), Illinois, Ferdonia, Non Magnetic (Peoria), and probably a couple more brands. I have more Hampden's and Hamilton's than any of the others. I collect eye candy. If I see it and I like it I collect it.

I like Hampdens and they're fun to collect.

I have always liked Hampdens as I feel they give the "best bang for the buck" The earlier ones were pretty well made

One story I heard long ago about hampdens not being worth what other makes were was at one time Hampden had no money to pay their employees so they paid them in watches. Then the employees would go out on the street and try to hock them for whatever they could get to buy food etc...whether that's true or not I have no idea just a story I once heard...

Unfortunately in THIS slow market we are in, I simply cannot afford to have say a 17J Hampden serviced and expect to sell it or even come out on it as most only bring about what the service bill will be. No one wants to pay a dime extra for a serviced watch, at least most won't. So guess I'll sell them as is no guarantees of anything and lose a little instead of losing more...(sigh)

Tom is now applying the old car salesman pitch - - WE LOSE A LITTLE BIT ON EACH ONE, BUT WE MAKE IT UP ON VOLUME......

Clark; Or...you can also say...Negative cash flow is still cash flow