Good afternoon, all.
I'm thrilled to say that I finally found a Columbus Watch Co. watch! I work just over a mile and a half away from the factory location (some of which is still standing and currently used as an office building) so I'm tickled to have found it. I do have some questions that I'm hoping someone can help me with. The big one is that I'm trying to figure out when it was manufactured. I know that there's a difference before and after 1894, but I'm having a rough time narrowing things down. If I look up the number online (316967) it tells me that it's a 6 size. It isn't, it's an 18. I've also looked at a hundred or so different pictures, and I can't find any with the regulator in this location. Here's the movement.

I'm also assuming that this isn't the original case, would you agree? It's a big, honking Silverode one that makes this thing nice and hefty. I'm really just trying to figure out what exactly, or generally, I have here. Regardless, I'll be sending it out for a good cleaning so that it's up and running. Once I do, I'll be a total nerd and take it down to the original factory location and take a picture of it so that it knows it's home!
Thanks for any thoughts or info.

I love your enthusiasm!

You are correct, it is a 7 jewel, 18 size movement that had been recased. I have many like this. Original cases are scrapped, melted, worn out, or used for higher quality movements, and nickel cases are plentiful. You can see extra screw marks in the rim where your casing screws are. That means it held another movement at some point in time.

I dont see anything wrong with the regulator, it matches others around the serial number. It's just a different design than the earlier long armed regulators.

The lookup you are referring too doesn't say your movement it six sized. It says the closest observed movement in proximity to yours is 95 away in serial number, and that it's a 6 size. There are no records to build a database, so it is reconstructed list. The more observations and data that get uploaded, the more accurate it will be. Some of the bigger companies like Elgin and Waltham have factory records to build a database from, and others like Columbus and Hampden do not, or have very little records.

Enjoy your watch! Hopefully a Columbus collector will stop by and give you a better rundown. What I posted is general information.

Have a good day! Show some pictures when you get it to it's destination!

Edward, can you tell me if that Columbus of yours is pendant set?

Thanks for that info Rick. That helps a lot. And I certainly will post some homecoming pictures!
And Bila, no, this one is lever set. I forgot to put that anywhere in the original post.

Thanks Edward, so it looks like you probably have a Grade 9, manufactured somewhere around 1895.

The reorganization of the "Columbus Watch Company" into the "New Columbus Watch Company" also occurred around 1895.

Although your watch is not marked as a "New Columbus", my bet is on a "1895" date or thereabouts. The reason I am of this opinion is due to that style of regulator running back along the balance cock, this was used on their lower grades a lot.

Also some people are under the believe that all "New Columbus" Manufacture were marked as such but this is not the case. As a large lot of material marked under the old Company name was still getting used by the new Entity.

I have been collecting a few of the Columbus , I have a pair of North Star's one in O/F and one hunter, and a Railway King Special , and just by chance I just picked up 2 more RWK Specials. The info is incomplete on Columbus, the one below and the 2 coming in are pendant set I believe.The early ones are swiss , american made start about 20000 , with 20024 on ebay as Ohio Columbus watch co on the dial .

The R.W.K Specials first appeared around 1892 Kevin, if your R.W.K's coming are pendant set then they are pre-1895, so somewhere for them between 1892-95 Manufacture.

What jeweling do your North Star's have, 11 or 15?

Bila , I have not counted them , the book says 11j , the O/F is gilt and the hunter is nickel that has a sort of star pattern

Like has been said already the regulator is a simple regulator used by most companies on their low end models, The case is not original. I use to Collect Columbus as they are very nice looking movements but once I found how much trouble it is to find and replace the staff I sold all but about two or three of them. So if the staff is good do whatever you need to do to keep from breaking that staff,

If they both have the Jewels bezel-set like the nickel one Kevin they will be 11 Jewels, These started being produced from approximately 1890. The nickel was selling for $11.00 and the gilt for $10.50 back in the day

Hello, Ed,

I got interested in collecting Columbus watches about 15 years ago when I lived around the corner from their old factory on Thurman Ave. I have a number of Columbus watches now. As someone else mentioned, they can be a real challenge to repair due to scarcity of parts. I still get a thrill finding one in good condition. Now if I can ever find one of those rare 25-jewel specimens, I'll die happy

Bila asked about pendent-set Columbus, which is a great question because the compsny's decision to start making some pendent-set models turned out to be a catastrophe for the company. They were sued for patent infringement by the Elgin/ Waltham consortium, and litigated for years all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, where they lost. I am convinced that this setback, in combination with the depression of 1893, got the founder, Dietrich Gruen, shown to the door and sent the company into bankruptcy/reorganization. As we know, they never really recovered financially and sold out to the Studebakers (South Bend) just after the turn of the century (1903). Meanwhile, Gruen went on to establish another very successful watch company.

Looking at Ed's new Columbus acquisition (first photo in this thread) , I am reminded of a question I've always been curious about: i.e. pressed jewels. In lower end watches, the jewels (or bushings as the case may be) are not in screwed-in gold settings, but are held in place in the plate by friction. My question: can such jewels be replaced? How is it done, and how difficult is it?

Dennis, I believe the first picture doesn't have plate jewels. Kevin's movement with the serial number ending in 75, has pressed in plate jewels, and these can be replaced.

The movement that Brian is talking about Dennis has what they call rubbed-in plate jewels(Brian is correct to the extent that after you rub out the old ones you then proceed to press in a new one, then you have to rub it back in.

These jewels themselves have a slight taper on their sides and are very hard to source. In comparison the normal Seitz jewel that gets pressed in have straight sides.

To do the rubbed-in ones correctly you must have a set of "bezel opening and closing" tools. These are a little hard to master but with perseverance you will get the knack.

If you look on the underside of the jewel you will see that there is a slight bezel/lip rolled over the edge of the jewel. This is what you need to roll slightly up and out, that is what the "bezel openers are used for. To do this you must first punch out the old glass/ruby (yes, break it out very carefully with out damaging the plate). So you have to use a destructive method initially to reach the desired result in the end.

Once you have carefully rolled up and out the edge of the jewel bezel you then select the correct size jewel (if you have that type) and carefully press it into position. You then take the "bezel closing" tool and very carefully and slowly roll the bezel/lip inwards and down. Please be aware that on some of these old plates that bezel/lip can be extremely brittle and it can snap away during either procedure (this is why most people do not like doing them).

This day and age it is a lost art for most that repair watches. this is due to the fact that most will just press out the existing jewel then ream with a Seitz or K & D reamer and then use a straight sided Seitz jewel in the tapered hole (more expedient in most cases or otherwise, it is due to the bezel/lip snapping away). This works just as well if done correctly but is definately not original to the movement or the correct way of doing things if the correct way is possible.

Thanks, Brian and Bila, interesting info on pressed jewels.

Thanks for the continued input Dennis and Bila. Really interesting stuff! I'll get mine sent out for a check up one of these weeks!

Hello all! I am curious about the location of the balance cock on these. I own several with space between the balance cock and the barrel bridge. But on the two key wind only I have, the cock is touching the bridge. Anyone know about this? (I am pretty sure all mine are of American manufacture...btw.)

All true key-winders the balance cock is against the barrel bridge Kip, non key-winders the cock is away from the bridge with the space in between.

There are some Models that were a transitional type, still with the key-wind arbor present but had a stem set up for winding.

I have seen a few bodge jobs done were key-set cannon pinions were fitted to the Transitional's and then they were installed in a key-wind case, these can be easily noticed when looking at the position of the balance cock