I have a nagging question I would like some thoughts on. I have read many posts by collectors in this club that basically state that recasing a watch drastically lowers the value of the watch.

I agree that a watch in the original case is more desirable. But, a lot of the cases are really worn out and have brassing all over the place. Some may have broken hinges and is really dented, etc. making it almost impossible to repair. So, if we recase the watch are we basically destroying the collect ability and significantly decreasing the value of the watch or are we improving the value?

Maybe I have a problem with people saying that recasing a watch always decreases the value. Maybe I have a problem with people making blanket statements that a watches value is decreased just because it has been recased when they have no knowledge regarding the reason why it was recased in the first place. If recasing a watch is a negative, then maybe we should destroy the watch because the case is bad.

I think we have all kinds of collectors in this club and we need to be mindful how we say things. Some people can afford to buy the best watch made. Others are happy to get a watch that runs. When we make blanket statements about decreasing the value of the watch because it was recased we are in effect telling the beginning collector or the person who can’t afford the best that maybe he should just get rid of his watches and forget about collecting them or God forbid improving them with a new case.

Ok, I had my say! What do you say?

Ernie, thats a very timely point. We must respect all collectors for their choices of collection. Each of us has our own value judgements of what is "collectible".

I puzzle at the hoarding of Gold-cased watches for the sake of their being gold because the real "gold" I see in a watch is different. I see the "story" behind the watch itself (if it could only talk) and the technical prowess of people during the "horse and buggy" days to make something so accurate that it still defies the imaginations of modern mechanics to do the same thing in those quantities and with manufacturing labor which we cwould consider "unskilled" today.

I think of our watches in their historical perspective of their owners as we now think of our cars. If we wear out the batteries (mainspring) or tires (cases and Hands) or paint job (dials) we replace them with new or better stuff.

To me a watch is a piece of "used" merchandise well worth its own weight in gold for the miracle of surviving such a long time in serviceable condition.

Any of us who collect "regular" watches also accumulate a certain number of other parts due to simple attrition of some movements.

To that end just tonight, a Hunter Case Getty Movement floated into my view which is one of the uniquly "nameless" Illinois movements. As it is a very nice clean movement and it had no case, I dug into my drawer of "stuff", and "viola" a case appeared that fitted it just fine! Now I can restore the rest of the watch knowing it has a proper case for it's next caretaker to enjoy it in. To me, when I am done with it it will look like a "million bucks".

In short, I think that ADDS VALUE TO THIS WATCH and I will do it again, and again, and . . .

Well Ernie, here is another way of looking at it, just this evening I posted on a question on an early Howard that was re-cased, had I not done that maybe the person interested in the Ebay watch might have bought it without knowing it wasn't in a proper case and might have paid way to much. Later maybe wanting to upgrade, or for some other reason the watch was to be sold and then the unfortunate owner would realize they would have to take a major loss on their Howard which could easily amount to hundreds of dollars. Now having said that, I realize what applies to an early Howard might not apply to a common watch.
I don't think making blanket statements about recasing is what makes a recased watch worth less, it's the market that determines the value. The market will always put a premium on originality, whether it's a watch or an old car. Just like an old Studebaker with the original Studebaker engine would be worth more than one with a later model replacement engine even though they both funtion perfectly.

I am a relatively new collector (2 years) and in my area of interest I can now usually tell if a watch has been recased. But the recase may have taken place 60, 70 or 80 years ago. Cases do break or wear out and years ago a good watch that was favored by the owner (and probably had been a costly purchase) would have been given a new case. Does that make the value of the second case minimal in today's market? It would depend on the collector and what they are looking for in a watch. I, for one, do not mind a slightly dinged case or one with brassing. If it really worn, I wouldn't hesitate to recase it, if only to continue to honor the many years of service it has provided and to give it a respectable "home". And, if I were to ever sell it, I would be sure to mention that I had recased it. Although there are many unscrupulous sellers that don't divulge that information in order to hope for a higher price. With the abundance of movements out there without cases, I have no qualms about putting one in a nice case that I may have. I feel the movement is more secure in a case versus a plastic or metal canister and you get to enjoy it as it was meant to be.

Yes, there are certain watches where having the original case greatly affects it's value and it's desirability among collectors, such as the E. Howard mentioned above by Harold. But the market has driven that need. And for those watches, if it has been recased, I would place value on the movement alone.

For new collectors, I would recommend that they buy what they like and what they can afford. If it has been recased, treasure it for what it is while remembering it's long life and the mechanical marvel that it is. What we now consider the lower or middle price point watches were the ones bought by the majority of the population during their day. They still make fine additions to a collection.

I have read these ruminations with fascination. We really have some considerate thinkers in this club! I have a couple of old watches that belonged to my grandfather in the original silveroid cases. Of course I wouldn't recase them for anything. On the other hand, I have a few excellent high grade movements that have had the original cases scrapped for the price of the metal. I hope to one day find cases for these so that I can salvage them from the scrap heap.

I don't mind a recasing if the case is period correct and the screw marks line up.

Original is always preferred but a proper recasing can be indistinguishable from an original.

Collecting 18 sz older Ball Hamiltons has the advantage of having the same screw marks as Hamiltons of the same era.

Having said that, I don't mind brassed and worn cases, they add a little historical feel to the watch and for the most part establish that these beauties were in service for a long time and probably did a good job for their owners.

A tribute to the worksmanship or the makers and pride of ownership of the carriers.

happy hunting,

Great point, Ernie! I am one of those watch collectors who wasn't born rich, and being hopelessly addicted to watch collecting, I try to get what I can afford.I collect pretty much railroads only, and let's face it, most RR watches, and most of mine have been recased once or twice in their lifetimes.So I personally have no problem recasing, as long as the case style agrees with the age of the movement.I have a few that are originally cased and I am happy to have them.I think the vast majority of collectors want original cases, and that's fine if you can afford to wait for, and pay extra for a nice all-original.I settle for what I can get.

I think re-casing is probably OK in some instances but a watch should never be re-cased into something of a different time period. I saw an Hamilton 992B, (which wasn't produced before 1941) that had been re-cased into a 992 case that looked like it was from the 1920's. It was a poor match. What about a size 12 gold case with a cheap, 17j or less, movement? If you had a good 23J movement from the same watch manufacturer and time period that was in a 10K gold-filled case, why not make the switch, if the watches and cases are from the same era?