I bought this 992E at the very beginning of my collecting. It's dial had some noticeable hairlines and I replaced it with this single-sunk montgomery that I later acquired.

I was going through my earlier acquisitions, recently, and thought the watch looked (somehow)wrong and concluded that it was the dial.

I bought a great looking Hamilton Box-car dial from John McElhenny and intended to use it for this watch. I KNOW that the Box-car dial was associated with the 992E.

But... I've had several people tell me that the watches present dial is "proper" as to time and design. I'm told that the small, block lettering is an indication of a later Hamilton design. Looking through some literature, today, I did see a very similar dial on an early 992B in one of the old books.

Maybe the single-sunk feature is throwing me off. I don't see that many single-sunk Montgomery's although I'm told that some folks, like Webb C. Ball, just preferred single-sunks.

The movement is SN 2643423. Gelson dates that movement to c. 1939-1940. Shugart dates it to 1936. The case is the "mainliner-type" and is not marked Hamilton.

If I got this dial "right," it was a mere accident. When I chose it, I knew absolutely nothing about dating a Hamilton dial. If I find that the Box-car dial is more appropriate, where would the S?S Montgomery dial fit-in? It's flawless dial and ought to be displayed.

Any help out there?

The 992 usually had a double sunk dial. The single sunk was common with the 974 Special.

Don

Peter,
Your dial is usually seen on the 992B movements marked "US Gov't" and referred to as No. 024.

Robert

Thanks guys. Actually, I bought that dial originally for a 974s and then I replaced it with an "Inter-urban" dial.

I have been looking for a military 992B but that dial would have to wait in line. Rob Jones got me a terrific, brand new Melamine (still in cellophane) 24hr dial that I will gladly "build" a watch around!

If you are certain that the dial is associated with a 974s, I might swap it. I do have another 974s with a dial that I don't particularly like either.

Here's the 974-special... also sporting a single-sunk dial.

I'm sorry if this is turning into "musical dials" and is getting hopelessly complex.

I've been reading an old 992B thread and privately talking with Terry Hall. He seems to think that the single-sunk Montgomery is appropriate to early military 992B's and there are some diagrams in the old threads to support it. My question would be whether that dial (the SS montgomery) would only be appropriate on a "US Govt" marked 992B, from the war-years, and housed in a military spec case?

Now... the plot thickens. This Xmas I got a NOS melamine dial from Rob Jones. (No photos but I'm working at the shop and will try to take a few today). This dial is 24 hour with red numerals. It is still in cellophane.

Of course, I am keeping this dial for a nice example of an appropriate movement and case. I'm told that it is defintely military and not Canadian. So... I've been looking for a "US Govt" marked movement for it.

But... Terry observed (correctly) that since it is Melamine it would have appeared later, (50's?) and, he thinks, by that time Hamilton stopped marking it's military movement "US Govt." So, now I'm wondering at an appropriate movement and case for that dial. I have quite a few 992B's, so if it is only a question of a replacing a dial (not a case or specially marked movement), I'll do it in a heartbeat. The dial that Rob Jones got for me.... is a heart-stopper!

In addition to the "Gov't" marked 992B, the No. 024 dial will (occasionally) be seen on "Non-Gov't" marked movements as well.

Robert

I have a 992B that my brother in law bought in the early 1950's. I know it did not come with a montgomery dial but one was put on when the watch was new.A porcelain single sunk monty dial was put on for him,but I dont know where.When he was alive I was not so involved in pocket watches.I missed a good chance on this one.
J Smith

This dial business gets very confusing. The dial that started this thread is not a 024 in my opinion. The five minute dots on a 024 are closer to the center than on this dial. Talk about nitpicking!!! According to a copy of the blueprint that I have the 024 was also not created until 1/17/1941. This was on a copper plate. In 1954 it was changed to an aluminum plate.

We also have a Hamilton memo dated 12/3/41. It states that they were having problems manufacturing double-sunk dials. They said they would substitute single sunk dials until the problem was solved. The affected dials were the 532, 536 and 537. They were replaced by the 080, 081 and 082.

Someday I hope to unravel the history of Hamilton dials, but it will take a lot of work. Hamilton was changing dials in small and large ways often. They also changed thier numbering system several times.

Don

I just bought an early 992E last night that has the single sunk dial on it as well.

I am still very confused as to which dial was available for the different watches; 992, 992B, 992E (with the exception of the "Railway Sepcials" on the 992Bs. I have come accross both double and single on each model; all "advertised" as being origional.

These days- unless you bought it new yourslef- it is too hard to tell. The 992E I bought last night is in an "origional" Hamilton BOC case- who knows!!

This is getting interesting.

I tried to compare Peter's dial to some 024 dials in other pictures in older threads, but the differences are so subtle I cannot tell if I am looking at a different dial number or just a different production run.

Donald, I am curious about what dial this one is if not the 024. I am trying to learn as much about these as possible and then some of this stuff gets incredibly detailed! I read your post a couple times to make sure I wasn't missing something but I still don't know what you would call Peter's dial?

Thanks to Peter for starting another fascinating Hamilton discussion.

BTW, it may the military/government association with this dial, I dunno, but I really like the single sunk 024 for some reason. I think it just has a clean look without getting too busy as some Montgomerys can do.

I took the "musical dials" plunge yesterday and swapped that dial for the "box-car" on the 992E. I figured that I was reasonably confident that the box-car dial is "right" on the 992E. And... it looks great. There is an elegance about a monochrome dial.

So... I now have two dials, looking for movements; the ss Montgomery and the 24 hour, red-numbered melamine.

I am intrigued by the idea of "re-dialing" some of my 992B's with these dials, once I can become convinced that such watches would be right and once I can pinpoint a time-period and signature.

Quite honestly... the idea of seeing EVERY 992B cased in a #15 or #17, with a "Railway Special" dial is.... boring. I have a few 992B's and would love to make some of them a bit different.... if proper.

Here is an element of collecting that our new "Ethic Code" cannot address... a desire to make our collections interesting and varied (as well as "proper"). Is this desire so far off? Didn't the watch manufacturers also offer variations in dials, cases, damaskeening, etc. in order to make their product lines more interesting and attractive?

Food for thought?

It definatley would make things more intersting for me as well; 992s are my weakness. The railway special dials on the 992bs are so notorious for flacking and cracking, being able to swapo them out with a boxcar or montogemry- and having it still be "correct" for the watch would be great.

So many of us find these mismatched movements, cases, and dials and spend countless hours trying to bring them back to being correct for the period and restoring them.

Here's a "down and dirty" shot of that NOS Melamine "military" dial that I'd love to mount on a 992B.... as soon as I can determine a year range and appropriate case.

That's a great looking dial, Peter, and should really set off the right "B" nicely.

I am also fascinated by the idea of restorations, and- how that might possibly muddy the waters of collecting in the future.

I know in collectible firearms, some are starting to mark restored parts with 'R's to indicate replica and also marking pieces unobtrusively with dates like, "Restored March, 2007" so future collectors know the piece is not original.

One of the neat things about watches I think is that we CAN switch things like dials and cases around to either fix damaged or incorrect or yes, boring parts for other ones. We can also build watches from leftover NOS and reproduction parts that are great for carrying and I don't see anything wrong with that as long as we aren't tearing apart original watches for their parts to make a few bucks on ebay or whatever.

I think it is natural for collectors to seek 'correct' and original examples for their collections, and to want to correct those that aren't already that way. After all, after you know your way around a 992 who wants one with a circa 1920 case and a 30's movement and a 50's dial and a replaced bow on the case? Such things stick out like a sore thumb to the collector.

Well, I feel like a nut! Of my 3 992B's, one is a 1941 issue in a model 11 case and with porcelein dial.
I really like this dial, as I can SEE this thing with it's boxcar numbers in a dimly lit room (like my control room at work). Something just seemed....well, different, even beyond the fact it was a porcelein dial vs my other two having melamine dials.

Well, DUH!!! It's a double sunk porcelein dial!! I never even noticed that before until I read this string and took another look!

Sometimes you can't see the forest for the trees!!

Regards! Mark

Peter,
According to information supplied by Don, the "blueprint" for your (CPR) Melamine dial, No. 50-090-3, has 2 dates, 8-27-51 and 7-15-54.

(The paragraph below was added 3-23-2007)

The No. 50-090-3 (Melamine) is the third version of this dial. The second version (50-090-2) was porcelain (glass) enamel and had two dates on the "blueprint", 11-25-42 and 3-7-46.

If you like (CPR) Canadian Pacific Railway dials, you will like this topic.

Robert