Hi All,

Information needed on this pocket watch movement serial# 380032 Waltham 16s 11 jewel. Waltham site list this as a 1857 Model (I thought 1857 model was only made in 18s and not in a 3/4 plate). Shugart book does not list a 1857 in a 16s keywind (maybe a 1868 Model)? Any information would be greatly appreciated.

Best Regards to All,
Bila

Dial Face

Nice watch! A model 1868, size 16 movement maybe?

An interesting Piece indeed! S/N 380032 is listed on P23 of Roy Ehrhardt's "Waltham P W ID & Price Guide" as "380001-380500 Size 16 Appleton Tracy & Co., 3/4 Plate 15 Jewel Premium Grade" with no Model designator.
Meanwhile in Roy Earhardt's "Serial NUmbers 1,001 - 1,500,000 . . . in the handwriting of American Employees beginning in November 1857 - January 1882", The page for s/n's 379021-380633 is MISSING!
So going by the 1890 Watch material catalog in the back of same, we find this very same movement listed as "1860 Model KW16-16 size 3/4 Plate- Keywind". There is great historical significance to this movement as it is the first real product appearance of a "Nashua" model which designed by the luckless Nashua based geniuses rescued back to the watch business by Waltham under the guidance of Mentor/saviour, Royal Robbins. That may also explain why there are no Waltham factory records for these Nashua based movements.

The 1866 was Pendant wind and this 1860 is your Key Wind.

Thanks David and Mike for your input and expertise, I had come across one of these pocket watches about 18 months ago on EBay but failed to win it at auction. My interset in them was initially because they were a keywind 16s which you do not see very often in an American watch. It is great to know that there is more historical interest in this model than some of the other run of th mill types, especially the link to the Nashua Watch Company. The next challenge will be finding a case and a balance staff to suit as the staff in this one is shot.

Best Regards,
Bila

Bila,
Below is an enlargement of Model 1860, and in the next message will be an enlargement of Model 1868. I thought your movement looked more like Model 1868 although there seem to be only subtle differences between the 2 models.

Shugarts fat book does list both these models (p. 121) and all have multiple stars. I didn't think your watch had a vibrating hairspring, a maltese cross stopworks, nor was it 19 jewels. That left the 15 jewel Model 1868 as the most likely choice.

Model 1868

Bila, I spoke to quickly. Mikes description and pictures show that your watch is the model 1868. The historical distinction remains the same.

So, that is what that box of mainsprings marked 1868 go to... Neat-O

Nice work Mike

I have been perusing the Shugart Guide 2011 and come acroos this plate in the Waltham section, it lists the same plate configuration for some of the 1860, 1868 & the KW16. Looks very similar to the plate on my movement. Could this movement of mine be a 11 jewel as I have seen plenty of Walthams with only one jewel instead of three jewels on the gear train on the dial plate?

Bila

Hi Jon,

I would be interested in a couple of those springs if you would like to sell any?

Bila

Hi Bila,

Looks like there are five (5) left in the Waltham box. (Pioneer Resilient) 1868 - 2208C

You can email me at:

need_pr@yahoo.com

Just sent an email to you Jon.

Bila

Bila, your movement is a model 1860 and is almost certainly 15 jewels. An 1868 model would be stem wind (male stem sticking out of the watch) and "lever" set.

The fat book makes things confusing by listing in various places 1860 and 1868 together (probably to save space) and referring to 1868 as KW KS from the back. The 1860 is KW KS and the 1868 is stemwind and set.

I don't know where the two photos Mike LaForest posted came from, but they both show 1860 models as there is no stem or set "lever" visible. I say "lever" because it moves straight in and out vs. in an arc as in most later watches that we are familiar with.

Also, looking in the handwritten records neither of the serial numbers shown in those photos have a "SW" (stemwind) written in the record.

The main difference I see in the two photos are of the screws around the center wheel in the first. This is due to the higher grade "American Watch Co." pictured which has more jewels than the "AMn. Watch Co." grade pictured in the second.

A case will be difficult to find.

Mike

Hi All,

Have been chasing more information on this watch and it seems to be pointing to David Abbe's original asessment and Mike Kosinenko's later comments that this is a KW16-1860 Model. It seems that this is also determined by the small crescent shaped cut beside the winding arbor, this denoting the 1860 Model. The small differences as explained by Mike LaForest in the guard around the keyset arbor is only different due to a difference in the grades of each 1860 model variation, such as the 'AMn.co' grade (which mines is), 'Appleton Tracy' Grades and also the highest grade 'American Watch Co' which are engraved on the plate (this is explained by Mike Kosinenko in the above post). I will keep trying to dredge up more info, any other info everyone can put forward or their comments on the information already presented would be very welcome.

Bila

Bila, The 1860 had two versions with different Stopworks barrels and one evidently without stopworks. To find a mainspring requires disassembly and removal of the barrel to measure the spring and see which barrel it was equipped with, the 940, 941, or 942.

I must add that while the plate markings of Bila's watch do appear to be the art used for the later model. The production date is unclear, but had to be early.

Per "Watchmakers of Massachusetts" A.C.Bolino , 1987 ISBN 0-939133-01-6, "The basic 3/4 plate (Nashua) movement was introduced in 1861 . . . but discontinued in 1868. (P134).

Production of these were; Model 1860 11,451, Model 1868 2,500 (Vernon Hawkins, "Movement Production, American Watch Co" Heart of American Press 1986)

Bila, Please check the Fogg's patent date at the center of the movement plate. If that is the 1865 Patent, then this MUST be a model 1868 making it even more rare!

Hi David,

The Fogg's patent date is definately 1865, can you elaborate on why this is more important?

Bila

Bila, If it is marked with an 1865 Patent assignment date, then the model issue has to be later than 1865. That rules out the Model 1860 theory and revives the Model 1868 as most probable for your watch. However, as far fewer model 1868 movements wers made, yours is the rarer of the two.

There is no question about this watch. If there is no stem sticking out of the watch and no lever to set it, it is a model 1860. You can have an earlier model watch with a later patented improvement applied to it.
To be an 1868 model it MUST be stem wind/lever set as I mentioned previously.

David, definately 1865 patent, thanks for the information and your time for researching it, hopefully some more info might come to light. Also, I might have scored a case that is suitable with a very slight professional modification on the curvette, this way at least it will be housed.

Best regards
Bila

Thanks Michael for your input and time to research the topic, I am still trying to digest everything everyone has told me plus the info I have found as well. Seems to be a bit of a mystery with opposing views, even on other forum sites this occurs. This can not hurt as the more views we have the more information we continue to get. Hopefully we can continue to find out more. I wish I was in America to give you, David and others a look at it.

Best Regards,
Bila

Michael, I just had another read of your last post and need to query you on the patent date issue. I agree that you can have a earlier dated watch with the later fogg's patent date, but only if the run of the model type surpasses the year of manufacture that the new patent was implemented. Is this correct, and if so, the run of model 1860s' would have to of have been manufactured past the 1865 date of the 'Fogg's patent' introduction to the manufacturing process. My question to everyone is therefore, in what year did the run of model 1860 finish and is it possible to find out, seeing there is a page missing from the journal records?

Bila

1860 models finished about 1870-71. Yours was likely made between 1868-70. I will post a link later.

Mike, thank you for adding focus to the production dates. The parts list for the model 1886 is all different part numbers beginning with 1001 and states categorically "Series H-1868 Model - 16 Size - 3/4 plate. Hunting Stem Wind - 3 pillar - 1st Series 1st serial number 410,001 - Last No. 470,500. That separates Bil's totally into the 1860 model arena by serial number and the fact that it is Key wind.

A last note, the longevity of the model 1860 s/n production range of 50,094-1,062,600 far outlasted that of the shorter lived model 1868's 410,001-470,500.

Thank you all with the help provided in finding information with regards to this watch. David I have one more question, would you have or know of the serial numbers either side of the page that is missing from the Waltham journal that you spoke about?

Bila

Bila, below is a scan of Waltham Hand-written Factory Production pages in that range. The Red line shows where the missing page occurred. The missing production are serial Numbers between 379020 and 380634 and started from June,to Mid-September, 1868.

Thank you very much for the information David, it is greatly appreciated.

Best Regards,
Bila