This is a little higher grade example from the same company.



This one is the open face version.

Click for bigger pics.

I have been under the opinion that safety barrels and motor barrels were not the same critters. A fair amount of 'ink' has been spilt over this matter. Witness the posting:
https://ihc185.infopop.cc/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3...931055821#1931055821
Consequently, I need to ask for a 'new' definitive answer as you are 'bursting my bubble' of belief.

"Safety Barrel" is pretty clearly a mainspring barrel designed to spare the barrel teeth and center pinion in case of mainspring breakage. "Motor Barrel" has no such clear agreed-upon definition and the term has been used (and abused) by various watch companies and writers in different ways. Consequently there is no "definitive" answer.

Yes, I have an Elgin 15J version. Mine is in the SN 7,9xx,xxx range.

Tom

I have new mainsprings for these if you should ever need one. They might be hard to find.

The Elgin grade 201 and 205 are among the finest 0 size watches made. They have solid gold train wheels and are finely finished throughout. Elgin did not make any better watches in any size.

In my opinion all "safety barrels" are "motor barrels." All motor barrels are not safety barrels. I believe that was the distinction being made in the other thread. Waltham and Elgin used motor barrels on most of their high grade watches for a very long time.

This watch orginally made in 1861 has a barrel design that at least presages the motor barrel.

Looks as though I opened a can of worms this time.

Tom M. can you let me know what leads you to say:

In my opinion all "safety barrels" are "motor barrels." All motor barrels are not safety barrels. I believe that was the distinction being made in the other thread.

I am NOT trying to be argumentative, but my thinking may make need to make a 180 degree turn around because I “glossed over” some very vital comment. I would love to know what that/those statement(s) was/were.

I would have to agree with Jerry that an accurate definition of the term Motor Barrel does not exist. That is why I pointed-out the earlier discussion. The response from Steve Maddox that Rob Carter shared gets the closest to identifying the traits which make a Going Barrel, a Safety Barrel and a Motor Barrel all unique. In fact, I come away with the impression that there are three distinct barrel systems. Like Lindell, I have an Elgin (12 size though) that is marked on the mechanism as having a Safety Barrel, but is listed in the database as having a Motor Barrel. My confusion becomes even more compounded when I look at the barrel’s mounting system – three screws. To me, two or three screw mounting is a visual designation of a Motor Barrel and yet the back plate is clearly engraved “Safety Barrel”. S-o-o-o, the question is how can the two barrel systems be the same and yet different?

Mark,

Perhaps I should have said that all safety barrels have all the advantages of a motor barrel (except the one I showed a picture of).

The motor barrel was invented for the Waltham 1888 model. I have been looking for the patent, but have not been able to find it. I had thought it was invented by Church but there are no patents by him on motor or safety barrels that I could find. He did invent one form of the mainspring bridle.

Tom,

Let me know if you need another one. The factory number is 1713. They have the single hook.

Tom;
I rather suspect that this is not the Duane Church patent for which you are seeking, but I do have a record of patent 339,378 which was granted on April 6th 1886. Church, however, refers to this as a going barrel.

There is a second patent; not granted to Duane Church, but to Charles Morlet. Morlet was playing his cards very close to his vest and describes the device only as a “Watch Winding Mechanism”. The number is 395,166. The patent for it was granted on December 25th 1888, but the application was filed on April 28th 1888. Although the April date is rather late in the development phase, the winding mechanism design may not have been submitted for patent until after its worth had been proven.

I am interested in what you have said about the Safety/Motor barrel matter. It may assist us to look at the database with a new perspective. It could be a matter that provides a fresh point-of-view, or it could be a dead-end that is reminiscent only of arguments about the number of angels dancing on the head of a pin.

It appears that Morlet's patent would help reduce the chance of winding a mainspring too tight, while Church's patent would allow a wider mainspring to be used. However, Church's patent does have some resemblance to a motor barrel.

Church's patent.

Morlet's patent.

Morlet's patent page 2.

Morlet's patent page 3.

John;

I will take your word for it. Neither patent was relevant to that for which I was originally searching, so I did not pay them much mind. My only thought would be to wonder if they are relevant to the Waltham model 1888 development time-line. Perhaps the work illustrated by patent 339,387 was used as a basis for the final mechanism found in the model 1888. It may be that a new patent was not deemed necessary as the critical elements were already covered. I am, however, thinking strictly off-the-cuff and have not a shred of evidence for what I have said. I leave the definitive response to those who have a greater understanding of the matter.

Mark,

Just an assumption. I have no idea if either of these patents were actually used in a production watch.

Do you or anyone else have a good listing of watch patent numbers? I could put together a presentation in the "Helping Hand" forum.

John;
I do not know if they were used in production either. My only thought on the matter is that Patent Lawyers do not work for free and both Duane Church and Charles Morlet were involved with the watch industry and were likely pre-disposed to expect some return on their inventions - at least enough to cover their costs.

The only list of patents that I put together is a list of Patent/Safety Pinions and Barrels which is offered over in the Technical Library, Serial Numbers and Site Links forum. I do not know if it will fit into what you may have in mind, but check it out.

My apologies to the group. I thought everyone knew there was a database of horological patents that was put together by volunteers (I think led by Tracey Stallcup back in the 1970's. It is currently on-line at www.nawcc-info.org with some queries that I wrote to aid in the information retrieval.

Once you have patent numbers, you can, of course, get the full text images from the US Patent Office.

Thanks Mark & Tom!