Hi All

Picked this up the other day off the Bay. The dial and that it is a 19j always gets me. After receiving the watch I did some research on the Grade 1892 Waltham 19j Vanguard. Finding it a not so common grade and the Waltham search site listed the serial number from a run of 23j Vanguards.

I would like to see if others have found mixed run information within the Waltham research site also. My serial number is 11501450. This is my first 1892 Waltham Vanguard, sure is a great looking movement. Can any one tell me the reason for the little hole under the balance wheel (around 7o'clock).

Thanks for any information.

Regards
Keith

Keith, I don't know if you have checked this web site which is exclusively for the Waltham 1892 and has a wealth of information on the various grades and the variations. The linked page is for the 19J Vanguard and talks about the "split jewel" runs. I didn't see an explanation for the little hole but it does show in the photo on this page but not on all the movements shown on other pages of the site.

Bob

Thanks Bob

That site is cool. A lot of good information.

Regards
Keith

Keith! I am a huge Model 1892 Waltham fan and hasten to reply to your post here. Unnamed sources (initials EU), have hypothesized that the strange hole you pointed out under the balance is actually an oil breather hole meant to allow excess oil to drain out of the movement thus allowing the gears to function properly. I can attest that these 1892's don't keep good time unless oiled properly and frequently.

I have a world class collection of these watches and have looked at a dozen or so (both early and late serial numbers, and different grades) and found no consistency whatsoever in the presence or absence of such a hole. About 33% seem to have it suggesting poor quality control on Walthams part. Personally, I would not purchase one of these babies unless it had a hole. You got one of the good ones, man!

I got an idea for a tiny funnel for that little hole so I can pour the 3-in-1 right into the guts, where it counts.

It's shaped just like the cap that ML wears.

Oh Sure,
Now I have to go get all my 92's from the bank, and check and see if I have any of the good ones,
Of course I know full well that I do have a couple, and when I gave them an oil change in that manner, it just seemed to gum them up, is there any specific weight of oil you might want to use ????
Bill

Please excuse my interruption. If we are discussin the hole circled in RED below, I need to explain that Waltham could not drain or add oil through this orofice as . . .

it is one of the two (2) locating dowel pin holes for the bottom balance jewel cock that is affixed to the backside of the train plate by a screw(RED #1 circled).(See below . . . the "naked" top and bottom view of the 1892 Train plate [of this design iteration].)

Any attempts to use this dowel hole as an oil fill or drain hole may not be rewarded by a "Happy New Year" of good time keeping!

While we are on the subject, does anyone know what percentage of the 92's had diamond end stones, and what was the reasoning for only some of them to do so ?????
Dave, why do only some of them have these, dowel pin holes ??
Bill

Hey! Don't shoot the messenger. I was just repeatin' what I heard. I myselph thought it was a lint trap when I first peered into the hole, but it looks like older heads are taking the young ones to school here. So, Dave, why do some models have a visible hole on the top plate and others don't?

Cheap Facet Cut Diamond end stones on the Highest grade Waltham and Elgin movements were "dressage" of very limited value.

Understanding the "whys and wherefors" of a "sometimes" visible hole (one of the three "visibles" when the balance cock is not on the watch) as evidence of various means to mount the bottom balance cock would be understanding WHY Waltham's earlier model 1892's had only 2 plate screws holding down the barrel bridge while later ones had three and in the process they changed the length of their pallet fork arbor making it a "stinko" problem to replace

Actually the method of attachment for the bottom balance cock was changed at least once and I think it was then changed back. Sort of like when a few 16s model 9 Illinois watches had reverse jewel screws on the balance cock which were abruptly dismissed as a worthy modification.

In some cases (excepting the Getty), I suspect very strongly that too often in the "later" years the heavily over structured watchmaker hierarchy created more and more of a "design by committee" "flavor" in these watches.

Bummer I was already to get the turkey baster out and get some 10W30 and get my 1892 and "Pump it UP" Now I find that those little machining holes are not small oil tanks, oh well there goes another fine ideal!!

Thanks Dave...

Not sure about the rest of you... The web site recommendation was good.

Regards

Keith I have the more typical 21j 1982 Vanguard and I did find the site interesting. Anytime someone happens upon these types of sites it is always nice to share with others.