I bought this one because I have not seen the pendant/lever switch function before. The watch, while not perfect, is running well. The dial is very good with no faults. The switch screw is missing and so is locked in the lever set mode. What was the benefit or advantage of being able to change from lever to pendant set and vice versa? What is the purpose of the little screw just above the serial number? Here is the movement.....

The bluing is mostly gone from the minute hand. Here is the dial.....

Nice Grade 67, made in 1887, Mary Ann....Why the combo, my guess would be as a marketing tool....gives the buyer an option of the lever or pendant convenience in setting the time....

Others will probably tell us the real reason though....

Regards,
Jerry

Mary Ann I share your curiosity of both HOW and WHY the Rockford S/L is doen. A quick hunt through my "rummage" produced this thing with Jewels on the 3rd and 4th wheels??? Usually with this jeweling, of "paired" jeweling, they would be on the 4th and escape wheel. So as old Jown Wayne used to say "Waaall hear ya go again" (Pictorial report to follow)

Mary,
I have always been told that when a watch company was trying something new (lever set to pendant set) or ( key wind to stem wind) most of the time they did do both, for a while. Just in case someone bought the watch and did not like the "new way of doing things" It could be changed back with a turn of a screw. This was also done on the keywinds to stem wind. There are a few pocket watches out there that do both. I know there is a 18 size Illinois that does both. This is called a transition watch. Not sure about the others. Not sure if this is right or not, but that is my 2 cents.

Leon

Sounds as good as any so far Leon....

I, in fact, have two of those watches that are PW/KW....I think you have a very good point about the versatility of having both functions avalable for the period of transition from one method to another....

At least it makes sense....

Regards,
Jerry

Well, from servicing this "thing" I can share four things that learned;

1. Watchmakers removed the parts for the "S-L" from all 6 of the Rockfods I have with the attested function.

2. Rockford created a monstor trying to satisfy their marketing dept. Mebbe that helped slow their sales inertia and eventual demise. . .

3. This is a 9 jewel watch with two jewels in the least "appropriate places.

4. It cleaned up and runs quite well.

Thank you, all, for your comments and to Dave for his pictorial. Yes, I guess the advantage would be a customer satisfaction type issue during transitional periods from lever to pendant set. As Dave found, it made for a funky movement. I did do some searching since my initial post and found comments that earlier watchmakers didn't fancy to it too much and, as these two examples show, removed it. But despite itself, I like it!

And thats all that matters, my dear, the fact that YOU like it....

And Dave, that watch actually cleaned up very nicely....another great job....

Regards,
Jerry

I would like to see one complete unit though, sorta like the Stopworks Elgins.

I tried to sketch out from the few parts left in the movement as to how I saw this one to work and it still did not make sense because the screwed down parts would have to move the wrong way. I think that it required a special winding stem held in by the retainer pin, and that stem reacted in some magic way to the flexture squishing when a cam action on the L-S was activated.

Dave, I think I understand what you just said Maybe after the class in June it will make more sense to me. I would be glad to send mine to you and let you look at it and compare to see if it has more of the mechanism parts. When I look in the missing screw hole, there is something on the pillar plate that looks like where a pinion would go, I think. Let me know. And, yes, it would be nice to find a complete one. I will keep looking.

Mary Ann, Thank you for the offer, but yours would make a good learning pirce for you after you have finished school. We just ned to keep looking. As I have 6 of these and they are all inverious states of "disorder" so that none is complete for the L-S mecchanism, finding one complete will probably have to depend on the "luck of the draw".

One good thng, if you go to a mart, you can actually "test" this function to see if it is really working.

I have a question about these watches. When the watchmaker took the adjustment out what did he leave behind? Was it then a lever, or a pendent set? I would be interested to know which was considered preferable over the other.
Another observation: This seems like such a unique adaptation, and would be a nice addition to any collection; so why does the price guide place such a low value on them?

Steve G.

By the way, I have one of these, and I think it is complete, but my watchmaker has it right now, and I don't know when he will get to it.

Steve G.

Steve, the parts that are left out faciitate changing from Lever Set to Pendant set, leaving them lever setting only.

I have no understanding or explanations for any of the price "Guidelines" except for the very very rare watches and those can only be educated "guesses". The P.G. lists 16s 2 star watches for $65.00, and "no star" watches with hundreds of thousands still in circulation at over $200.00. Why is a 19 Jewel Jeweled Motor barrel watch with 4400 total made listed at virtually the same value as a 21 Jewel non-motor barreled cousin with 100,000+ made? (Hamilton 944 vs 940)

I know that I am begging the question, but it is not rational compared to actual eBay prices paid. . . PERIOD!