It all started when I saw the case at the Ft. Lauderdale National. In my opinion, the Hamilton Cross-Bar case is the most elegant that Hamilton designed. They must be scarce because I seldom see them. Here, at the national, was a White-gold filed case, reasonably priced. It was absolutely pristine, except for a bit of fob-wear, under the bow. I grabbed it.

I kept it, intending to find components to “make-up” a nice watch with it. Then, on the Chapter 185 site, I read a discussion about a certain dial and advertisement. There was my case, with a most complimentary dial. I decided to have THAT watch.

I was able to find the dial; a double-sunk, monochrome (that added to the watch’s elegance). Appropriate hands were also located.

On eBay, I bought a movement, with a serial number that dated it to 1931, a time appropriate to this case. The movement caused me some initial problems (like a GLUED, improper hairspring) but today, everything was fixed and the movement was, again at factory specs.

When it all finally came together, I was surprised that I had an extra set of case-screw marks. The case, when bought, had just one set of marks, consistent with a near-mint case. But… those two marks were in the position of a 992B, rather than a 992.

Now… here’s the dilemma. The case first appeared in 1924 and, I believe that the 992 movement is proper to that case. I also believe that a 992B movement would not be proper to this particular case. Plus, I’d rather not case it with a 992B and then have to also use dials from that era. I want the look of the mid to late 20’s.

So… either way, I have an improper watch. Either the wrong movement or an era set of case-screws. Which would you choose?

My friend says the he’d go with a 992B and a case that did not have extra screw-marks. As to my argument that the 992B is improper to this case, he says that this was probably a factory-cased watch, so Hamilton DID case 992B’s in it…. so they ARE proper.

I don’t think so and I also find myself dedicated to reproducing the elegant watch in the Hamilton Ad… even if it means an obviously unoriginal case.

So…. Excuse the photos. I’m away from “home” and only have my mini-camera and poor light.

First, here’s the Ad:

Here's the watch:

Here's the movement with one of the 992B (locale) case screw marks circled. Sorry that my camera didn't pick up the other one.

Pete,
Go with what you are comfortable with. I think it's a spiffy looking watch. The movement looks very clean and you got a great dial. That case is appropriate for the watch and a very desireable case.

Best,

Frank "407" Kusumoto

Hi Peter,

The Crossbar case as your ad shows was introduced in 1924 and was designed for a 992 and as a matter of fact it was the first factory RR case for Hamilton. Myself I would keep the 992 in it as it was intended to be used. I find it odd when I see a 992B in these earlier Hamilton RR cases. I too find the extra screw mark annoying, but in this case would learn to live with it. The watch/case combination looks great!!!!!!!!

Rob

have you inserted a 992b movement to make certain of the location.... there were other movements that the location is 'close'...

i have seem some cases 'apparently' with non-hamilton movements in them with no other marks...

another possibility...
the original CS marks were very light... and when the 'other' movement was placed, they were given a heavy hand... and maybe a buff to remove the other set of marks...

because the watch can not be original no matter what you do, enjoy it for what it is...

P>S. ... I would have cased an earlier movement if given the choice... these cases seemed to have a short life span... most likely not extending into the 992B era..

P.S.S....
MOst likely the case was available because it was not original in the first place and the case was parted out....

Thanks for your comments.

In quick reply, I didn't have a 992B movement handy but I am fairly certain that the case-screw marks are in the 992B position. (Many conversations with Lindell have imprinted those positions in my head! )

A scenario that would be consistent with the evidence, would have that case shipped to a retailer, as a replacement (did Hamilton do that?) and then sat around, unsold, for some years. Years later, someone with a 992B came in and needed a case and the jeweler reached deep into his drawer! Possible!

It just points up the fact that we are always guessing about the history of our watches and that our present generation is certainly not the first "switchers."

I discount the fact that it might have originally held a 992 with light case-screw marks. My theory is that if it were cased at the factory, the workers, doing just that all day, would have no trepidation about really bearing down on those case-screws.

I can't be 100% certain but I think the evidence indicates that the first movement, in that case, was a 992B. As to why it got parted out.... we can only guess.

peter,
please post the number in the case back...
it will be logged in case a box for it shows up... or if it already exists in a database ....

outside chance there...

First things first.... the case number is #0224741.

I was aware of the case screw positions for the 992 and 992B when I bought the case but, honestly, I was asleep at the switch. I opened the case, saw just one set of case-screw marks and bought it. Believing that all these cases were sold with movements, I just assumed that the case marks were factory and were 992.

I suppose it's possible that someone might have deliberately and expertly obscured the 992 case-screw marks. I'm always surprised at the level of repair that some folks can achieve. That said, I find it implausible that someone would have taken such time, just to use the case for an improper movement. Why "fake" an obviously non-original watch?

I've discussed this with oher members who have suggested that the original 992 marks might have been very light. I was taught that a movement is a object, constantly vibrating at 18,000 cycles per hour. As such, I was taught to very smartly tighten the movements, with care not to strip the screws. I find it hard to believe that a factory-worker, doing nothing but casing watches at Hamilton, would not have tightened those case screws to the point where the marks were distinct.

Finally, I find that almost every time that I take apart a pocket-watch, I uncover mysteries that are fun to try to solve. I realise that it's virtually impossible to be 100% certain. I especially like to try to figure out exactly how damage occurred and often imagine a watch falling and the balance pivot striking the cap-jewel and mushrooming. Then, I imagine the watchmaker pulling the peened pivot out and shattering the hole-jewel. I guess this is what happens when you cross a watch-maker with a criminal attorney. I have a tendency to want to "reenact the crime!"

Lindell's rule is correct... and will work probably 95+ % of the time....

I have used the 'jab' as mike says, a 992 is 'before' a 992b... and 992 screw marks are 'before' the pendant and B marks are 'after' the pendant... and mike may have coined that 'jab'...

but be aware, making a determination without an actual movement can be tricky.... that other 5% ... it's sometimes hard to tell exactly 7 o'clock, etc under pressure on the mart floor or in an image without some type of reference... and we all can't just carry around a spare movement

Illinois case screw marks are "close" to a 992b, and Elgin marks are 'close' to a 992... and i can stand to be corrected.... that's why i said 'close'...

and I have seen 'apparently' original Illinois and Elgin movements in crossbar cases and number 2 cases...


what movement number did u wind up with?

.

Peter,

Thanks for posting the "Crossbar" images and telling of your case dilemma.

According to the Hamilton records, the "Crossbar" was still available in 1935. Records shows that 8 was sold in 1934-35 in 10k gold-filled and 2 in 14k white gold-filled in 1935.

It appears that retail stores, such as "Sears" had access to Hamilton cases.

Hamilton did some unusual things like selling the "Bunn Special" in the Hamilton model 3 (tu-tone) and model 12 cases.

It know it would be a narrow possibility, but I suppose if there were "Crossbars" on hand and a "special order" was received, it would be filled.

Below is three images of the 1st model (Crossbar).

Robert

Movement SN is #2449379.

Comparing my case to the three posted by Robert, I would identify mine as the "Sears" model by the crown.

I would like to make a point or two on this topic, which is:.... the first 2 crossbars I ever saw many many years ago were in fact on non Hamilton watches and I, at that time, never knew they were used on Hamilton watches as well. Now I was quite young at the time and when I first learned they were in fact the first RR case used by Hamilton in the mid '20's I was stunned, ha!....

The fact is this: these crossbar cases were made by Wadsworth in Dayton Kentucky, NONE of them were ever marked HAMILTON Anywhere on the case, not in the back, not on the crown and in no hidden crevise, EVER, so..... I had always drawn the natural conclusion that many jewelers ordered them from Wadsworth as ( I later learned) did Hamilton. I am still of that conclusion after all I have learned in the last 35 years of collecting.

So "other" case screw marks for anything other than a 992 (or any PRE B Hamilton) just may indicate it was a jeweler ordered case from WADSWORTH for an Elgin, a Waltham, or ANY watch. Some were not used until the 40's as the Depression greatly slowed sales quite substantially to say the least and many cases were probably not sold until well into the early 40' when they had in fact been manufactured some dozen years earlier.

We do know that all white and green Wadsworth cases were discontinued in May, 1934. How long they were available for sale after that we do not know and how long it took them to be finally USED on a watch could extend all the way into the 1950's theoretically. All I am saying in all of this is one thing, this crossbar case was NOT a case used exclusively by or for Hamilton. It is in fact a WADSWORTH case that Hamilton "chose" to use to factory case some of their movements as early as 1924.

Just as not all Hamilton movements were factory cased, not all Wadsworth crossbar cases were used by Hamilton. Just my input on this matter, as too many times we collectors get so "locked" into believing things are absolutely true or correct only one way. Terry says, "never say never and never say always", I believe that more everyday, as I learn more and more. There are so many exceptions to the rules we will never know..... there are many possibilities sometimes.

These watches and cases were sold in the 20's and hard times of the 1930's and the ONLY goal of either manufacturer was to make a SALE for PROFIT, period. If you wanted a case to bake a muffin in, Wadsworth would sell you one and if you wanted a movement to install on the barn door for the cows, Hamilton would sell you one.This was before all the legal jargon of mumbo jumbo warning labels and frivalous lawsuites. Let's all remember sales were the only concern of these manufactuers, they didn't care what went on what as we do today.

Peter, I think you have a nice watch and I also have to agree with Terry,... ENJOY it for what it is; a very nice case on a very nice watch. Originality or lack of should not be the "end all" in our collecting. It should be the goal, but not to the extent that it ruins our enjoyment of the watch as only 1 watch in a 100 is ALL original anyway! Happy "crossbar on whatever you want to put it on" Hunting!

Thanks Mike. That is precisely what my friend told me. His point, like yours, is that there were many ins & outs in those days and exceptions to almost every rule.

I enjoyed this project... first finding the case and then the ad....and then "making" a watch to match the terrific one that I was seeing in that ad.

I still have to "digest" that watch. I've only had it, in it's present form, for 2 days. As a perfectionist, I'd like it to be perfect. It took some effort to find that dial, I struggled with the movement (would you believe, a GLUED hairspring?) and a long time, poking with a tweezers, into a box of old hands to find and fit the ones that would match the ad.

I appreciate your comments and the comments of everyone who wrote. I guess, in time, I will have to decide whether I can accept an imperfect watch or......

Post Script:

Peter, the movement will date closer to 1927 than 1931.... so you made a better choice than you thought...

.

It's amazing how much effort we expend trying to MAKE our watches ORIGINAL!

Epilogue.....

Today I serviced two watches. The first, a NICE Ball-Hamilton, 23J, 999, had balance problems and gave me some problems in timing.

The second was a 992E movement that I recently bought.... again to be used in a case that I picked up in Ft. Lauderdale, this summer. The case, is a Model 10, which first appeared in 1936 and would be "proper" for a 992E.

The 992E was easy to service and ran very nicely with a narrow beat in all positions.

This case also had but one set of case-screw marks. When I went to case the movement... same thing. My one set of case-screw marks were for a 992B!

DOH !

Like homer says....

serial number on the number 10 case?

Terry,

Are you in need of serial #'s for # 10 cases ?? I have 2 if you are, they both contain, I think, original 992B's..

Both cases are Mdl 10's

C37500............H 568499

C28475............H 528312

When did signatures change form 1 to 2 ??