With all of the discussions we have concerning originality and authenticity of watches, we often get into some pretty interesting conversations that can bring together some diversified opinions.

This has caused me to want to put up one of my watches for discussion. I have shown this to several collectors over the past few years I have owned this watch. It has made for some wonderful speculation.

Let me say before I go any further that this watch is NOT for sale so there is no salesmanship interest here. Nor am I looking for a good story to tell. There is in fact, a story behind this watch but I am mearly seeking the input and opinions of the experts here.

I bought this Hamilton 992B several years ago. It is a complete package i.e. watch, inner bakelite box, outer cardboard box (matching numbers), certificate and what even appears to be some white tissue paper that was used as padding and wrap. Take a look.

Everything looks right on the watch. The numbers on the box match the case and movement.

I have combed over this watch a thousand times and can find no signs of wear. Remove the bezel and the dial is perfect. Black hands are bright and spotless. The crystal is free of any scratches.

This next image is quite revealing. Hamilton collectors will immediately notice that the case back has been polished. This watch would have left the factory with a brushed "butler" finish. This is where the story comes in and I will talk about it shortly. I want to post the remaining pictures first.

The crown looks as sharp as a saw blade.

The bow is as tight as can be. The bow tube fits perfectly and does not appear to be a replacement.

No jewelers marks present on the case back. The number J346887 all match to the box, case back, frame and bezel.

The picture of the movement doesn't hold a candle to how crisp it is in hand.

Movement #C338636 matches the box and dates to about 1951.

O.K. Here is what all the hubbub is about. Technically speaking, I am the third owner of the watch. PRACTICALLY speaking, one would say I am the SECOND owner of the watch. The watch was bought from an estate by a dealer that I have dealt with several times and have found them to be honest and very trustworthy. They purchased the watch from the wife of the original owner. Cleaned and oiled the movement only. Did not touch the case. I purchased the watch from them so it was only in their possession for about 2 weeks. I have had it ever sense then.

A case model #2 with a polished back is typically indicative of having been buffed to remove scratches or wear. However, the condition of the watch from every other aspect doesn't show any wear. Believe me when I say this, in spite of what appearance the photos may give. Light reflections or blurry spots can sometimes play tricks on you.

The case back has been monogramed M.O.B.W. You will also note the penciled in name of Mr. M.O. Wahgenteen on the box label.

Engraving a case like this would have left the engraving with a sharp edge to it necessitating the buffing of the case back to smooth the engraving. Consequently, it would also remove the brushed finish.

How plausible is it that the case was engraved by the jeweler and buffed smooth upon its original purchase. The owners wife claimed that she gave the watch to her husband as a gift and he became so fond of it that he wouldn't wear it.

Is this a "Mint" watch? Or should we use the term "Unused"? Or, does the fact that the case has been altered knock it out of that category compltely? How much would a buffed back affect the value of the watch? Would it detract any from the amount YOU would be willing to pay for it?

Have at it boys and girls!!!!!!!!

Just an opinion from a Clock enthusiast, The back was polished by the guy who put the initials on, Nice watch, You know over this side of the Pond Plated or Gold Filled are not regarded very highly despite whatever movement it has. Regards, Ged. PS. I must have been typing my reply with my Arthritic fingers at the same time as you wrote the explanation hence the wrong sequence of event.

David,
First off, I don`t think the term "mint" should be applied to a watch although this term has some merit when applied to the damasceening and etchings on the movement. Since watches aren`t minted but rather, produced in factories, I believe "Factory new" would be a more appropriate term and meaning condition exactly as it was when it left the factory after final inspection, prior to sale. Even then you could spot occasional differences like sharper engravings, etc.
This watch or any watch that is monogrammed would not be original or "factory new" as far as the case is concerned but even here we would have to start splitting hairs because some would say "well it was monogrammed at the factory", etc.
Personally I like the smooth finish better than the brushed type but like almost everyone else my preferences are overidden and modified when dollar values are considered. I would not pay top dollar for a monogrammed watch. On the other hand, if my initials were M.O.B.W. (fat chance!) I would likely pay a premium.
When you are trying to put a descriptive label on a pristine watch it is almost meaningless anyway. You could say this was unworn or worn a time or two, unused, etc. but if you can`t tell by looking at the watch it`s really a moot point as you have nothing to go on but the story. Like most everything else, it`s all relative and you don`t have to agree on descriptive labels, just price.

Just call it "MINTY!"

But seriously, if it were a coin it couldn't be called "mint" because it's been taken out of the package. "Mint" coins are all in those cellophane wrappers. Once the wrapper is off it's "extra-fine" or "very fine" or something like that. But we don't have a very consistent grading system for watches. I wish we did.

Most everything else substantiative I'd have to agree with Kenny.

Just my two "minty" cents!

Frank "407" Kusumoto

Fantastic! Spectacular! A lot of us are green with envy.

David,

This is one of the best watch packages that I have seen so far.

Thank you for sharing this gem with us!


This picture shows the grading system for coins. If this system could be adapted to your watch, I would grade it as Mint State 65.

Grading coins is an art and I would venture to say the same thing about grading watches. There are always the variables of eye appeal, blemishes, factory flaws, and other such aspects to consider.

David...The word Mint is so over used that your watch probably would rate superior to most. I like and use "Pristine" to describe a watch like yours....Robert

David:
It's difficult to compare coins and watches. There is so very much to "grade" here. That's a very fine piece. I personally would call it "mint." You are getting into a gray area however since it has the monogram, some folks would grade it down to very fine. I have a friend who, no matter how nice it is, would not collect it because of the monogram. Just my two cents!
Joel Sarich

David,
That is a very nice example...... nothing can take that away..

Point please.... Do we KNOW for a fact these cases left with a brushed back ?

I believe any minor buffing after the engraving would not remove the brush marks.... it takes some serious buffing to do that... IMHO.. those brush marks are 'beefier' that one imagines... and would change the edge of the case back where it intersects with the stamped 'pie crust' and the border surrounding it.

As far as a determination of if the watch was carried.....

there are 'tells' that can only be revealed by an in-hand inspection.... no image can show these...

It is plausiable (sp?) that he did not carry the watch..bacause of sentimental value..

now representing the watch....
totally a subjective process....
some will 'kill it' because of the engraving... some won't..

one can still judge it on an amout of wear.... believe me... you can tell a 98% case from a 95% case.. but "usually" only if they are side by side for comparison...

You said it was not for sale..
Basically present the item just as you have here... and let the observer make up their OWN mind of MINT, PRISTINE, 99%, SUPERIOR.. or whatever term they wish to use...


that's my .02

Thanks for posting this great example. Even though it is a 'common' RR watch (as some have condemed them)

David, an awesome package!

Shugart's Complete Guide to Watches shows watch grading on page 12 & 13. Excuse the poor quality quick pics taken for your info.

Page 13

Gorgeous watch Dave! Someone, at some time, has engraved a monogram on the back of this case and either that same person, or perhaps someone else buffed it. The question we are asked to consider is who did the buffing and why.

Why was it done? It looks like the engraving was done first, then the buffing, as the design appears to be partially "smoothed." So here's my speculation: someone may have attempted to buff the monogram off, but stopped when they saw how deeply cut it was.

Who did it? Assuming the chain of provenance you gave is correct, it had to be either the first or second owner.

The first owner may have decided he didn't like the look of the monogram. The second owner may have wanted to be rid of the initials to increase the value of the watch.

As far as value of the set is concerned, I wouldn't consider it a big deal in view of the "big picture" i.e. the completeness of the set and the extraordinary condition of all the components.

Everyone,

Thanks so much for the wealth of comments. This watch always causes a stir when I bring it out. If nothing else, it makes for a great study piece.

I agree that the term "mint" by nature is not appropriate in grading pocket watches. However, like it or not, it has become synonomous with this hobby to some degree. Because it is not appropriate, it is a very subjective term and this gives sellers a lot of "latitude" when using it in their descriptions. Because of this, I have just about eliminated the word from my vocabulary.

As for the watch itself. Terry, how likely is it that you could obtain this case with a polished back from the factory? This is a new angle that I have never heard of before. I am all but positive that the case has been buffed with a rouge wheel. These wheels will leave very tiny, microscopic divits in the case and these divits are present in the back of this case. Whether this was used to remove the brushed finish is another subject. However, the "pie crust" border you mentioned is fully in tact and sharp. I often carry this watch with me to shows or events where other collectors are present. Hopefully one day we will meet in person when I have it with me. I would greatly value your evaluation of it in hand. Unfortunately, I am unable to get down to Ft. Lauderdale.

Ed, The monogram has a unique look to it. The letters are made up of a series of small marks or dots which may be giving the illusion of wear. It is not worn and completely legible, even when viewed under a loupe. I don't think anyone has tried to remove it.

What I find interesting is that when I show this watch, all the Hamilton & Railroad collectors hover around it and the opinions start to fly. Inevitably, I am asked how much I want for it. Soon, a couple of very generous offers will come. When people see this watch in hand, the monogram becomes less of an issue.

Complete examples in this "condition" (regardless of how one may define that word) don't show up often. I think that as a rule of thumb, this tends to overshadow everything else.

In the mean time, I am going to continue enjoying My Original Beautiful Watch and take pride in having it as a part of my collection!!!

quote:

I am all but positive that the case has been buffed with a rouge wheel. These wheels will leave very tiny, microscopic divits in the case and these divits are present in the back of this case.

David,
That is an important detail... and yes, adds to the mystery

I do not have an answer for the brushed/polished issue... more research needed...

What would be of more concern is the condition of the thin border before the pie crust... not necessarly the pie crust itself...

My Original Beautiful Watch.

I like it.

Terry,

This type of thing fancinates me. If I take a couple of close up shots of the case edge, will this give you any more information to comment on?

Also, there may be some difference in how one defines a watch as being "never carried". Many will say this means literally never carried, as in, sat in the box its entire life while some will say never carried "on a daily basis" but may have been worn on special occasions. To this, examination of the case may be the only indicators to answer what may apply here.

david,
I would certainly look at a pic.... no problem there.... especially with the type of images you take...

your statement about the buffing marks does give me more info.... i have seen the marks you speak of... usually caused by very very small dirt particles imbedded in the buff ...

=======

of course the "carried" term can be a literal term.... i would say never carried would be just that.. not worn, living its life in a box..

you hear a similar term in some revolver collectors...... the cylinder never turned... there are some of those out there.... an elite few... and these guy are serious about them to the point of being anal... one would take a whipping if you pulled the trigger on one.. if you got to handle it..

David,
Extremely nice watch, I'm just curious, does the inner box have a label, is so would you mind posting?

Thanks,
Robert

Robert,

The inner box has no label attached. The only label is on the outer cardboard box.

David,
Thanks for sharing your spectacular 992B.

Lindell,
Thanks for the label info. Did they later use the label again?

Robert