|WWT Shows||CLICK TO: Join and Support Internet Horology Club 185™||IHC185™ Forums|
|<! the next weird code puts some space on the left>||
• Check Out Our... •
• TWO Book Offer! •
Reply to Post
Recently acquired Hamilton 992 with 24hr dial, circa 1916. The inside of the case is engraved: PERSENTED TO ROY L. TRAYLOR – 1939-1941 - BY THE A.A. of S.R.E. & M.C.O. of A, Div 26. This is, of course, the Amalgamated Association of Street Railway Employees and Motor Coach Operators. The Union was founded in 1892 and Div 26 is Detroit.
The watch was sold advertising it as having a streetcar insignia. Did they mean the inscription or the back of the case or just the engraving? See photo.
A lot of questions here. Since the watch was made circa 1916, was it in service by employee(s) of the Street Railway and subsequently donated as a retirement gift to Mr. Traylor? As most of you know, the standards for streetcar/trolley watches were somewhat less than those required on the railroads – 17 jewels, I think, and 3 adjustments. This 992 met that and more and with a Canadian dial to boot. The DUR (Detroit United Railway) controlled most of the streetcar companies in Detroit until 1922 and the investors were Canadian. Did they impose higher standards warranting 992s with 24hr dials?
I discovered was this in the IN TRANSIT archives, vol 29-30. “ALL INTERURBAN TRAINMEN SHALL BE REQUIRED TO HAVE AND USE WHEN ON DUTY A STANDARD WATCH AS PRESCRIED BY THE COMPANY. CARDS SHALL BE FURNISHED FOR THE PURPOSE OF INSPECTION. ALL CITY TRAINMEN ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE A RELIABLE WATCH. And there’s tons more archives to go through
Regarding retirement gifts: it was common for fellow employees to pool resources to purchase a watch for a well-liked individual. Well, when I retired all I got was a lousy quartz wristwatch that could have come from Target. I guess I wasn’t well-liked.
Looking more closely, The abbreviation PRES is beneath Traylor's name, apparently President of Div 26 between those years.
That case is a model A which was introduced around 1940. The serial number of the case also dates it to 1940 which is consistent with the retirement engraving. A 992 from 1916 would not have originally been in that case. If you post the serial number of the movement it will help to determine if the dial is correct. Better yet a picture of the movement and case frame will help. The dial looks nice especially with the hands that are on it.
Ser# 1,357,633. I place it circa 1916, so may not be the movement presented. Learning all the time!
Your movement dates to 1919 according to the Gelson list which is a very accurate way to date Hamilton watches.
Here’s the link to the list: Hamilton Movement Number Listings Preserved by John F. Gelson
The dial on your movement is correct for a 992 made in 1919. I’m still learning too and it’s possible that the movement originally presented was a 950E or a 950B. Are there any other case screw marks?
Richard: Here is pic of movt in case. Thanks for Hamilton ser # link.
Richard is entirely correct about the movement, hands and dial. They are a beautiful, very desirable, most likely original combination but I agree they do not belong in that case and here is why...
That case is as Richard explained the Case A which was introduced in 1940 and the earliest ones held either a 992-Elinvar or 950-Elinvar prior to the 992B introduction. Your case lines-up as being from the 1940-1941 time period, that fits perfectly with the presentation. These cases were used only with factory installed movements. If there are no other case-screw marks the original movement that came in your case would be as stated above.
My plan would be to place the movement in a 1919-era case and find a proper movement for thie later case.
1940 Hamilton Watch Company factory-cased watch advertising...
Good advice. Now if I only had a 1940 movt in a 1919 case! But worth finding both separately.
|Powered by Social Strata|