If Hamilton could assemble "post-production" 992B's out of whatever parts were laying about - is it OK for me to do the same thing?

I'll know for sure in a week - but I think I've assembled a 992B in kit form that will be perfectly correct in all respects - for LESS than what similar examples are going for today (contrary to conventional wisdom). Pictures when assembled...

will all # be the same matching? on bridges under balance and so on?

My fault for being imprecise. I'm not assembling a movement from smaller parts - merely acquiring movement, case, hands, dial separately and combining. All "period correct", of course. There *might* be an issue with a credible match of movement and case serial #'s - but then again, there may not - I haven't really checked that, yet.

Sorry for being misleading - please chalk it up to ignorance, not malice.

Ken, In any complex product collection, be it watches*, Model airplane engines*, cars, mixmasters, typweriters, or Piper Cubs, it is foolhardy to claim something is "all original fromn the factory" unless it is unused in the original sealed box, bag or hangar. Maybe golf balls and snow sleds could be an exception to this.
*The only two things I ever sold recently "new in the box".
Most well used (and kept) RR watches saw more than one part replaced in their lifetime. If you are making a movement "period authentic" I see little disrespect finding a complete movement and "dressing it" with period correct arts such as a dial, case, hands, etc.

David - indeed. There is an ancient philosophical conundrum about "identity" which some people pose as a question about cars. If you replace the parts on your car (or watch) one at a time...when does it stop being "the same car"? In the first case, suppose you change one part at a time, until eventually all the parts have been changed? In a different (is it?) case, suppose you completely dismantle the car, exchange *all* the parts, and then re-assemble these new parts into a car (watch) that is indistinguishable from the original. Is the second case different? Why? For watches, we have those pesky serial numbers stamped (and scratched) in various places. But how about all the "unbranded" pieces. Does it stop being "your watch" when you swap out the mainspring? the hands? the dial? the bow? the case? all of the above (one at a time, or all at once - does this matter?) As you say - "mint in box" is the closest thing there is to certainty. After that, it's all a matter of degree, and constant discussion. Which, of course, is why the philosophers are so pleased... For me, "mint in box" is uninteresting (taking nothing away from those who disagree).

I agree with Dave with respect to new in box with matching #'s. That is the only way to be 100% sure.

I think it is ok to respectfully put a watch together as you are doing by taking the time to know what is "proper" and period correct. You are doing this on a 992B which makes it fairly easy. There is a lot of research and ad's are available which show you what is "correct"

As to the 992B movement. By the time the 992B was being produced production of parts was good enough that interchangeability of parts was easy and stamping serial numbers on most parts stopped. The serial # on the main plate was the only one stamped in. Occasionally, I see numbers still scratched in on the mainspring barrels and the arms of the balance wheel. So there are not a lot of ways to verify originality on a 992B movement other than damascening patterns which helps, but are not definitive and the single serial # stamped in.

I know everyone doesn't agree with this and it absolutely doesn't apply to every watch model of course, but in this specific case of a 992B I think it is ok.

Rob
www.pocketwatchrepairs.net