RCAF Waltham with original dial

[Steve Z.]

I had been lead to believe that watches that were originally designated 6b/159 and were re-designated 6b/234 had been downgraded. Perhaps that wasn't the case; if they hacked they could be "navigators watches" where if they couldn't be synchronized, they stayed 6b/159.

[Don Aldo]

Originally Posted by Steve Z.

I had been lead to believe that watches that were originally designated 6b/159 and were re-designated 6b/234 had been downgraded. Perhaps that wasn't the case; if they hacked they could be "navigators watches" where if they couldn't be synchronized, they stayed 6b/159.

I really do believe that 6B/159 designates an RAF issue watch with a chronometer 'grade' movement. A pilot/navigator's watch that didn't have a movement that neither performed at, or wasn't built to meet, chronometer-grade performance would be designated 6B/234.

As far as 'hacking' was concerned, it generally seems that this wouldn't be built in to any 'spec' or 'pattern' for the British military until after the war (with the obvious exception of the US made watches which they received). The matter could largely be seen as one of timekeeping consistency rather than to the second accuracy (which, after being synchronized to a time source, could theoretically be less consistent soon after); the former being arguably more desirable than the latter... not to mention what the Swiss watch industry, in terms of movements and features could provide, as opposed to what the American watch industry could deliver.

[IANovice]

This is why I joined the forum in the first place!!

Great discussion and great thread!!!!!

[lysander]

Originally Posted by Mr.D.

This is just flat out wrong. I have one of these white dialed RCAF Walthams along with another movement and handset and they both have blued hands. All of the other non-luminous, white dialed US and allied issued watches that I have in my collection (Elgin, Hamilton, Waltham, Longines, LeCoultre) have blued hands, NOT black.

The picture that you posted below by the way, shows a watch (can't tell the manufacturer by the picture) with an Elgin Type A-11 dial and Waltham hands and is quite frankly, a bad example to use in your argument.

The watch pictured is a Waltham A-11, you can tell by the style of the dial, the Elgins have a slighty different layout of the minute track and outer second numbers.

Yes, you are correct about the blue vs. black. If you scrape off the white paint, (or sometimes it just comes off by itself) you can see all of these hands were blued to a very dark blue, almost black.

[Mr.D.]

Originally Posted by lysander

The watch pictured is a Waltham A-11, you can tell by the style of the dial, the Elgins have a slighty different layout of the minute track and outer second numbers.

Yes, you are correct about the blue vs. black. If you scrape off the white paint, (or sometimes it just comes off by itself) you can see all of these hands were blued to a very dark blue, almost black.

Wrong, that is an Elgin dial and Waltham handset. The Elgin's dial is very distinctive with the outer numbers 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60 being placed down into the hash marks (the only one that does it this way). The Waltham dials both black and white have the numbers placed way outside the hash marks. Compare the white dialed Waltham with the picture that you posted and you can see the difference. I figured the watch was a Waltham that someone had stuck an Elgin dial on, since the watch had Waltham hands. With time and experience you can pick them out at a glance.

[lysander]

Originally Posted by Mr.D.

Wrong, that is an Elgin dial and Waltham handset. The Elgin's dial is very distinctive with the outer numbers 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60 being placed down into the hash marks (the only one that does it this way). The Waltham dials both black and white have the numbers placed way outside the hash marks. Compare the white dialed Waltham with the picture that you posted and you can see the difference. I figured the watch was a Waltham that someone had stuck an Elgin dial on, since the watch had Waltham hands. With time and experience you can pick them out at a glance.

No, I am afraid not:

Elgin dial:

Picture borrowed from RiverRat on WUS

Picture borrowed from Don Aldo

My picture

Waltham dial had two styles, this one (similar to, but not exactly the same as the Elgin, note the difference in font):

From Flightpath

And the short line type:

[Flightpath]

Hi,

just to throw a spanner in the works, someone once told me long ago that my Waltham A-11 had an Elgin dial fitted but I don't know enough about Waltham & Elgin A-11s to know for sure!
(I sold all my WW2 US watches to concerntrate on Commonwealth issue watches).

cheers,

-John

[lysander]

The dial feet would have to have been moved. The ones I have seen with the same dial style as yours had the original three dial feet as usual for Walthams.

If it were a Elgin dial there would be evidence on the back of the dial to indicate the moving of the dial feet.

The differences are, if you look closely are:

1) The Elgin zeros are much more round set further down in the minute track.

2) If you look at the numeral "5" onn the Elgin the termination curl points off at about 45 degrees from the horizontal, on the Waltham, it is almost horizontal. The same for the "3" and the "6"

3) The "4" is different in proportion.

4) The second numbers are set further down into the minute track.

[Mr.D.]

Anyone can see that this photo showing a dial is not from the watch you posted before.

[quote=lysander;69564]

My picture

QUOTE]

Your previous picture...


These two dials are completely different dials and not from the same watch. Who are you trying to kid, maybe the newby but certainly not the seasoned collector.

For the rest of the forum members (I know that I will not Lysender) both of these dials posted by Lysender are variations of Elgin non-luminous dials, not Waltham. You will not find a Waltham dial in which the outer seconds track numbers are below the hash marks. I have handled hundreds of Waltham A-11s (and their USN and RAF counter-parts) and currently have more than a dozen in my collection. Go look in Whitney, if you don't believe me. Try pages 540, 542-544 for Elgin and pages 554-556 for Walthams. Do any of the Waltham dials look like the above?

I will post many photos showing you that you are wrong and are spreading bad information. I don't have the time right now but I will post over the Christmas holiday many (all) examples from my own personal collection so that other members of this forum can know what a correct Elgin or Waltham should look like. I will not cut and paste from previous posts and websites but will show with new photos from my own collection and other colleagues of mine.

From your other post you state...

The dial feet would have to have been moved.

No, not necessarily. I have seen many watches where the wrong dial had been used by removing the dial feet and either using glue or tape, secured the dial to the movement. I can't imagine someone going to the trouble of moving dial feet on such a common, inexpensive watch.

My education in US issued watches didn't come cheaply or by viewing photos posted on websites or eBay and taking that as gospel. It came through many years of personally tracking down watches and buying them. Sometimes I even bought incorrect watches just to confirm that they were incorrect and not some variation. I can't tell you how many incorrect watches that I have purchased just for this alone. Like I said, it is not cheap when you want to learn and understand what is correct and what isn't.

[Mr.D.]

describes variations of Elgin dials.

Originally Posted by lysander

The dial feet would have to have been moved. The ones I have seen with the same dial style as yours had the original three dial feet as usual for Walthams.

If it were a Elgin dial there would be evidence on the back of the dial to indicate the moving of the dial feet.

The differences are, if you look closely are:

1) The Elgin zeros are much more round set further down in the minute track.

2) If you look at the numeral "5" onn the Elgin the termination curl points off at about 45 degrees from the horizontal, on the Waltham, it is almost horizontal. The same for the "3" and the "6"

3) The "4" is different in proportion.

4) The second numbers are set further down into the minute track.

[lysander]

[quote=Mr.D.;69595]Anyone can see that this photo showing a dial is not from the watch you posted before.

Originally Posted by lysander

My picture

QUOTE]

Your previous picture...


These two dials are completely different dials and not from the same watch. Who are you trying to kid, maybe the newby but certainly not the seasoned collector.

For the rest of the forum members (I know that I will not Lysender) both of these dials posted by Lysender are variations of Elgin non-luminous dials, not Waltham. You will not find a Waltham dial in which the outer seconds track numbers are below the hash marks. I have handled hundreds of Waltham A-11s (and their USN and RAF counter-parts) and currently have more than a dozen in my collection. Go look in Whitney, if you don't believe me. Try pages 540, 542-544 for Elgin and pages 554-556 for Walthams. Do any of the Waltham dials look like the above?

I will post many photos showing you that you are wrong and are spreading bad information. I don't have the time right now but I will post over the Christmas holiday many (all) examples from my own personal collection so that other members of this forum can know what a correct Elgin or Waltham should look like. I will not cut and paste from previous posts and websites but will show with new photos from my own collection and other colleagues of mine.

From your other post you state...

No, not necessarily. I have seen many watches where the wrong dial had been used by removing the dial feet and either using glue or tape, secured the dial to the movement. I can't imagine someone going to the trouble of moving dial feet on such a common, inexpensive watch.

My education in US issued watches didn't come cheaply or by viewing photos posted on websites or eBay and taking that as gospel. It came through many years of personally tracking down watches and buying them. Sometimes I even bought incorrect watches just to confirm that they were incorrect and not some variation. I can't tell you how many incorrect watches that I have purchased just for this alone. Like I said, it is not cheap when you want to learn and understand what is correct and what isn't.

I never said they were the same dial, but the one you pictured is the Elgin dial. you might have noticed had you read the post.

And, do you think I cannot tell if the dial is held on by glue/double side tape or the original dial feet when I service a watch?

But, whatever. Have a great day.

[dagsfottfal]

I just want to appologise for the delay in the competitions being made available. I also want to appologise for any picture which may of been sent in and are not up for voting.

Thanks for the patience this month

Niko

[kfranzk]

In my book British Military Timepieces I show some Walthams and Bulova 6B/234 and some with Denisson recase.
. Gruesse/Regards/Salute Konrad Knirim
PS: Have a look at my new book:
British Military Timepieces
. http://www.knirim.de