This is my 1970 Bulova. I believe it is a 1970 "Royal Clipper".

FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
FifthAvenueRest...
Posted June 5, 2012 - 9:03am

Very nice!

1970 seems late for this style, can You give the information found on the Caseback?

Thanks.

peter-g
Posted June 5, 2012 - 10:07am

Hi.  Sorry MO would be 1960 ... Found MO on the movement.

 

 

 

 

plainsmen
Posted June 5, 2012 - 10:16am

Club 5000Panel Member

That back case look a little suspect to anyone else?  Might be a replacement?

Fantastic looking watch though... wow.

NOVA
Posted June 5, 2012 - 11:31am

I don't think I've ever seen a back quite like that, but that fact alone does not mean that it's not legit.

"Shockabsorber", in particular, stands out as odd.  But, really, all the wording on the back is atypical.

What is on the inside of the case back?

peter-g
Posted June 5, 2012 - 11:30am

Inside

 

NOVA
Posted June 5, 2012 - 11:33am

Hmmm. . . that doesn't look like the inside of a Bulova case back from 1960.  Not in my experience, anyway.   This may not be a complete Bulova watch, as opposed to a Bulova dial and movement in someone else's case.

bobbee's picture
bobbee
Posted June 5, 2012 - 2:16pm

If the caseback was from 1960's it would say "waterproof", not "water resistant". Case looks period to me, probably just a new back. Gorgeous dial and hands look 50's though. Frankie, is my thought, though a very handsome one I would enjoy wearing, Peter. Very nice.

DarHin's picture
DarHin
Posted June 5, 2012 - 2:43pm

Is it unusual for the dial to read Selfwinding and the case back to read Automatic?

NOVA
Posted June 5, 2012 - 2:48pm

Yes.  Literally everything about that back is unusual--both what it includes and what it is missing.

bobbee's picture
bobbee
Posted June 5, 2012 - 2:51pm

I think so. Cannot see a date on the case back either. "steel back", not "stainless steel"?

bobbee's picture
bobbee
Posted June 5, 2012 - 2:53pm

Love a mystery, Scooby Doo!

bobbee's picture
bobbee
Posted June 5, 2012 - 2:58pm

That dial and the hands looks brand spanking new, but original, including the radium dots, if you know what I mean.

peter-g
Posted June 5, 2012 - 3:18pm

Thanks for all the comments.

Another picture .... Do you think it is a "Royal" Clipper.

 

 

 

 

 

 

JP
Posted June 5, 2012 - 3:28pm

Panel Member

I don't know but I have one like it that is going to the repair shop since my talents don't extend to self.winding. When I get it back I will post it and we can compare. It is a beautiful watch though.

JP

JP
Posted June 5, 2012 - 3:41pm

Panel Member

Just took a look at the back of mine, inside it says BULOVA FIFTH  AVE NEW YORK. Out side it says M0 and the following: 10K RGP Bezel Stainless Steel Back, Shock Resistant, Anti-magnetic,

Self Winding, Water Proof and of course BULOVA.

 

JP

NOVA
Posted June 5, 2012 - 3:46pm

Is the crown Bulova signed?  Doesn't appear to be, which is odd considering the year of manufacture and the condition of the case, etc. in general.  Wouldn't expect it to have a replacement crown.

peter-g
Posted June 5, 2012 - 3:59pm

The crown has BULOVA stamped on it.

NOVA
Posted June 5, 2012 - 4:01pm

Interesting.

bobbee's picture
bobbee
Posted June 5, 2012 - 4:06pm

Looks just like the Royal Clipper in the 1958 first ad page 10, Peter, just the caseback looks wrong for it.

peter-g
Posted June 5, 2012 - 4:37pm

Thank you.

JP
Posted June 5, 2012 - 4:55pm

Panel Member

I may have the answer to the strange case back. My back has the little tang sticking out on it too but it is just about gone and it doesn't allow me to tighten down the back because it slips around and this can wrinkle up the gasket. I thought about buying another watch and trading out the backs but changed my mind and am having a friend with a special welding rig fix it for me when I am ready for him. This could be a quicky fix for that reason and they just didn't get the correct back. IMO

JP

DarHin's picture
DarHin
Posted June 5, 2012 - 5:15pm

The "factory" looking BULOVA stamped on the back appears like it was meant to decieve but why not add a date code? No date code makes it even more suspicious. Also, the case back appears to be very thin gauging from the stamps impression on the inside.

JP
Posted June 5, 2012 - 5:20pm

Panel Member

Good catch Dar. I think it was not meangt to be a deception rathar than a fix for a common problem. It has the same cal as mine and everything but the case back is pretty much correct even the hands though as was pointed out, they look brand new.

JP