Very nice present from a dear friend

bobbee's picture

I will always think of this man as a gentle, helpful and above all very friendly man, and I received this and another watch from him today, as a gift. I thank him for this very generous addition to my collection, to be cherished always, even though I don't know the model!  Thanks, JP.

Thank You, JP.

bobbee's picture
bobbee
Posted June 6, 2012 - 6:04pm

Anyone know what this is? Can't find one in DB.

JP
Posted June 6, 2012 - 6:09pm

Panel Member

Mark can help out here. I think it is a president but I am not sure.

JP

DarHin's picture
DarHin
Posted June 6, 2012 - 6:22pm

No Presidents in the db with a 10BT.

Bobbee, how many jewels?

NOVA
Posted June 6, 2012 - 6:25pm

It's probably an Ambassador, judging from the style and date.

Crystal specs may be able to support that theory or provide an alternative.

bobbee's picture
bobbee
Posted June 6, 2012 - 6:32pm

19mm. X 22mm. as near as I can measure with ruler, Maybe 18.8 or .9X21.8 or .9

16mm. lug gape, case 37X23mm.

NOVA
Posted June 6, 2012 - 6:35pm

Bob, get yourself some digital calipers.  Crystal measurements are in fractions of millimeters and are very precise.

bobbee's picture
bobbee
Posted June 6, 2012 - 6:25pm

15

JP
Posted June 6, 2012 - 6:27pm

Panel Member

Maybe a 53 Ambassador.

JP

JP
Posted June 6, 2012 - 6:34pm

Panel Member

I just don't remember. I know Mark had an  ad to verify id.

bobbee's picture
bobbee
Posted June 6, 2012 - 6:46pm

Not more tools! If my crystals don't fit I make 'em fit! angle grinder, chain saw and emery cloth!

NOVA
Posted June 6, 2012 - 6:50pm

Can you tell me if the crystal is curved, and, if so, in what direction(s)?

bobbee's picture
bobbee
Posted June 6, 2012 - 6:57pm

Yes, laterally and longtitudinally.

Sorry, going now, musssssttt sssleeeeeeep.........

Jim Townsend
Posted June 6, 2012 - 6:57pm

Mine is a 1954 Ambassdor

                                                                                    

NOVA
Posted June 6, 2012 - 6:59pm

Very different watches, Jim.  Crystal specs tell us that there were quite a few Ambassadors during that time period.

The second one is a Delegate or Statesman, depending on the date.

bourg01
Posted June 6, 2012 - 8:21pm

Panel Member

Bottom watch is the " Delagate ".

NOVA
Posted June 6, 2012 - 8:29pm

. . . or Statesman, depending on the date.

NOVA
Posted June 6, 2012 - 6:57pm

The crystal size is in the right ballpark for an Ambassador.  For example, the Ambassador F is listed in the 1957 Watch-Craft catalog as 22.1 x 19.1.  But a lot of watches are close to that size, and I'm not confident of crystal results without a more precise measurement.

I would keep this one as an unknown until a matching ad is presented.

Jim Townsend
Posted June 6, 2012 - 7:02pm

Both i posted are the same watch just differnt pictures.

 

NOVA
Posted June 6, 2012 - 7:03pm

Huh?  The pictures you posted are of two entirely different watches.

Jim Townsend
Posted June 6, 2012 - 7:05pm

Yes i see that sorry got my pictures mixed up sorry.

bobbee's picture
bobbee
Posted June 6, 2012 - 6:59pm

Not like mine, mine has flat bezel all round lugs different too. 

Going now, ZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzz.......

Jim Townsend
Posted June 6, 2012 - 6:59pm

Hmmm i noticed my lugs are a tad differnt.

Jim Townsend
Posted June 6, 2012 - 7:00pm

night night sleep tight

JP
Posted June 7, 2012 - 7:30pm

Panel Member

It could also be a Senator. They used the same movement and jewel count. I just don't remember what Mark told me it was but it was 3 stars and in the data base until I pulled it to sell.

JP

FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
FifthAvenueRest...
Posted June 8, 2012 - 10:44am

JP
Posted June 8, 2012 - 10:57am

Panel Member

Thank you very much Mark. Bobbee was probably going to go bonkers trying to find that info. I'm sure he will be very happy now.

John

William Smith's picture
William Smith
Posted June 8, 2012 - 11:18am

Club 5000Panel Member

The Ardsley lugs seem to "stick out" on the sides of the bezel a little more than lugs on subject watch.  Is it camera angle and/or ad angle?  

Where the lugs attach to bezel in ad is further "out" and a little closer to dial on bezel. 

NOVA
Posted June 8, 2012 - 11:45am

It's not just the camera angle, Will.  The lugs not only stick out more from the sides, but they also come up over the bezel frame, unlike the subject watch.  The subject watch is not the Ardsley. 

Here's my Ardsley next to the ad.  Last time I checked, there were Ardsleys in the database also.

Correction:  There should be several Ardsleys in the database, but they are still mislabeled as something else.  If you do a site search for "Ardsley", you'll find the discussions.  Here's one example:  http://www.mybulova.com/watches/1951-brunswick-2076.  I believe there are a couple more like that.

FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
FifthAvenueRest...
Posted June 8, 2012 - 11:44am

it's the 'ARDSLEY'

bourg01
Posted June 8, 2012 - 11:59am

Panel Member

No, It's not the Ardsley, Nova has shown the Ardsey in her comment.Clearly different than the subject watch.

DarHin's picture
DarHin
Posted June 8, 2012 - 12:38pm

Sorry, Mark but the subject watch is not the Ardsley.

NOVA
Posted June 8, 2012 - 11:50am

I think someone should schedule a visit with the eye doctor ASAP.  It is clearly not the Ardsley.

Will's side-by-side shot shows the difference in how the lugs are shaped (flared out) and in how they overlap the bezel, as compared to the ad.

The dial is also not a match.

FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
FifthAvenueRest...
Posted June 8, 2012 - 11:57am

The lugs match the ad - look to the lower right lug in the image.

Camera angle is the  issue.

bourg01
Posted June 8, 2012 - 12:00pm

Panel Member

Nope, they do not.

NOVA
Posted June 8, 2012 - 3:59pm

Mark, look at where the lugs end on the subject watch versus where they end in the ad.  The Ardsley ad is unmistakable in that the lugs come all the way to the inner edge of the bezel.  They don't do that on the subject watch--not even close.

The subject watch also shows, using the photo you posted, that the outside of the lugs are in line with the outside of the bezel.  In the ad, the lugs flare out from the bezel sides significantly.

The dial of the subject match also does not match the ad.

It is not camera angle.  We have numerous examples of a watch that looks just like the ad, including mine, above, and several on site listed under the wrong name, because we had not yet found the Ardsley ad when they were posted, and the watch owners have not been around to update.  On one of those watches--the one linked above--you agreed that it was the Ardsley.  It is not the same watch as the one posted here; rather, it resembles my Ardsley with the clearly flared lugs.

 

NOVA
Posted June 8, 2012 - 12:12pm

Here's a link to an actual Ardsley, which looks just like mine posted above.  All agreed--even you, Fifth--that it's an Ardsley:    http://www.mybulova.com/watches/1951-brunswick-2076

It does not resemble the subject watch. 

Here's another one:  http://www.mybulova.com/watches/1951-treasurer-2932

And yet another possibility for the case (but different dial):  http://www.mybulova.com/watches/1953-unknown-1326