Bulova 1921 Lady Maxim

11/10 votes
Model ID rating explained.
Manufacture Year: 
Movement Model: 
Movement Jewels: 
Movement Serial No.: 
Case Serial No.: 
Case shape: 
Case Manufacturer: 
American Standard
Additional Information: 

 Recently acquired this one... a real Mystery! 1924 is a guess. Movement is 8 1/2 lignes, case is 18K non-Bulova. I found a post on NAWCC site about a similar Lady Maxim (no photo). The case was 14K gold filled, but had the same manufacturer's stamp. Is this a BULOVA, or was it made for another company by BULOVA??

Image added by myBulova Administrator.

J. Bulova Company. Makers of the Famous Lady Maxim and Rubaiyat Watches.


Not For Sale
Bulova watch
Bulova watch
Bulova watch
bobbee's picture
Posted September 4, 2012 - 9:25pm

Now THAT is what I call an important find! How crazy is that, right there under our extremely long noses.
Well done Mark, the Havana is yours!

FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
Posted September 4, 2012 - 10:00pm

The way I interpret the information is the Maxim and the Rubaiyat were manufactured by Bulova in the same way the later Westfield, Caravelle and Accutrons were, as subsiduary or secondary Company's, which is why We see their Names printed on the Dials and not Bulovas'...

bobbee's picture
Posted September 4, 2012 - 9:58pm

With Bulova, all things are possible. That one is just about lost in the mists of time though.

Posted September 4, 2012 - 11:41pm

Club 5000Panel Member

OMG how did we miss that.

So, Lady Maxim, Bulova watch or not? 

If we apply the same rule of thumb as the Westfields then it shouldn't be apart of the dbase, but what a shame to lose it.

Thoughts please.

William Smith's picture
William Smith
Posted September 5, 2012 - 12:28am

Club 5000Panel Member

It's not really clear from the ad that the Hudson Maxim and Rubaiyat were made by a bulova subsidiary or differently branded like the Westfield and/or Caravelle.  Maybe there are all bulova and just don't have Bulova on the dials- like admin says about the branding this early in the game.  Maybe made all bulova and just have Maxim on dial?  Hummmm thinking........
Great catch on that Fifth.   Do we have any other evidence of this possible subsidiary idea?

Posted September 5, 2012 - 1:35am

Club 5000Panel Member

ok reading back through this very interest and sometimes heated discussion, there is one thing that can now be put to bed. Bulova made this watch.

William Smith's picture
William Smith
Posted September 5, 2012 - 2:57am

Club 5000Panel Member

Why in the world would we delete all this good Bulova history and information because of a "rule".  The rules are more like guidelines.  All through this post folks have noted the merit of this info.  ...and as far as consistently following rules....one more exception to the rule wouldn't hurt.  It's good Bulova "history speculation" with facts coming along to fill in the speculation gaps.

Can anyone tell me which two watch models are displayed on the first 1922 ad? I can't make out the two model names, if it's even stated?  Thanks.

Posted September 13, 2012 - 7:43am

Club 5000Panel Member

Will, I have a feeling that the mens pocket watch shown may be the Phantom.

William Smith's picture
William Smith
Posted September 14, 2012 - 12:11am

Club 5000Panel Member

...yep Admin, I have that feeling too :(

bobbee's picture
Posted September 5, 2012 - 3:40am

Can't make them out,Will.
I re-read the whole post over again last night and found it very rewarding and insightful, seeing the thought processes members went through with a much more limited database, and am thankful for the enrichment of it since then.
The watches cannot be proved either way to have been a sub-brand, as it could just as easily be an advert for a new way of Bulova naming instead of numbering their watches, or just proud of those particular, or possibly most popular watches, and as these are at least aknowledged by Bulova and are early examples of fine watch making, we should keep them.