Bulova 1943 -Unknown

Model ID rating explained.
0
Manufacture Year: 
1943
Movement Symbol: 
X
Movement Model: 
10BA
Movement Jewels: 
17
Case Serial No.: 
3335020
Case shape: 
Tonneau
Case Manufacturer: 
Bulova
Crystal Details: 
19.80X22.50 CURVED FROM TOP TO BOTTOM
Gender: 
Mens
Additional Information: 

1943 Arnold

Case back:serial number only

Inside case back:BULOVA 10K ROLLED GOLD PLATE BEZEL   STERLING BASE STAINLESS BACK NEW YORK

 10 BA 17 jewel movement isdated 1943(x symbol)

Dial:butler finish dial with gold applied numbers,sub seconds dial,dauphinegold hands and reads BULOVA

Crown broke off in shipping but is unmarked

Not For Sale
1943 Bulova watch
1943 Bulova watch
1943 Bulova watch
1943 Bulova watch
1943 Bulova watch
JP
Posted January 2, 2016 - 12:21am

Panel Member

I'm good with Arnold

Andersok
Posted January 2, 2016 - 9:36am

Panel Member

 

I believe this one is the Norman, 1944 example here

Arnold had a slightly different case

 

jabs
Posted January 2, 2016 - 11:39am

Panel Member

I am inclined to Norman, cases are very similar, however ...

In addition, the number of jewells corresponding Norman

Bulova Watch

denupnorth
Posted January 2, 2016 - 6:09pm

After seeing the example and the ad posted by Andersok I'm thinking Norman also.Funny,I think this is the second or third time I post a watch as an Arnold only to be shot down.Damn BULOVA for making all these similac cases.Someday I'll find one and get this right LOL.Norman is fine by me.

Geoff Baker
Posted January 3, 2016 - 8:52am

Club 5000Panel Member

I am also leaning toward Norman.

mybulova_admin
Posted January 4, 2016 - 5:01am

Club 5000Panel Member

I have to disagree with the Norman call, the case looks different to me, especially the sides of the bezel. I think we also got it wrong with the other example.

The side engravings seem to be one solid piece with the Norman. This watch doesn't have that.

Still looking to see if it's an Arnold or something else.

Geoff Baker
Posted January 12, 2016 - 8:57am

Club 5000Panel Member

I've been looking at this and the 15 Arnolds we have in the dB on and off for the past week and I think I've come around. The Norman advert shows a continuous flow of engraving all the way to the tips of the lugs, the Arnold, on the other hand, shows a slight step where the engraving transitions from the bezel to the lug. 

I'm flipping to Arnold on this one, I think the 15 in the dB are all correctly ID's as well. I think Alan's Norman watch however,  needs to be re-evaluated. I understand that the movement jewel counts may differ from the adverts and can only attribute that to movement swaps. In this example I think the case design is substantially different and the ID should be based on it.

Reverend Rob's picture
Reverend Rob
Posted January 12, 2016 - 11:30am

Panel Member
 

Looks like an Arnold to me, based on the engravings and the ad.

jabs
Posted January 12, 2016 - 11:48am

Panel Member

so what about movement, Arnold have 15JWLs movement unlike Norman whitch have 17 JWLs movement

as writes Geoff "... I think the 15 in the dB are all correctly ID's as well ...", I think that's the 15 pieces have 15 JWLs

Andersok
Posted January 12, 2016 - 1:54pm

Panel Member

I'm looking at the area below and above the crystal opening and in the Arnold I clearly see (in database watches and ads) a secondary horizontal ridge. I also somewhat see this in the Norman ad. The subject watch does not have this.

Subj watch actually looks more similar to the Stamford, but with the engravings. I cannot find an ad to help id this otherwise and am at Unknown.