Bulova 1954 Warwick

4/10 votes
Model ID rating explained.
Manufacture Year: 
Movement Model: 
8 AC
Movement Jewels: 
Case Serial No.: 
Case shape: 
Additional Information: 

Case measures 39mm lug to lug x 21mm wide non inclusive of the Crown while using Calipers.

Bultler finish Dial shows a combination of applied Gilt numerals and hashmark Hour markers, Bulova signature and open cross-hair sub Seconds Dial are printed in Black. There is no Minute register.

Crown is signed Bulova.

Snap fit Caseback is Gold and stamped as shown.


* From the safe of a closed Jewelery store - Watch appears N.O.S.


as found will update.

Not For Sale
Bulova watch
Bulova watch
Bulova watch
Bulova Watch
William Smith's picture
William Smith
Posted June 1, 2012 - 3:50pm

Club 5000Panel Member

I'm thinking 1955 for the ad too.  There are some other ads w/o spicific dates in the pipeline.... 

Posted June 1, 2012 - 4:06pm

Panel Member

Hey Gents, I have 2 of these right now, a 1953 and a 1955. Mark, If your looking for a crystal, the CMX324-2C is a perfect fit. However, it's labelled as being for the Cromwell & Princeton. Another example of crytal data being unreliable unless it was re-named "Warwick" in 1954-55. I can say for sure it's not a Princeton, but maybe Cromwell in 1953 ??? Would be nice to get another ad showing the watch in 1953. I'm convinced " Warwick" for 1954-55 due to the ad but left wondering about 1953. Your thoughts.

FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
Posted June 1, 2012 - 9:16pm


In thought I'm actually befuddlled (sp)

Given the Dial characterics and 21 Jewels I actually thought this Watch could possibly be a post (lawsuit settlement) 1952 unseen 'AA' or at the least an 'EXCELLENCY'

If the vintage ad giving the ID is from 1955 (for a '56 market?) one of the posiblities still remains, although doubtful.

This one has totally threw Me off.

Posted June 1, 2012 - 10:24pm

Panel Member

I don't think so Mark, going into 1953 - 54 we have ta tentative ad for 1955 but earlier,  I would think Execellency  Group. Designation unknown as no ad is available. We do know Bulova was ordered to stop using the AA advertising in 1952. i doubt this is a later AA release as I have never seen one in the 2 tone quadrant dial or in any other ad . JMO

Posted June 5, 2012 - 4:58pm

Quote from above:  "We do know Bulova was ordered to stop using the AA advertising in 1952."

Just to be clear, Bulova agreed by stipulation in October 1952 to change the way it advertised the AAs.  Here's the relevant excerpt from the stipulation:

“Bulova Watch Co., Inc entered into an agreement in connection with the offering for sale, sale and distribution, in commerce, of its “Academy Award Watches,” it will cease and desist from using the words “Academy Award” or the word “Oscar,” as a designation of or in the advertising for sale of its watches or other commodities unless, in direct connection with the use of such words, depictions or simulations it is clearly and adequately disclosed that the right to use such words, depictions or simulations is by virtue of a licensing agreement entered into by and between Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences and Bulova Watch Co., Inc, and is not representative of any meritorious award made on the bases of comparative tests with other watches.”  (emphasis supplied)

A full reprint of the entire stipulation, as published by the FTC, can be found in this thread:  http://www.mybulova.com/watches/1953-his-excellency-1669.

Posted June 5, 2012 - 7:33pm

Panel Member

Excuse me ,my bad. Let me correct myself "ordered" incorrect.  " Negoiated  suitable closure for both parties in it's case with the FTC and AMPASS". Like they had any other choice.

Posted June 5, 2012 - 7:37pm

The use of "ordered" was not my primary point.  My point was that Bulova didn't have to stop advertising the AAs, but rather simply had to change some of the language in future advertisements.  They didn't have to stop using the Academy Award name or the Oscar symbol.  They just couldn't make it sound like the watch had won the award.  That's really all the stipulation said.

Posted June 5, 2012 - 8:05pm

Panel Member

Hi Lisa,

Yes, I understand. Perhaps if they had never won the "Fashion Academy Gold Medal for Design" there never would have neen any change in their advertising and the contract with AMPASS would have run full circle, perhaps even been renewed.

Well, we all know that didn't happen.

Posted June 5, 2012 - 8:10pm

The Fashion Academy Award was a totally different thing from Bulova's use of the Academy Award name, which they purchased the right to use from AMPAS.  The FTC stipulation concerned the Academy Award watch advertising, not the Fashion Academy award and any advertising associated with that.  It sounds like you're mixing up the two.

We have no evidence that the contract with AMPAS didn't run its full course.  At least I don't have any evidene of that, do you?


Posted June 1, 2012 - 8:41pm

Club 5000Panel Member

Nice ID Will!