Bulova 1957 His Excellency

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

I decided "C" over "EW" because variant "C" specifies precision adjustments where "EW" does not. Movement has 6 Adjustments

Not For Sale
Bulova watch
Bulova watch
Bulova watch
Bulova Watch
Bulova Watch
Bulova Watch
FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
Posted September 17, 2012 - 2:08pm

"Mark, nowhere in Will's posted advert does it say what you state in this post. The only place it says the word "all" is in this part I will quote verbatim: "...different in the dress styling that sets this watch apart from all other waterproofs...",  so you have misquoted there, so sorry."

Bulova His Excellency advert



Perhaps you should have your eyes checked, I said the ad above states....

William Smith's picture
William Smith
Posted September 10, 2012 - 6:31am

Club 5000Panel Member

Bob It does look like"

"EW" is the "A" on the next ad, and the "HW" becomes the "M".

I hadn't seen that before.  Interesting... Good catch!

FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
Posted September 10, 2012 - 7:04am

If We go strictly by Date of ad then the Watch is the 'HIS EXCELENCY' 'EW' as the ad and the Watch are both Dated 1958.

Going strictly by Date of the ad has been exampled here http://www.mybulova.com/watches/1958-his-excellency-d-1730?page=1#commen...

Consistancy? I'm not seeing any as the arguement seems to become about who is right and who is wrong and not about the merits of the Watch.

bobbee's picture
Posted September 10, 2012 - 7:33am

Consistency is only shown by you in the dogged fashion you go about trying to prove that EVERY designation letter ever used includes the band, I have never contested the FACT that the letter designation does include the band SOMETIMES. And as to this being an argument about who's right or wrong, try reading my posts, at least I'm willing to change my point of view when the evidence is to the contrary.




bobbee's picture
Posted September 10, 2012 - 7:12am

  If you look at the "M" in above ad, it is solid gold, $135. The "HW" in the other ad, "natural gold" $135. The "C" in the top ad is "natural gold" $79.50. The "EW" has no mention of case metal, but is gold coloured, $59.50. 

Is it not possible, using the above wording as an interpretation, that the "C" is solid gold and the "EW" is RGP? Making the subject the "EW".

Posted September 10, 2012 - 12:47pm

Im not very educated on how these discusions go so I will introduce a question to possibly aid in the outcome. 

Are there other examples of where simply the band of the watch makes a variant designation??

If it is simply the band that is differing determination I'm afraid we will never known which one it is, because this is not the original band. Unless there is another way to make a distinction, I suggest giving it a general identification. It is interesting and fun to speculate but without a foundation for the speculation it should remain just that. Of course this is just my opinion which also has its own place ;D lol

If the band is not solely the determination for variance something else should be considered or be postponed until further evidence is brought to the fore.

Posted September 10, 2012 - 1:09pm

Panel Member

Gents, 4 what it's worth, I'm with Mark on the EW designation. It's a no brainer, he's posted the evidence that is as clear as water in a glass. Never mind the pricing, just consider the ad. I'm 3 ticks for the EW designation or 3 for His Excellency with no variant. Publish it.

bobbee's picture
Posted September 10, 2012 - 3:46pm

"He's posted evidence as clear as water in a glass". Go back to the bottom of page two and take another look...

EDIT:- His Excellency non-variation 3 ticks.

William Smith's picture
William Smith
Posted September 10, 2012 - 4:35pm

Club 5000Panel Member

gang, perhaps the glass of water was actually a frosty cold mug of beer in a warm tropical environment.... and since the beer is no longer in the mug (hiccup- excuse me), at this moment thing are now clear.  So

The morning dew has left the glass,
and you, my friends, can........

...consider my vote to be either "EW" or generic.  Again the first conveys more information about the watch, but I'll go w/ the majority on either call to expedite publication :)    (hiccup- excuse me)

bobbee's picture
Posted September 10, 2012 - 4:48pm

Good one, Will!

Got a real thirst on now, for some reason.....