Bulova 1921 Lady Maxim

Manufacture Year

1921

Movement Model

Movement Jewels

Case Serial No.

1009043

Case shape

Cushion

Case color

Yellow

Case Manufacturer

American Standard

Crystal details

18mm Round

Gender

Ladies

Watch Description

Case has no markings on the back - Gold filled Symbol on movement looks like a rhombus with 10 marked in it??? I have put 1922 only so I can get this on the site for your consideration. I do not know the date. Stem and crown appears to be a replacement??

Edit: Avertisment Added: The advertisment is from 1922 add no 3 of 36 - Top "954", but this watch is 14kt white gold and the one I have is yellow gold- to me the case looks the same and the face looks the same. Case is 24mm. Lug end to lug end is 27mm Hinged Case opens from the side

Edit: Changed date to 22 from 24

donegd

Posted May 27, 2015 - 7:19am

I have a very similar watch to this one in white gold fill but its not a bulova movement

William Smith

Posted May 27, 2015 - 2:11pm

So does Lady Maxim 953 describes this watch best? (based on ads and other documentation).

We have other Lady Maxim ID's, some with Lady Maxim on the dial, some with Bulova on the dial, and some with no dial signature.

Do we have an ad or other watch ID'ed as Lady Maxim with subject watch case shape? I'm not seeing one, but that may not matter, unless this case shape was not part of the "Lady Maxim" group.

Begs the question...is Lady Maxim the "series", and the numbers (e.g. 953/954) the model names (numbers)? Or would Lady maxim be the model, and the numbers are variants? LOL

Kind of a mess, but an interesting mess.

bobbee

Posted May 27, 2015 - 6:03pm

I posted several LM ads that aren't in the 1920-29 ads in the "Evidence" thread I posted regarding LM/early numbered watch ads here:

http://www.mybulova.com/forums/evidence-early-numbered-bulovas-were-ladyhudson-maxim-wwatch-line

There is this ad from March 1922.

Lady Maxim=model, number=model variant number.

All the evidence points to it in the above linked thread.

William Smith

Posted May 27, 2015 - 6:34pm

That's where I saw this line of reasoning and evidence/ads etc.... and it's been in that thread for a while. Thanks for reminding me.

bobbee

Posted May 28, 2015 - 4:56am

You're welcome Will.

I don't know if it makes a difference, but the crown matches the one on the LM ad too, so possibly the 1922 date is correct. I know the ad is for solid gold, but we know filled options were available for most watches, including this style.