1927 Lone Eagle with 10AP movement

Hello: has anyone seen a Lone Eagle (the original 1927 variant) with a 10AP movement? This is my first one. All the ones I have seen prior have had the 10AN. I see the mybulova database also has a few with a 9AT movement. It is definitely a completely different movement than the 10AN (I've included an image of the 10AN that I borrowed from the mybulova database). I checked my Marshall Handy Manual, and I see that the Bulova 10AP was based on an ebauche made by Le Phare.  And of course, it has a mainspring and a staff distinct from the 10AN. About the only thing it does have in common with the 10AN, and that is its size, at 10.5 lignes. Comments are welcome.


this is the usual 10AN found inside the Lone Eagle


This is the 10AP inside of the Lone Eagle I have.


Here's an exterior image of my Lone Eagle.

Posted May 21, 2012 - 11:50am


I have the same model with the 10P.  When I had it posted here, it was determined to be a Conqueror, though it has the case design of the Lone Eagle.  You can see it here:


What is the case serial number on yours?

- Lisa

William Smith's picture
William Smith
Posted May 21, 2012 - 12:34pm

Club 5000Panel Member

Bruce  The 10AP did occur in 1926 Conquerors.  We have two in database. One below.


Note the similar dial (open nine), and the movement serial number of yours and the model linked above.  Can you confirm your mvnt serial number and ad the case serial number.

Conqueror linked above:   Movement Serial No.: 1047177      Case Serial No.:  6637758

Subject watch :                   Movement Serial No.: 1045300      Case Serial No.:  ?559873

While we don't know too much about Bulvoa movement and case serial numbers, we can use them as a form of "relative" dating based on patters seen w/i specific calibers and cases/models.


Posted May 21, 2012 - 9:05pm

Movt serial # is1045300

the first digit of the case serial # is hard to discern, but after the first digit, it's 559873. My case back is also enscribed "Pat. June 10, 1924." So presumably, the first digit would be a "6" based on the other one that's in the database. Bruce

William Smith's picture
William Smith
Posted May 22, 2012 - 1:46pm

Club 5000Panel Member

agreed.  Most likely a mis-strike leading "6" for case serial number. 

Edit:   a leading 6 or a leading 9 ?

So is it

bobbee's picture
Posted May 22, 2012 - 3:26pm

I'd say it's a mis-struck 9, looking at the flow of the numbers as they curve in a smile from left to right, and it seems to have a tail at the bottom right.

Posted May 23, 2012 - 2:39am

Club 5000Panel Member

100% guarantee it's a 6

Posted May 22, 2012 - 12:32am

Club 5000Panel Member

10AP, 10P - 1926/27 Conqueror

10AN - 1927 Lone Eagle

9AT - 1927/28 Lone Eagle

FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
Posted May 22, 2012 - 5:51pm

I would agree with bobbee that the lead off number for the Case, based on its orientation, is possibly a mis-struck 9 and could even be an 8.

Also,  I don't see a Datecode on the 10AP which would confirm its time of manufacture to 1927, does anyone see one?

We have a datecodeless 15 Jewel 10AP in the database, seriel # 614690(?)  http://www.mybulova.com/watches/1929-ambassador-4266 in a 1928 (or 9) Case.

William Smith's picture
William Smith
Posted May 23, 2012 - 2:45am

Club 5000Panel Member

I don't see any date symbol on the movement.  Bruce would have looked pretty thoroughly.  The "flow of the smile", or curvature of the serial numbers is a little deceptive in the image because of parallax issues and distortion due to angle of shot.  The numbers on the right appear larger than numbers at the beginning, so it actually could be the bottom of a six lining up in this pattern.  I'm gonna play with the image and do a little rubber sheeting trick to see if I can get the picture looking like a straight-on shot from top dead center. 

bobbee's picture
Posted May 23, 2012 - 4:12am

Looking again at the photo above, and comparing opposite side numbers, the 7 and 3, the bottom of the 3 is halfway up the 7, so it is natural to assume the opposite side, the 5 and mis-struck number, the bottom of the mis-struck is halfway up the 5, leaving us with either a 6 or an 8. The "tail" at the bottom right of the mis-struck number is probably a kind of "skid" from being mis-struck. Also the top of the mis-struck looks a little shallower and fainter than the bottom, probably from being struck at an angle.  So in my opinion Stephen and Will are right and I was wrong in my earlier comment.