Skip to main content

Bulova 1924 5892

6/10 votes
Model ID rating explained.
2.34

Manufacture Year: 

1924

Movement Model: 

5P

Movement Jewels: 

17

Movement Serial No.: 

12339

Case Serial No.: 

867

Case shape: 

Oval

Gender: 

Ladies

Additional Information

An early platinum Bulova as seen in the advert of 1924 with model number 5892. As you can see, my model has an inner minute indicator, which in the advert is not there. However, I have seen on internet more pictures of this model and we all share the same dial. So, maybe Bulova changed its mind how the dial should look like after the drawing was made for the advert? Another surprise when I received the watch: unfortunately it has a Hamilton 721 movement. The disadvantage of buying it off internet! I will pursue to find out what the original movement should be, so I can retrofit it back to its original state. Any info is welcome to help identify the correct movement. Other than that, another beautiful platinum Bulova, unfortunately identified by a number, hence I herewith baptize her "Agatha". A name that, until now, is not existing in the database. The size is 14mm wide and 30mm long.

EDIT 1: a watch from this time wold have a 5P 17 jewel. I finally found one and replaced the Hamilton movement for an original 5P!

Not For Sale
Bulova 5892
1924 Bulova watch
1924 Bulova watch
1924 Bulova watch
1924 Bulova watch
Bulova Watch
Alex
Panel Member
Posted August 31, 2014 - 12:16am

More to come!

mybulova_admin
Club 5000Panel Member
Posted August 31, 2014 - 3:02am

Beautiful watch and a very highend one for that period. Not many would have been made I'd imagine. It's a shame about the movement and I really do hope you're able to find an original. Possibility a 6P or 5P.

Normally we would ID this as Non-Conforming, but as long as it is clearly mentioned that the movement is incorrect and to be replaced then I'm happy for it to be added to the database with its correct model reference number as i believe it serves a better purpose.

Thanks for adding such a wonderful watch.

Alex
Panel Member
Posted August 31, 2014 - 3:15am

It was indeed a very nasty surprise when I opened the case and found the Hamilton movement. It was not me tioned in the listing. Being a collector, you can understand my disappointment. But the case that is in excellent state deserves to get it's original movement back. Thanks for listing it!

bobbee's picture
bobbee
Posted August 31, 2014 - 5:24am

Lovely watch Alex.
Agree with decision even though watch has a Ham...urrgh!, 'scuse me...incorrect movement.

jabs
Panel Member
Posted August 31, 2014 - 5:49am

Nice watch but "Non-Conforming"

William Smith's picture
William Smith
Club 5000Panel Member
Posted August 31, 2014 - 1:54pm

Lovely "Agatha" :)  The case sure looks to match the ad for "5892".  A Bulova contract case, without Bulova or any other case manufacture hallmarks. 

For now, by our working definition, it can't even be ID'ed as "Non-Conforming" because of non-Bulova movement.  We would be ID'ing just the case.  ...but IMO we should not delet this great watch record.

When Alex finds an appropriate movement, I'd go with "5892" for model ID.  Until then, what do we call it in the mean time?

Geoff Baker
Club 5000Panel Member
Posted September 1, 2014 - 4:37am

Very nice watch, amazing condition. The crown alone is a work of art. I like the (white gold?) braided cord, it really does the watch justice. I also like the fact that, like at mine, all 'Unknown' watches have a name at your house.

I'm comfortable tagging it as a 5892 right away, to Stephen's point, the mvnt swap is noted.

Alex
Panel Member
Posted September 1, 2014 - 9:43am

I just bought a 6PPI 17 jewel movement. Albeit with missing winding wheel that connects with the ratchet wheel. Lets see if my watch maker can get it working. One step closer to restoring the "Agatha".

Alex
Panel Member
Posted September 1, 2014 - 9:45am

Looking at the years in the movement table, the 5892 with a 6PPI would fit. You agree?

mybulova_admin
Club 5000Panel Member
Posted September 6, 2014 - 4:54am

 

I would agree with that movement. Whilst it may not be exact (but then again it might) it's certainly period to the watch in question.