Bulova 1950 Duo Wind

12/10 votes
Model ID rating explained.
Manufacture Year: 
Movement Model: 
Movement Jewels: 
Case Serial No.: 
Case shape: 
Case Manufacturer: 
Additional Information: 

Fancy Cased Automatic measures 40mm lug to lug x 33mm non inclusive of the Crown using Calipers.

Original Butler finish Dial shows a combination of applied Gilt hashmarks and Arabic numerals. Hour and Minute hands are Gilt Alpha style, Sweep center seconds hand is Gilt Modern style. Bulova logo is applied Gilt, Duo Wind insignia is printed Black, Black printed track is numerically calibrated at 5 Second intervals.

Crown is original.

Snap fit Caseback is Stainless Steel and stamped as shown.

1950 was the first Year an Automatic movement in a Bulova.

Not For Sale
Bulova watch
Bulova watch
Bulova watch
Bulova Watch
Bulova Watch
FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
Posted June 9, 2012 - 9:20pm

When You find an ad Naming this Watch the 'THAYER' in 1950 please advise, until then it's the 1950 'DUO-WIND' as shown and described in the vintage display ad, also dated 1950.


database ad dated 1953 http://www.mybulova.com/sites/default/files/vintage_ads/bulova-ad-1953-6...

Posted June 9, 2012 - 10:40pm

Obviously, you can call it what you want.  All I pointed out was that the ad you used doesn't match the watch, and the 1952 ad that has "Duo-Wind" on the dial names it the Thayer.

You are, of course, free to ignore all that, as you have been doing.

How a watch without a matching ad can get almost three stars, I don't know, but I guess that's just a consequence of having no objective standards to support the ratings.

FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
Posted June 10, 2012 - 8:52am

I am.

There is no evidence to support a 'THAYER' ID on this design prior to 1952, - there are however database examples dated 1952 and beyond worthy of a look.

This design has followed the same trend as the Watch discussed in the link You provided above, a Watch which in 1950 and 1951/2 was known as a 'DUO WIND', then in 1953 became the 'SPENCER'.

Posted June 10, 2012 - 9:48am

And you continue to ignore the fact that your dial more closely matches the 1952 ad, rather than the 1950 as evidenced by the "Duo Wind" on the dial.  Everything else is speculation based on an absence of information rather than on positive proof.

FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
Posted June 10, 2012 - 11:04am

Not ignoring this matter at all, I disagree.

The numerals showing in the 1952 ad more closely resemble the printed type as shown below.

The numerals on the subject Watch are applied (raised) Gilt, and smaller, matching the 1950 ad.

There's a subtle difference....

Posted June 10, 2012 - 11:27am

I'm not talking about Plains' watch, I'm talking about yours.  Why don't we stick with the watch and topic at hand.

The 1950 ad that you used to support your watch's ID does not show "Duo Wind" on the dial.  Therefore, your watch does not match that ad.  

Your watch does match the 1952 ad, which has Duo Wind on the dial and names the watch the Thayer.

FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
Posted June 10, 2012 - 11:46am

Plainsmens Watch is shown as an illustration of the Dial depicted in the 1952 'THAYER' ad which differs from the Dial shown in the 1950 'DUO-WIND ad, which also is the production Date of the subject Watch.

I'm done.

Posted June 10, 2012 - 11:51am

Your strongest argument, Fifth, for your watch being a Duo-Wind, does not rest in a comparison to the ads.  They don't help you. 

However, there may be truth to the assertion of a difference in size between the Duo-Wind and Thayer, and there may also be a clear difference in movement caliber and construction which could help distinguish the two models, if they are in fact two different watches that can be distinguished at all. 

A detailed analysis of those factors between all the watches with this style of case, would, in my opinion, be worth doing, and might actually settle this question.  Whereas continuing to argue about limited advertisements that do not match your watch seems pointless.


FifthAvenueRestorations's picture
Posted June 10, 2012 - 12:06pm

Go for it, please let Us know Your findings as I have already stated the Movements differ.

The attack on this particular ID was, and still is, baseless. 

Posted June 10, 2012 - 12:36pm

It's not my theory to prove or disprove.  It is yours.  Although, as usual, you stated it as fact, rather than as a theory, despite the absence of any data to prove it true.

I know what my two watches are--the Thayer.

How typical that you would refer to a discussion of a watch's model ID as an "attack", yet you have repeatedly criticized other members in the past for taking these discussions personally and getting upset when there is disagreement.  Seems like you would at least attempt to set a better example, especially since you feel so free to criticize others.

I'm sure you'll be deleting this entire thread soon enough anyway, since that's what you do when someone "attacks" your watch.  lol


The basis of the so-called attack on your model ID remains the new advertisement, which shows a watch with "Duo-Wind" on the dial--just like your watch--but calls it the Thayer in four different places.  Conversely, the ad you used to support your Duo-Wind ID shows nothing on the dial except "Bulova".   You can consider that an "attack" if you want, but I consider it new information that deserves consideration by the panel, even if you steadfastedly ignore it.