# Need Help Identifying Collection



## WatchGecko (Aug 25, 2009)

Hello All, I am new to these boards, and very new to pocket watch collecting. I received a box of watches from my family and I am just trying to identify them. I do not have a great camera, but I was able to get a few good photos.

I have numbered each one and will write what I've figured out.

1. This watch is gold, no second hand, and absolutely no markings on the face or in the cover. Not running.

2. Silver, has JA, then a funny small S, Ronald Greenock, inside the back cover are a stamp of a anchor, lion and the letter Y which looks backwards. Runs, and keeps time within a minute a week

3. Gold, had two initials behind the hands, which don't move, and then it says Shaw Glasgow.

4. Black and gold, says Acier in the back of the case, not on the watch, also has a shield stamped in it with maybe Germany or Gammini or something close to that written in the ribbon going through the middle. It also has some hand painted flowers on the face. No other names or markings. Runs

5. Its an Elgin, that says Jay Jly Co, Schenectady, NY on the fact. Doesnt run, wont open.

6. An 1896 Waltham American, according to the serial number and the website. Doesnt run.

7. A silver Autocrat Ingraham, doesnt run.

That's what I know, can anyone help me learn some more. I have considered going to a watch/clock specialist but i am out in the country and they are all located very far away.

Thanks

Robert

It doesn't appear my images are loading correctly, they are also located on my blog at My Art Blog


----------



## WatchGecko (Aug 25, 2009)

So I am guessing by the lack of responses I need some better detailed photos of my watches.

I am going to try and add some more tonight.


----------



## tixntox (Jul 17, 2009)

You don't give the circumstances of the gift. Inheritance?? The watches look well cared for which is a good sign. Others will probably agree that it's best to have the watches serviced before you run them for long periods. the non runners may be quite easily brought back to life, if the innards are as good as they look externally. the oils tend to go like treacle with age and stop the works. Find a reputable watch repairer (easier said than done) or find someone here who is local to you.


----------



## Shangas (Jan 27, 2008)

Where do you live, WatchGecko?


----------



## WatchGecko (Aug 25, 2009)

Shangas said:


> Where do you live, WatchGecko?


I live in Beaufort, SC, USA. It's a very tiny town, but I have two major ones about an hour out. I've done a search in this area. I found one called The Treasure Chest in Savannah, GA. It's about an hour away for me, but ill get there.

As for the history behind these watches, there really isn't much to tell. My mom had them, said that the men in our family had collected them over the years. That's about all I know. No family left except her, so no one to ask.

Thanks

Robert


----------



## Shangas (Jan 27, 2008)

Hey Rob.

Watches 1, 2 and 3 are all key-wind, key-set pocket watches. #1 is probably the oldest; most earlier watches did not have seconds dials. Also, it looks like it's the fattest. Watch #4 is probably a woman's pocket-watch from the late 19th century (based on size and dial-decorations). Watch #5, the Elgin, is probably from the 20s/30s (more likely 30s, I think). It's got typical 30s Art Deco styling, featuring angular numerals, etc. Watch #6 has mismatched hands. Looking at the style of the watch, I'm inclined to think it's the minute-hand that needs replacing.

Not sure what to say about watch #7. No comments on watches 2 or 3. If you can provide movement photographs of each watch, others may be able to tell you more (such as precise dates of manufacture).


----------



## WatchGecko (Aug 25, 2009)

Shangus,

Thanks a lot for the information, I am going to take them to the watch place I found in Savannah this weekend and get them all checked out. Also, I was going to post more pictures, but my camera has failed me in getting the shots. A friend here at work is going to bring in his big DSLR Nikon and try for me, hopefully with better results.

When I find out a little bit more about them or have better pictures, I will post some more.

Thanks again.

Robert


----------



## mel (Dec 6, 2006)

Isn't watch No 7 a "dollar watch" Shangas? Kind of looks like from here - but it's a ways from Edinburgh. :lol:

Looks a bit like an Ingraham - a forerunner to (eventually) US Time (Timex) long before it became Timex. B)

Welcome to the forum, anyhow! WatchGecko, try Google with the names and places you already have, such as "Ingraham Watches" and see what comes up - Google is a good research tool for this kind of thing :yes:


----------



## Shangas (Jan 27, 2008)

It may be a dollar watch, but I don't think I know enough about them to really identify them. Maybe some of the others will recognise it, though. I must say, that Art Deco Elgin is to die for. Once that's cleaned and serviced, it would make an excellent daily timepiece.


----------



## WatchGecko (Aug 25, 2009)

Mel, #7 is an Ingraham Autocrat, or at least that's what it says on the face. I looked it up, and it seems to be the least valued and most common of all the watches I listed. It's a nice watch though and still in pretty good shape.

I have no idea what a dollar watch is, but it's nice to have some kind of possible identification on it.

And I will definitely hitting Google after this weekend, I am going to a nice watch repair shop in Savannah, GA. Hopefully they can tell me what they are, if not, I am going to have them at least help me open the ones that I cannot. I have a coworker who has a much better quality camera who is going to bring it in next week and take some more pictures of the ones I can't identify.

Shangus, thanks for the compliment on the Elgin, this is one of my personal favorites. I really like the design on it, and hopefully will have it restored soon.

Robert


----------



## Shangas (Jan 27, 2008)

Hey Robert,

You're very welcome! That Elgin does look beautiful. A 'Dollar Watch' was a watch produced...originally a company called Ingersoll...which retailed for one dollar, starting in the 1890s. They were meant to be cheap, reliable watches sold to the masses...a bit like Henry Ford's motor-cars.


----------



## WatchGecko (Aug 25, 2009)

Well sadly my expedition to the watch shop was uneventful, the place was closed for the holiday weekend. Gotta love small town businesses and the ability to close your doors when you feel like it.

Well hopefully my counterpart here at the office brings in his big beautiful digital camera and we can get some better shots of my watches.

And I found some info on dollar watches, good stuff. Also saw a couple of really nice repair guides at a book store we found, of course they were all well out of my price range being collectors items in there own rights.

Hope to update again soon.

Robert


----------



## WatchGecko (Aug 25, 2009)

Number 5, is a 1924 Elgin, series 303(?) according to the serial number I looked up online. Was finally able to get the back of the case off.

Also has anyone ever heard of a watch maker named Greenock. I have not been able to find anyone by that name. The serial on the watch is 468174.

Thanks everyone for all your help.

Robert


----------



## ValvesRule (May 20, 2009)

> I have no idea what a dollar watch is...


These were cheap watches (also known as Labourer's Watches (?)), made to sell for no more than a week's wages of an unskilled labourer. Generally, they had four-wheel trains, had no Seconds hand, were key-wound, were set by pushing the hands, and required little oil. They were made possible by the invention of the Pin Pallet escapament, which dispensed with jewels. They often had small paintings in the centre of the dials.

I believe they were invented in the 1890s, and I have a vague suspicion (don't quote me on it) that they were made entirely of Steel - plates and wheels and all (not the glass - obviously).


----------



## Larry from Calgary (Jun 5, 2006)

WatchGecko said:


> So I am guessing by the lack of responses I need some better detailed photos of my watches.
> 
> I am going to try and add some more tonight.


These are all nice looking watches. Thanks for sharing a bit of history with other Forum members. As family heirlooms they are priceless.

The watch in your photo #1 has caught my attention.

Does anyone know the reason or significance of subdividing the seconds into groups of 25 up to 300 (i.e. 25,50, 75 etc)? Or was this simply a matter of spacing the minute hand on the dial? It looks like it the outer numbering was added later. Comments anybody?

Any chance of seeing detailed pictures of the movements?


----------



## WatchGecko (Aug 25, 2009)

Good Morning all, well my colleague brought his camera, so I have updated my blog with all new pictures of numbers 1-4 of my original watch list. There are a few close up shots, so you can see the movements and all the other things that I can find.

My BLOG with all new pics

I am really curious now about number 4, it's a very charming little watch.

Thanks for everyones info and help.

Robert


----------



## Shangas (Jan 27, 2008)

Very fine watches, Rob.

The 1924 Art Deco Elgin watch is still my favourite, inside and out! The position of the regulator-needle suggests that it needs to be thoroughly serviced. Get that done before you use it.

Watch #4 is a woman's pocket watch, probably very late 19th century/early 20th century, but other than that, I couldn't tell you. The experts here might know more.


----------



## WatchGecko (Aug 25, 2009)

Thanks for all the help. I really appreciate it.

And I planned to have all my watches serviced before use. I did wind up one of them and it ran perfect for 24 hours, but i still want to have it cleaned and maintained before i carry it.

Robert


----------



## ValvesRule (May 20, 2009)

Larry from Calgary said:


> Does anyone know the reason or significance of subdividing the seconds into groups of 25 up to 300 (i.e. 25,50, 75 etc)? Or was this simply a matter of spacing the minute hand on the dial? It looks like it the outer numbering was added later. Comments anybody?


It Looks a bit like this Watch (No. 1) originally had a Centre Seconds Hand. The Minute Track is subdiveded into Fifths, presmably the Watch runs at 5 B.P.S., so these Numbers would count Beats (Ticks).

This is a Common Feature of simple Three-Handed Chronograph Watches, in which the Centre Seconds Hand can be manipulated without disturbing the Normal Timekeeping of the Minute and Hour Hands.

Do you know if Watch 1 is a Chronograph, WatchGecko?


----------



## Larry from Calgary (Jun 5, 2006)

ValvesRule said:


> Larry from Calgary said:
> 
> 
> > Does anyone know the reason or significance of subdividing the seconds into groups of 25 up to 300 (i.e. 25,50, 75 etc)? Or was this simply a matter of spacing the minute hand on the dial? It looks like it the outer numbering was added later. Comments anybody?
> ...


Thanks for the reply. I had already reconsidered this due to the variance of 300 BPS versus 360 counts. If the intent of the markers is to measure beats, then who other than a watchmaker would find this information useful? Would a watchmaker need to mark the dial?

As far as I know, 300 time divisions has no reference value (i.e. 1 hour, 1 minute, 1 second and 100 beats). Does 300 BPS relate to any other measurement (distance, acceleration, heart-rate, etc.)?

Off Topic. What exactly is free hand technical drawing? Do you mean with rule and ink, are you a draughtsman? You like steam, eh? Do a Google news search for Sayano-Shushenskaya Dam to see damage and destruction supposedly attributed to valve closure (water hammer).


----------



## ValvesRule (May 20, 2009)

Not 300 BPS, 5 BPS. 300 beats per Minute (B.P.M.)

I don't know why it would be marked in Beats, but I have seen it before.

Perhaps because counting Seconds can be taken as read, counting Beats is just another [more specialised] system. This is, after all, what the Watch is doing.

I am, of course, assuming that WatchGecko has not actually counted 360 ticks in one minute.



> As far as I know, 300 time divisions has no reference value


Assuming that the Watch goes "tick" 5 times a seconds (common), then the Second Hand (presumed missing) would show 300 (= 5 x 60) "ticks" in one Revolution.

The "Reference Value" You refer to is a Non-Universal Unit called the Split Second. Its Duration depends on the B.P.S. of the Measuring Instrument; in this case, 0.2 of a Second.



> Off Topic. What exactly is free hand technical drawing? Do you mean with rule and ink, are you a draughtsman? You like steam, eh? Do a Google news search for Sayano-Shushenskaya Dam to see damage and destruction supposedly attributed to valve closure (water hammer).


Drawing in a "technical style" for fun, without instruments. Doodling with design. http://www.nubcake.com/index.php?act=Attach&type=post&id=2098 Just pen and paper. I am not a draughtsman, though I have started doing measured drawings for things I build, but this is really just procrastination before actually building it.

As for Sayano-Shushenskaya; wow.


----------



## timewatch (Sep 17, 2009)

WatchGecko said:


> Hello All, I am new to these boards, and very new to pocket watch collecting. I received a box of watches from my family and I am just trying to identify them. I do not have a great camera, but I was able to get a few good photos.
> 
> I have numbered each one and will write what I've figured out.
> 
> ...


----------



## timewatch (Sep 17, 2009)

Robert

I might be able to help a little with some details on the 'S Ronald Greenock' pocket watch.

Firstly its JAs Ronald ---ie James S Ronald of Greenock. Greenock is the town he worked in and lived and is on the River Clyde at west coast of Scotland near Glasgow. He was a relatively prolific watchmaker with many examples of his work still in circulation and not rare. He operated from 1871-1876 but his shop continued until about 1909. He was married to Rachael and they had 2 sons and 1 daughter. Greenock was known for its sugar industry and shipbuilding--both of which like the watchmaking trade are long gone.

My interest is on the history of west coast Scottish watchmakers and always on the look out for more details and watches.

Hope this helps

Best regards

Alex


----------



## Jim Carroll (Dec 27, 2005)

Timewatch,

I believe the hallmark on the James Ronald watch case =The Anchor ~ The Rampant lion ~ and the letter â€œYâ€ could be for Birmingham, England. 1898

James Ronald is mentioned in the local trade directories, possibly working from his house in 11 Lyle St. Greenock in 1876, he had a Watchmaker and jewelers shop in 26 Ann St. Greenock from 1877 to 1880, and then moved to 23 Cathcart St. Greenock from 1881 to 1909.

James lost another two sons both at the age of three.


----------



## WatchGecko (Aug 25, 2009)

Thanks to both TimeWatch and Jim Carroll for the updates.

This is a fantastic watch that I hope to carrying soon. It just needs some minor maintenance and it should be good to go. I still havent found a good watch store in my area to have them all checked out.

Thanks

Robert


----------

