# A bit of a puzzle ...



## spinynorman (Apr 2, 2014)

Some of you may know I inherited a gold wristwatch from 1925 by the Sir John Bennett company. So, when I found a silver octagonal watch by Sir John, hallmarked 1916, on Ebay with no bidders at £20, I snapped it up. The thing I didn't notice in my enthusiasm was the size - 26.6mm excl crown. So, it's tiny, but there's still some interesting things about it.

First question, is it a "trench watch", as described by the seller, or a lady's watch, as I would guess from the size? However, it has a red 12 marker and the hands were lumed. Certainly not an attractive watch on a female wrist, but I don't think I would wear it.

Inside of the caseback has imported mark for London and letter a for 1916. There is a sponsor's mark at the top edge that is a little easier to read in the photos. but I still can't decipher it. It's the right shape for George Stockwell, but doesn't look like GS. Any ideas?

The movement is certainly pretty, but I can't see any marks. It's 10 ligne. Can anyone identify it?

Finally, the bracelet signed Bonklip. I hadn't heard of that name before, but I read they were developed in the 1930s for pilots to wear over their sleeves. So wrong for the period of the watch. It does fit the 11mm wire lugs, so I may leave it on, what do you think? Anyone know more about Bonklip?


----------



## JonnyOldBoy (Mar 28, 2017)

The term "trench watch" is often used to loosely refer to watches of that era in some quarters. Mens watches only really dropped significantly in size post 1930 for a while .... Its a beautiful watch, but it's not near the issue sizes for mens trench watches, however, I wonder if it was issued to a medical corp support unit in which case the lume would make logical sense. I suspect this may have been a military watch worn by a female medical support operative. Octagonal shape in that era also would suggest female. I am no expert by any stretch of the imagination on any of these matters but intuitively it does appear to be a service watch.... :thumbsup:


----------



## Jet Jetski (Feb 10, 2019)

As above, and ladies watches could have red or blue twelves too, just helps orientate the watch quickly. Hadn't thought about medical watch.


----------



## spinynorman (Apr 2, 2014)

JonnyOldBoy said:


> The term "trench watch" is often used to loosely refer to watches of that era in some quarters. Mens watches only really dropped significantly in size post 1930 for a while .... Its a beautiful watch, but it's not near the issue sizes for mens trench watches, however, I wonder if it was issued to a medical corp support unit in which case the lume would make logical sense. I suspect this may have been a military watch worn by a female medical support operative. Octagonal shape in that era also would suggest female. I am no expert by any stretch of the imagination on any of these matters but intuitively it does appear to be a service watch.... :thumbsup:


 Thanks, that does make a lot of sense. Do you have any idea about the movement?


----------



## JonnyOldBoy (Mar 28, 2017)

spinynorman said:


> Thanks, that does make a lot of sense. Do you have any idea about the movement?


 No , not very knowledgeable about such matters but this is such an interesting thread , I will do some digging when I get time today .... as will others more versed in watch mechanics than me I suspect ...

Have a look here .... could be a Fontainemelon or A. Schild

https://www.vintagewatchstraps.com/movements.php#fontainemelon3


----------



## vinn (Jun 14, 2015)

spinynorman said:


> Some of you may know I inherited a gold wristwatch from 1925 by the Sir John Bennett company. So, when I found a silver octagonal watch by Sir John, hallmarked 1916, on Ebay with no bidders at £20, I snapped it up. The thing I didn't notice in my enthusiasm was the size - 26.6mm excl crown. So, it's tiny, but there's still some interesting things about it.
> 
> First question, is it a "trench watch", as described by the seller, or a lady's watch, as I would guess from the size? However, it has a red 12 marker and the hands were lumed. Certainly not an attractive watch on a female wrist, but I don't think I would wear it.
> 
> ...


 lady's trench watch? vin


----------



## WRENCH (Jun 20, 2016)

spinynorman said:


> trench watch


 If you scroll down this you'll find a short bit on the subject of ladies trench watches.

https://www.vintagewatchstraps.com/trenchwatches.php


----------



## spinynorman (Apr 2, 2014)

JonnyOldBoy said:


> No , not very knowledgeable about such matters but this is such an interesting thread , I will do some digging when I get time today .... as will others more versed in watch mechanics than me I suspect ...
> 
> Have a look here .... could be a Fontainemelon or A. Schild
> 
> https://www.vintagewatchstraps.com/movements.php#fontainemelon3





vinn said:


> lady's trench watch? vin





Jet Jetski said:


> As above, and ladies watches could have red or blue twelves too, just helps orientate the watch quickly. Hadn't thought about medical watch.


 I emailed David Boettcher at VintageWatchStraps and got a very quick reply.

If it was medical, he thinks it would have a centre seconds hand, ref " Field hospitals would have been illuminated dimly at night and a luminous seconds hand would have been very useful when taking a pulse." In his opinion it is a ladies' watch in the style of a trench watch.

He also thinks the movement is Fontainemelon. Looking at Ranfft, the 10.5''' FHF30 has the right shapes.

http://www.ranfft.de/cgi-bin/bidfun-db.cgi?11&ranfft&0&2uswk&FHF_30

The Bonklip is coming off, as Boettcher says a metal bracelet will eventually chew through wire lugs. A leather strap would be better.


----------



## Jet Jetski (Feb 10, 2019)

spinynorman said:


> I emailed David Boettcher at VintageWatchStraps and got a very quick reply.
> 
> If it was medical, he thinks it would have a centre seconds hand, ref " Field hospitals would have been illuminated dimly at night and a luminous seconds hand would have been very useful when taking a pulse." In his opinion it is a ladies' watch in the style of a trench watch.
> 
> ...


 I was going to say about centre seconds, but didn't want to be a clever clogs lol and besides I probably read it on DB's website anyway, but pulsometer watches of course must have centre seconds.

David Boettcher can put you in touch with someone who makes splendid leather straps too! (I have 3 - he is a fine chap, he continued to supply me even though I put one on a quartz watch! OK, two)


----------



## JonnyOldBoy (Mar 28, 2017)

Jet Jetski said:


> he is a fine chap, he continued to supply me even though I put one on a quartz watch! OK, two)


 :swoon:


----------



## Jet Jetski (Feb 10, 2019)

JonnyOldBoy said:


> :swoon:


 [IMG alt="No photo description available." data-ratio="96.77"]https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/69984909_153470289057550_5077798387902840832_n.jpg?_nc_cat=106&_nc_oc=AQk2FTv-MGZUSXFUHBLd6OdhqQGQn5su_-gGkW14EJp24Adk5dX-xypxcpVGIyV1spN7FkodqYt8yfw-RjCvTuUp&_nc_ht=scontent-lhr3-1.xx&oh=6731fb831957b40bce70f5864fa39ea9&oe=5E36656F[/IMG][IMG alt="Image may contain: 1 person" data-ratio="101.91"]https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/52977619_122094298861816_663099283569901568_n.jpg?_nc_cat=109&_nc_oc=AQls0bKAWU_DpaZgciLcudERwZT4H_uDDOKcythU8Hd0dxR1hcgl9qfGVyjwqVZ_GDqwtc-Cy7E3OzvsFb1pLwKv&_nc_ht=scontent-lhr3-1.xx&oh=a24da518e021906fc3485c497b89ae30&oe=5DFA3C96[/IMG]

His RAF style NATOs are the best, no floppy spare bit, and you can wear the buckle on the side (as Citizen above) so the buckle doesn't get scratched on your desk, nor vice versa.

I am pretty sure he will forgive me, as I have now bought the actual watch on the drawing for Dimier Brothers' design registration of the wristwatch concept, also showing the means by which it is secured to the wrist (forerunner of the G10)

Credit for the pic to https://www.vintagewatchstraps.com/earlywristwatches.php










Here is my watch, signed on the movement Dimier Freres, and on the case Dimier Bros (for assay purposes). OK not THE watch, but it has roman numerals and everything lol

[IMG alt="s-l1600.jpg" data-ratio="75.00"]https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/XysAAOSwSBhbtUiD/s-l1600.jpg[/IMG]

p.s. @Always"watching" - this is the watch I bought instead of the sus piece.


----------



## JonnyOldBoy (Mar 28, 2017)

Jet Jetski said:


> His RAF style NATOs are the best, no floppy spare bit, and you can wear the buckle on the side (as right) so it doesn't get scratched on your desk.
> 
> I am pretty sure he will forgive me, as I have now bought the actual watch on the drawing for Dimier Brothers' design registration of the wristwatch concept, also showing the means by which it is secured to the wrist (forerunner of the G10)


 You are redeemed.... Bravo for your attention to detail....


----------



## Jet Jetski (Feb 10, 2019)

JonnyOldBoy said:


> attention to detail....


 But you have to be careful - I almost bought this watch :









before I noticed the word 'Nickel', purportedly on the back of the same watch, in this pic - but assayed watches have to be all silver ...









Now this is an AS 137 however.


----------



## WRENCH (Jun 20, 2016)

Jet Jetski said:


> even though I put one on a quartz watch! OK, two)


 The watch police have been notified. :laughing2dw:


----------



## Jet Jetski (Feb 10, 2019)

WRENCH said:


> The watch police have been notified. :laughing2dw:


 Erm ... I sent him the pics ....









I was young!


----------



## spinynorman (Apr 2, 2014)

I'm now pretty sure the sponsor's mark is SD, with the tab like the one @Jet Jetski almost bought. I used that software they have in CSI ...

... ok, I'm lying, I used a magnifier and a bright light.

My watch doesn't mention nickle anywhere. I'm sure Sir John's heirs wouldn't stoop so low. :bash:

The Bonklip put up a bit of a fight, but it's now off. If I knew a fashionable young lady who was likely to wear it, I'd think about buying a leather strap.


----------



## Balaton1109 (Jul 5, 2015)

Sorry @spinynorman. Unfashionably late to this particular party, so no change there, then.

I’m tempted to say that your movement has many similarities to a 9.75’’’ FHF Model 352 (see image), which wasn’t an official calibre number, but purely a model designation for its 1913 registration in the Swiss Official Gazette of Commerce.

As it happens, there is an actual FHF 352 calibre listed in Ranfft, but it’s a 21600 A/h movement from the 1970s so ‘nuff said about that one.

Regards.


----------



## spinynorman (Apr 2, 2014)

Balaton1109 said:


> Sorry @spinynorman. Unfashionably late to this particular party, so no change there, then.
> 
> I’m tempted to say that your movement has many similarities to a 9.75’’’ FHF Model 352 (see image), which wasn’t an official calibre number, but purely a model designation for its 1913 registration in the Swiss Official Gazette of Commerce.
> 
> Regards.


Ooh, that's interesting, thanks for digging that out of the archives. By my calculation 9.75''' is 22mm. My measurement of the diameter is coming up slightly bigger, but only by 1/2 a millimeter. The nearest I've got up to now was the FHF Robert 8.75''', but that's too small and too late, if Ranfft is to be believed. Excellent find, thank you.


----------



## Balaton1109 (Jul 5, 2015)

spinynorman said:


> Ooh, that's interesting, thanks for digging that out of the archives. By my calculation 9.75''' is 22mm. My measurement of the diameter is coming up slightly bigger, but only by 1/2 a millimeter. The nearest I've got up to now was the FHF Robert 8.75''', but that's too small and too late, if Ranfft is to be believed. Excellent find, thank you.


You're most welcome. I can see why you considered the "Robert" - pretty damned close in most respects. 

Apart from the size, the only thing I would say is that the the tail-end of the train bridge of both yours and the Model 352 looks to be more sharply pointed than that of the Robert although that could just be my imagination (or old eyes!).

Needless to say, the keyless works of the 352 are quite different from those of the Robert.

Regards.


----------



## spinynorman (Apr 2, 2014)

Balaton1109 said:


> Apart from the size, the only thing I would say is that the the tail-end of the train bridge of both yours and the Model 352 looks to be more sharply pointed than that of the Robert although that could just be my imagination (or old eyes!).


The first picture of Ranfft's looks to me like the point is broken off. The second example is sharp.


----------



## Balaton1109 (Jul 5, 2015)

spinynorman said:


> The first picture of Ranfft's looks to me like the point is broken off. The second example is sharp.


Yes, it could be that the tail end has just been snapped off, but I had thought it looked truncated to avoid, and be almost contoured with, the screw. In a way, similar to this example in Lorenz who bills it as a 1920s 9.75’’’ FHF 1144 and which is of sufficiently different configuration from the 10.5’’’ FHF 1144 example in Ranfft, as to be from a different planet: 17jewels.info: FHF 1144

Incidentally, Ranfft also has the 1144 in 18.5’’’ and 19’’’ sizes (!)

Somewhat confusingly, my own notes have yet another version of the FHF 1144 (below), this one recorded as 8.75’’’ and noted in the Paulson of 1950. To my old eyes anyway, it also has a truncated tail end, which leads me to think that Messrs. FHF had some “previous” with this bridge shape.

Regards.


----------

