Here is the Calhoun model. Untouched and unrestored, just received. Working fine.
This has a rare 21 jewel 10ae movement. Most 10ae I have seen have been 15/17j I think.
I will update with better pictures in the future but just wanted to get this out there as there is not another on here.
My watch looks similar, the insides say 10BE? Could the insides be maybe swapped with another
watch or something? 
In reply to My watch looks similar, the by vankleef
no, yours is a different model. Yours has a rectangular dial and seconds trace with a portion of the "6" showing below the seconds. The others have a toneau dial and seconds trace and none of the "6" showing.
That looks more like a 41 Banker.
JP
Interesting that this watch is sometimes called the Ben Hur and sometimes the Calhoun when the ads show the Ben Hur with both an engraved and a plain bezel, and there is no ad that I'm aware of for the Calhoun. Based on current evidence, it would appear that they are all Ben Hurs, and the Calhoun is still a mystery.
Did anyone notic the double line of the sub secs track on the subject watch but not in the Ben Hur??
My vote would be tenetative Calhoun based on the current available info. Definitely not a Ben Hur.
Looks like the dial was redone, and the sub dial was redone too small, otherwise we would see part of the number six with that size sub dial.
Ben Hur with redial.
Vankleef look for the Banker of that period. I have one and it looks a lot like your watch, no engraving and part of the 6 showing below the sub sec register.
I find one ad for the Calhoun when I search ads, and didn't see any when browsing this time period. The image for the 1937 Calhoun ad (supplied by Plains) comes up as a red X. Was the Calhoun ID originally based on crystal specs?
Does anyone else see the chamfering on the outer corners of the subject's lugs, and compare them to the Ben Hur's lugs they match.
Ben Hur.
As stated, Ben-Hur. See new ad Jerin found for plain bezel Calhoun.
