WWII Bulova ORD CORPS. Stainless Steel Case measures 39mm lug to lug x 32mm wide non inclusive of the Crown while using Calipers. White Dial shows Military standard Arabic numerals and Black printed tracks. Hour and Minute Hands are Military radium and a radium 10AK Military Seconds Hand appears on a sub Dial fully obscuring the 6. Anti-magnetic dust shield and Gasket between Caseback and Movement. 10 sided Stainless Steel Caseback screws on and is stamped as shown.
* although the Movement is Dated to 1944 this style of Military Case did not appear until 1945-'46. as found - glass in poor condition.
Yes, thank You for the input Rob although My interest in the Military pieces is not about what can be pieced together but rather of what was actually issued and when. The necessity to bring other Watch manufacturers into the discussion lays heavily on the fact that all major manufacturers produced timepieces for U.S. Military issue and those timepieces would have to have met a standard of requirments - a spec. The Hamilton entered the discussion to utilize the Watch owners notes on the Case design, the Watch Owner being an avid preservationist / restorer of vintage Hamilton.
Let me try to understand all the previous posts: Are people saying that this particular case with an "ORD CORPS" "OF-XXXXX" caseback cover NEVER, EVER had a Bulova 15J 10AK movement in it? Sorry to disappoint...but I have owned and sold many of these with 10AK and 10BM sub-second movements. It is also nearly an identical case to the "1917-H" USMC case and variant that also came with a 15J 10AK sub-second movement. End of story. An Elgin 8/0 554 movement, or Hamilitton, 987a, or Waltham 6/0-B would not likely even fit in this particular case. The dial is right - and it will only fit a Bulova 10AK 15J movement. Anyone suggestion this case never had a Bulova 10AK 15J movement has never had much experience with military issue watches. I don't need to make enemies, but take it from someone who knows, this watch is correct and authenic. Maybe this is why I don't even bother to post my military-issue Bulovas on this site....there is a complete lack of understanding of military-watches. I saw someone post a comment about a Bulova 21AE military clock...and it was like the first time they'd seen one. No offense...but you can't know what you don't know. That's my two-bits!
I'm not even going to try to defend my opinion with specs because the fact is I have bought, owned, restored, and sold dozens of these exact watches. I sold them for not less then $400 each, in the same watch case as above, and with Bulova 10AK 15J or 10BM movement, and I never had one person ever come back and say it wasn't an authentic military-issue watch.
Maybe someone should start a sub-Club website called "Bulova Military Watches" and then they can dismiss people's watches there. In the meantime, my suggestion to members is not to post military watches here...there are far better sites and places to share military watches and get knowledgeable feedback.
P.S. This watch case is not a A-17 case with a different case back cover. The A-17 case is supposed to have a sweep second movement and different dial. The Bulova's had the 10BNCH movement in the A-17. I currectly have three of them. That's not an opinion - that's a fact. The A-17 models I have are all larger cases, take larger-size diameter dials, have larger crowns, have larger diameter scewback covers, and support completely different movements. The case parts and dials are not interchangeable to fit WWII model watches. Period.
In reply to P.S. This watch case is not a by stoddrob
Milspecs are used to identify military watches on this site as we are not military specialists. You sound very knowledgeable, but I see no proof, no pics of these genuine watches that you have or have sold, in fact nothing but words. If, as you state as fact, the A-17 by Bulova of which you claim to currently have three of is so common, why has no-one anywhere seen or heard of them before? Only Waltham released the A-17. You also state as fact that the cases are larger than the subjects case, to fit the 10BNCH movement, yet if you care to look in this site DB you will find A-17A and 3818A case measurements that match exactly, or are within 1mm. of the subject's measurements. Can I say that the subject case has a "spacer ring" to allow it to fit the 10AK? The cases were all the same for all brands, but I thought the case backs would be marked differently, I am sure I have seen the same type of marked case back on a Hamilton in this thread? All cases and casebacks are interchangeable within this and the earlier type A-11 cases, as testified to in other threads and on other sites by more knowledgeable people than me.
If I may interject, the difference between a 10 1/2 ''' and an 11 1/2''' case opening that holds the movt is 2.25mm roughly. (1.125mm on either side) The dials from one would not fit the other and ditto for the cases and movts. I have worked on Military era watches, but I am not an expert on who issued what or when. I see many that are untampered with, and I do agree you can tell when a watch has been worked on, as the patina and various marks will attest. I think the subject watch may very well be legit, and I'll take Rob's word for his expertise in this area, he has seen far more of them than I have.
Of course Military watches were worked on and repaired, either at the time or later, so it is not surprising to find a mismatched case and movt, either. I'm not seeing any reason here that this watch wouldn't be considered original. It is post 1945, and post TM 9-1975. Am I missing something?
Did you check the DB for case sizes Rob? They are the same for the A-17A and 3818A as the subject case yet it holds a 10 AK, and they were not released until the 1950's/60/'s. TM 9-1575 gives the correct case type for this model, was released in April 1945, which is the claimed date of this watch. Below is the case type for the date, and without any spec docs other than the above, it's just guessing.
