Bulova 1938 -Non-Conforming

Submitted by jcochise on
Manufacture Year
1938
Movement Model
10AE
Movement Date Code
Cresent Moon
Movement Jewels
17
Case Serial No.
-
Case shape
Tonneau
Case color
Yellow
Case Manufacturer
Other
Gender
Mens
Watch Description

I submitted a 1941 Gem Faced Beau Brummell that I got in Buenos Aries Argentina. I was told that it was non conforming custom build because of the 18kt rose gold Elite case. Here is a 1938 or 28 crescent 🌙  stamped Cal. 10AE 17j in a non conforming case. So my question is; these non conforming cases seem to be mostly prevalent on the Gem Faced watches, such as the '41 long case I presented earlier. I have now seen numerous Gem Faced Bulovas with non conforming cases. So, are you guys saying that they are not Bulovas. We're they licensed by Bulova,  or what's the deal guys and gals?

1938 gem face
1938 10AE 17j
1938 Gem Faced Tonneau
1938 Duro GF Tonneau back
1938 Gem Faced Bulova/Duro GF Tonneau case
neetstuf-4-u
Posted February 24, 2022 - 1:43pm

Companies not affiliated with or authorized by Bulova produced replacement case/face sets that jewelers used to "restore" or "upgrade" worn out watches. It was an inexpensive way to spiffy up a worn out watch for a customer or to make a tired trade in look new to re-sell. Early on, they were produced with a name on the dial of a certified watch making company and unscrupulous folks were making counterfeit Bulovas and selling them as authentic. Law suits ensued for copyright infringement of using the Bulova name without authorization. There were wholesale businesses that sold these watches to retail stores as "replicas"; some had real Bulova movements and some did not.  First line of this ad " BULOVA Very impressive replicas of high priced diamond watch. Easy to sell" and they were passed off as authentic by sellers.

replica

This watch is a little less shady, as the dial states "Bulova Movement" indicating that the only thing Bulova about it is the movement (temporary legal loophole)

1938 Non-conforming

jcochise
Posted February 24, 2022 - 1:57pm

In reply to by neetstuf-4-u

Thank you, and yes, I am aware of exactly what you have said. Nevertheless, I will say again, as an avid collector of gem faced  watches, an excessive number, have aftermarket cases, yet all have original movements, dials, etc.. So albeit my opinion has little merit, I feel that there's more to the story of 1940 and earlier gem faced Bulovas, and sure would appreciate some help investigating. 

 

Very interesting 

Kathy L.
Posted February 24, 2022 - 1:59pm

Yes it is a Non-Conforming watch based on the non Bulova case and dial.  The word movement under the Bulova on the dial is a good give-a-way for this type of watch.

Non-Conforming

jcochise
Posted February 24, 2022 - 2:18pm

In reply to by Kathy L.

Glad to have you guys. I love these old Bulovas, even the non conforming ones. hahaha

JimDon5822
Posted February 24, 2022 - 8:17pm

I actually saw a complete display showing the options.   They would have a bag with a watch case, dial and hands by movement number.  You could go into the jeweler and pick out the combination you wanted.   Great upcycling way before it became fashionable.  

mybulova_admin
Posted February 24, 2022 - 9:56pm

We've always considered these as non-original Bulova watches and group them as 'Non-conforming'.

We have no way of really knowing if Bulova allowed certain jewelers to officially sell these kind of watches. My guess is that they did not, but that obviously didn't stop it from happening.

It was obviously a cheaper option than buying a new watch and it makes perfect sense that this kind if thing would be done, rather than throw away a perfectly good movement.

You make a good point that there are a good number of these re-cased movements with this particular style of dial.

The 10AE was the workhorse of Bulova mens watches in the late 1930s and as they were made in the US, I suspect there was quite a large number of these around, so they made the perfect movement to rebuild a watch in the 40s.

1938 Bulova Non-conforming for me too, but a good discussion piece.