Wow... Earliest I've seen this version, but I think we have a 1938 Bulova Ranger. The other wavy side case looks to have stopped in 1937.
With the larger dial and part of the 6 below the second register isn't this a 1938 Banker?
In reply to With the larger dial and… by JimDon5822
Banker had a smooth bezel. This is etched. Only the Ranger... And the. It was renamed the Chief I. 1942.
This one has me a little confused, we have ad confirmation for the Ranger in 1937 engraved and 1937 unengraved and it's a different case configuration with rolling as opposed to cut steps. Nothing represented on site for 1938 or 39 Ranger. We have 3 watches dated 1940 and 1941 identical to subject watch identified as Ranger based on a 1941 ad calling it "sleek and new". In 1942, name changes to Chief.
We have 2 or 3 of these dated 1938 identified as Banker. Based on Ranger being offered engraved and unengraved the year before in a different case, and 1938 Banker is identical without engraving in ads; subject case described in 1941 as "new" Ranger, it's entirely possible this is a Banker in 1938.
There was debate in the past that this might be the engraved version of the Banker in 1938 and it transitioned to being Ranger in 1940 or 41, changing again in 1942 to Chief
I'm currently at unknown but leaning to 1938 Banker based on year
I remember when this was easy. This one is NOT easy, the dial seems to be a 1938 Banker (showing a tiny bit of the 6) but there are no engraved Bankers in our dB. In fact there are no cases in our dB that match this one for 1937-1939. I'm at a loss plains.....
Every single 1938/39 advert for the Banker I can find all show as a plain case.
It might be a unicorn engraved version, but for now I think we have a yet to be ID'd model.
I'm at Unknown as at this stage.
Found this October 1, 1937 Bulova Ranger advert, so I think we can rule it out.
and another from May 20, 1938
Panel, any additional thoughts?
In reply to Panel, any additional… by mybulova_admin
I'm still on the fence on this one. Should we call it tentative Banker and keep them grouped or call it Unknown? If we opt for Unknown, we should then re-evaluate these two that were ID'ed as Banker previously.
https://mybulova.com/watches/1938-banker-8267 https://mybulova.com/watches/1938-banker-4852
I still think it's the Ranger. We know we have this exact model in 1940, it was my first Bulova.
In reply to I still think it's the… by plainsmen
Only issue I have with ID'ing as a Rnager is that we have 1938 adverts showing the Ranger in a different case.
It may be a case (pun intended) where the 'new' version of the Ranger came out in the later part of 1938 which could probably be confirmed by a 1939 advert.
The other 2 examples Bob points to above were ID'd a Bakers, so perhaps we do the same here for now until we can get a confirmation advert, one way of the other.