It appears We have confused this previously unseen Model with the 'AMBASSADOR' of the same era in the database. * For database reference only: note the Lug and Crown variation.
Mark, I personally don't care what we end up calling this watch, It's just one beautiful piece!!!!!
Fifth
Nice find! gj was right! Similar but different.
Wayne
The 1939/40 "AMBASSADOR..." (Dial Option: "C")
30s/40s: Ambassador, Lincoln, Montgomery, Oxford
CMT346-23
RMU147-13
MT2390 179
.jpg)
:-) Scott
In reply to The 1939/40 "AMBASSADOR..." by WatchCrystals.net
Scott,
If You are thinking the Watches shown above are the same they're not.
The Case design is different.
AMBASSADOR "A" vs. OXFORD, Circa 1939/40? (Or a lame redial, on the Ambie<or> OX?!)
OR PERHAPS NEITHER, SINCE THE SAME EXACT CASE IS SPORTING A '21J" 10AE!)
FRANKEN BULL? OR perhaps an UPSCALED "Lincoln," or "Montgomery" ???
.png)
__.png)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
I POSTED THIS AD SNIPPET/= BEFORE HERE, IN SEVERAL PLACES... (1939, SAT. EV. POST...)
:-) Scott
Ambassador "C" is my call too. Why was this one ID's as an Oxford?
In reply to Ambassador "C" is my call by mybulova_admin
OR...
WHY is an "Ambassador C" DIAL variant (and perhaps, movement?) housed in an Oxford, Lincoln and/or Montgomery, CASE?!
:-) Scott
Do you guys not see the Crown knotched out of the case and into the bezel on the Oxford?
and on the outside of a smooth case side in the Ambassador?
I can see a few details that are different between the watch we're discussing and the Ambassadors pictured. As a Bulova Noob, I don't know if they are important, but...
Compare the bottom picture from Scott's first post with the top picture in his second post.
1. The lugs of the Ambassadors pictured extend farther in, and are more curved than the subject watch.
2. The crown of the subject watch is recessed, whereas it is not on the Ambassadors.
what Plainsmen and Doug said. lol
admin.
This Case differs from the 'AMBASSADOR'