Bulova 1979 -Non-Conforming

Submitted by Geoff Baker on
Manufacture Year
1979
Movement Model
2836-2
Movement Jewels
17
Case Serial No.
G200944
Case shape
Oval
Case color
White
Crystal details
38.5 X 31.0
Gender
Mens
Watch Description

We discussed these watches in depth a year or more ago. I broke down and bought one recently. It is New Old Stock, but what exactly will we label it? At my house we call it the China Oval

The inside case back is clearly dated N9 for 1979. The movement is clearly dated P7 for 1987. The movement is marked ETA 2836-2 and bears another mark of DM 02/B18.

All stainless case. Stainless deployment bracelet with Accutron Fork

10/27/2012

Geoffrey L Baker China Oval Bulova Watch 10 27 2012
Bulova watch
Bulova watch
Bulova Watch
Bulova Watch
Bulova Watch
Geoff Baker
Posted November 18, 2012 - 5:59am

Stephen, I really am on the fence. I guess the sheer number of them selling indicates a questionable source. In fact there are several other models being sold on the bay for which the number available is suspect. Counterfeiters go to great pains to copy even flaws into products to make them seem 'more legitimate' (if that's possible). Another theory is that someone, somewhere, has discovered a cache of unassembled Bulova parts and is just slapping them together with no regard to what matches what. I would be interested to know if the SERIAL numbers on these watches are all the same. THAT would indicate reproduction.

I am happy to mail this watch to any member in the US who would like to inspect it. PM if you'd like to.

William Smith
Posted November 19, 2012 - 8:36pm

votes to date ( I think) Let me know if I got it wrong:

3    Unknown:   JP, Admin, Will

4    Frankie:   Bobbee, Fifth, Geoff, Plains

1    Non-Conforming:  OT, (maybe Rev Rob?)



That leaves Vintagebulova.com, Shawn, DarHin, (maybe Rev Rob?)



Does a vote for Frankie or knock-off mean it won't be listed on site?

OldTicker
Posted November 24, 2012 - 8:34pm

Non-Conforming is the PC term for Frankie Will :-)

William Smith
Posted November 24, 2012 - 9:20pm

In reply to by OldTicker

Roger that.  I got confused.  Guess I still am a little.

I thought Non-Conforming was used for a watch consisting off all Bulova parts, put together into a configuration which was "other than how it came at the original point of sale". A custom configuration, but all Bulova. One we could never ID by an ad because it was never sold as configured. 

Also thought we had another term - Frankenbully-for a watch which had some non-Bulova parts, like perhaps a Sutton case w/ Bulova movement and dial.  Or is a watch with non-Bulova parts just a Non-Bulova? 

 

DarHin
Posted November 24, 2012 - 9:42pm

I thought the same Will.

OldTicker
Posted November 24, 2012 - 9:58pm

We used to call them Frankenbullys, but it was thought by some as too demeaning to the watch owner, so "Non-Conforming" was born as not to hurt anyone's feelings...

http://www.mybulova.com/node/3867

Feel free to refresh your memory...besides, there is no "Frankenbully" category...hindsite is always 20/20

bobbee
Posted November 25, 2012 - 2:43am

Non-conforming, just to be PC!  :^)

How long will it be before the replica makers start trying to cash in on the older vintage watch market?

If they do, and go to the lengths they seem to have in the case of the subject, then it will be a hard job identifying them from pictures on a screen, and buyers, panel members and collectors could be in for some confusion when it comes to giving an ID.

William Smith
Posted November 30, 2012 - 1:49pm

votes to date ( I think):

4    Unknown:   JP, Admin, Will, DarHin

6    Non-Conforming:   Bobbee, Fifth, Geoff, Plains, OT, Rev Rob



I have included the "Frankie" votes in the Non-Conforming count.

That leaves Vintagebulova.com and Buorg01 w/ the deciding votes.  If they voted Unknown and we have a "tie", Stephen gets to make the call for this one.



I have EDITED count above to reflect DarHin's unknown vote from below.

DarHin
Posted November 30, 2012 - 3:30pm

Geoff, did you ever contact Bulova?

Unknown. Though with the large gap between mvt date and case date it could just as easily be Non-Conforming.