• Graduate
    26 Nov 2009, 11:40 p.m.

    Dear Forum,

    Could anyone please tell me if this is a collectible IWC or just fairly common watch?

    A hallmarked 1916 IWC solid silver Dennison cased. The watch is marked SS & Co on the movement. I am led to believe Stauffer (Stauffer Son & Co) were the London UK importers of IWC.

    The Dennison case is a big 35mm excluding the original crown. The case has a screw on bezel and screw back. The watch has the original signed dial with IWC Schaffhausen and all the original lume to the hands and markers. The dial is in mint untouched condition.

    Many thanks from New Zealand

    www.whitebay.co.nz/watch-1.jpg

    www.whitebay.co.nz/watch-2.jpg

  • Connoisseur
    26 Nov 2009, 10:15 p.m.

    Something doesn't seem right here....

    Hi Issy,

    Here we may go again ,)

    The dial is by IWC of course. The Dennison case is not by IWC, but was used for some IWC's by Stauffer & Co., who were the UK importers for IWC in the first few decades of the 20th century.

    However --and it's a big however-- Stauffer also handled other watches, and not all SS & Co. movements are IWC. We see on eBay all the SS marked pocket watches that are not IWC, sometimes despite sellers' claims. There's more on this in the archives. Cellar, one of our learned members from Down Under, wrote an article about this:

    www.gregsteer.net/IWC/Stauffer/Stauffer.html

    Here, my first glance is that this movement is not by IWC. Back then, IWC used Calibre 63 and 64 movements for its wristwatches, and this is clearly not that design. You can read more about IWC's earliest wristwatches in an article that I wrote for here over 8 years ago. It's at

    www.iwcforum.com/Articles/Cal64/text.html

    If the watch were really by IWC it's collectible, especially in an unusually large 35mm case even if it's a Dennison (and non-IWC) case.

    Regards,
    Michael

  • Connoisseur
    26 Nov 2009, 11 p.m.

    Agreed...

    And to my eye, the dial and hands, despite the compelling identically aged lume, did not start out life together. That's not to say the watch hasn't been in this state for many, many years, but it's doubtful the individual parts all started out life as you see them here.

    Kind regards,
    Michael

  • Graduate
    27 Nov 2009, 10:05 a.m.

    1906 trench watch

    Many thanks to the Forum,

    Seems like the seller has had a change of mind, I quote:

    "Seller Comment: Bidder and watchers I have decided to keep the watch now and research more about the history of this piece. 7:39 am, Fri 27 Nov"

    Thanks again