Bumper Movement in a Tudor

[Old Expat Beast]

From what I have been able to learn, this particular Tudor model was the only instance of Rolex putting a non-Perpetual rotor in a watch, and marking the dial "Automatic". They were produced from roughly around 1946 to 1952, before Herr Wilsdorf decided to use modified Rolex movements and Oyster cases for Tudor watches (IIRC).

I'd like to get one, but does anyone have any experience of owning these Harwood-style movements, and if so, are they reliable and relatively straightforward to service?

Unique collectible, or not worth the trouble?

thanks,

Adam

[seattleal]

Hi Adam-

That looks a lot like the bumper movement in my Juvenia triple date moonphase from the early '50's. I had no problem having it serviced (it cost a lot less than a Rolex service), and it runs well. It auto winds when I wear it; I've worn it for a week or more without having to manual wind. It will even run for weeks on an auto winder, but unlike a perpetual movement, only winds in one direction and requires many more TPD than the perpetual movement. Here are pics-

[Old Expat Beast]

Thanks Al....wow, what a beauty you have there.

[Too Old]

Interesting stuff.
I presume the springs are the "bumpers"?

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by Too Old

Interesting stuff.
I presume the springs are the "bumpers"?

That's right. It was this kind of movement that prevented Rolex from claiming the invention of the word's first self-winding movement. They had to, and should still have to, include the words 'rotor driven' or similar. Although they have conveniently forgotten before, hence the occasional appearance of public apologies in newspapers. Such as this one....

[R.W.T.]

And of course Wisldorf took quite a lot from the case shape of the Harwood for the bubble back oyster cases....

A friend actually had that bumper auto in 14k Rose gold Tudor Oyster case.

It's a contract movement as can be seen by the movement in the Juvenia. It's the same movement...with a different spec.

[Old Expat Beast]

Thanks Tommy. How do you rate these movements? I read somewhere that they were made by A. Schild.

[seattleal]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

.......I read somewhere that they were made by A. Schild.

Yes they were Adam - this may help you-

http://www.ranfft.de/cgi-bin/bidfun-...&2uswk&AS_1250

[rolfiz]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

Thanks Tommy. How do you rate these movements? I read somewhere that they were made by A. Schild.

Agreed, it looks like an A. Schild movement according to my BestFit manuals.

The funny thing about vintage Tudor watches is they're actually not very well made, especially their movements. Some of their oyster cases are nicer quality, such as the Submariner and the like. Although, the movements were still cheap.

Another curiosity with vintage Tudor was their lack of standards... you could buy 5 pieces that look virtually identical and two or three of them will have entirely different movements, it's as if they just used whatever was lowest priced that week.

I've been in this business for a long time and only recently have vintage Tudor pieces had any real value, prior to that, even with the Rolex connection, they were priced according to their movement quality.

Properly serviced the movement in your watch will run fine for years, but it's really just an average run of the mill automatic from the time. In fact, you can often pick up that exact movement, complete in running condition on eBay for $10 or $15 if you ever need spare parts.

I hope people realize I'm not knocking Tudor, but I do find it funny that people pay so much for a watch that can't hold it's own when compared to a vintage Hamilton or Lord Elgin.

[andromeda160]

Originally Posted by rolfiz

Agreed, it looks like an A. Schild movement according to my BestFit manuals.

The funny thing about vintage Tudor watches is they're actually not very well made, especially their movements. Some of their oyster cases are nicer quality, such as the Submariner and the like. Although, the movements were still cheap.

Another curiosity with vintage Tudor was their lack of standards... you could buy 5 pieces that look virtually identical and two or three of them will have entirely different movements, it's as if they just used whatever was lowest priced that week.

I've been in this business for a long time and only recently have vintage Tudor pieces had any real value, prior to that, even with the Rolex connection, they were priced according to their movement quality.

Properly serviced the movement in your watch will run fine for years, but it's really just an average run of the mill automatic from the time. In fact, you can often pick up that exact movement, complete in running condition on eBay for $10 or $15 if you ever need spare parts.

I hope people realize I'm not knocking Tudor, but I do find it funny that people pay so much for a watch that can't hold it's own when compared to a vintage Hamilton or Lord Elgin.

I'm really surprised at the lack of love for vintage american watches, great value, I have a few solid gold bulovas and elgins not worth $5 more than scrap but they are beautiful, movement polishing on American watches was something else


As for this one, I like it, but don't see it fetching a large premium over a rotor driven model.

[rolfiz]

Originally Posted by andromeda160

I'm really surprised at the lack of love for vintage american watches, great value, I have a few solid gold bulovas and elgins not worth $5 more than scrap but they are beautiful, movement polishing on American watches was something else


As for this one, I like it, but don't see it fetching a large premium over a rotor driven model.

Agreed, it's funny how little value vintage American watches have relative to many of their Swiss counterparts. However, there are also plenty of really well made Swiss pieces of low cost left to buy.

I assume it will always remain that way, there's so many pieces to be had, and many of them are rather run of the mill.

Again, I hope nobody thinks I'm knocking Tudor, and in this case, a beautiful watch indeed... but the price point they trade for these days makes me confused.

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by seattleal

Yes they were Adam - this may help you-

http://www.ranfft.de/cgi-bin/bidfun-...&2uswk&AS_1250

Thanks Al.

Originally Posted by rolfiz

Agreed, it looks like an A. Schild movement according to my BestFit manuals.

The funny thing about vintage Tudor watches is they're actually not very well made, especially their movements. Some of their oyster cases are nicer quality, such as the Submariner and the like. Although, the movements were still cheap.

Another curiosity with vintage Tudor was their lack of standards... you could buy 5 pieces that look virtually identical and two or three of them will have entirely different movements, it's as if they just used whatever was lowest priced that week.

I've been in this business for a long time and only recently have vintage Tudor pieces had any real value, prior to that, even with the Rolex connection, they were priced according to their movement quality.

Properly serviced the movement in your watch will run fine for years, but it's really just an average run of the mill automatic from the time. In fact, you can often pick up that exact movement, complete in running condition on eBay for $10 or $15 if you ever need spare parts.

I hope people realize I'm not knocking Tudor, but I do find it funny that people pay so much for a watch that can't hold it's own when compared to a vintage Hamilton or Lord Elgin.

Thanks, interesting post. The watch above is priced way over what i would be prepared to pay (about 1.5k), but I do find it appealing and interesting from an historical angle.

[rolfiz]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

Thanks Al.



Thanks, interesting post. The watch above is priced way over what i would be prepared to pay (about 1.5k), but I do find it appealing and interesting from an historical angle.

I am glad you did not take my opinion as a knock on Tudor, rather, their current market value. I remember quite clearly, in fact I have pictures of several vintage Tudor pieces I owned back in the late 90's, early 2000's that I picked up for under $200 a piece. Nicer pieces than even the one you posted above.

As recently as 15 years ago nobody really cared.

Everything started going crazy about 7 or 8 years ago. I worry a great deal about a crash, especially if the value of these pieces drop too quickly. A lot of online dealers will get stuck taking quite a bath.

But then again, maybe it will never happen... as long as people are willing to pay.

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by rolfiz

I am glad you did not take my opinion as a knock on Tudor, rather, their current market value. I remember quite clearly, in fact I have pictures of several vintage Tudor pieces I owned back in the late 90's, early 2000's that I picked up for under $200 a piece. Nicer pieces than even the one you posted above.

As recently as 15 years ago nobody really cared.

Everything started going crazy about 7 or 8 years ago. I worry a great deal about a crash, especially if the value of these pieces drop too quickly. A lot of online dealers will get stuck taking quite a bath.

But then again, maybe it will never happen... as long as people are willing to pay.

I have no problem at all with objective and educated criticism of Tudor.

[buckwhite]

Hello,

I'm curious what the going price would be for a Tudor with an AS 1250 in it. Any thoughts.