Yes, I can! Vintage Longines Catalogue No. 6 - Draeger

bigbug1964
Posts
52
Likes
157
I suspect from the 20's to 30's ... possible 40's, but don't think older



































Please no inquiries for the purpose of purchase, the catalog belongs to me (like these pictures), but is already promised to someone ...

Just think of it as a compensation for the "No nice scans from a 1933 Longines catalogue..." post.

The Longines collector retirement is approaching

bb1964
 
DirtyDozen12
Posts
2,804
Likes
4,882
Thank you for posting this.

It is neat to see how different dials, cases, and movements were priced relative to each other: an additional 40 fr. for a pulsometer dial or 60 fr. for a tachymeter dial on a 13.33Z, an additional 250 fr. for a dial with gold hour markers or 290 fr. for grey gold markers on time-only wristwatches, the 12.68Z cost 400 fr. in silver versus 550 fr. for an 11.84 or 645 fr. for a 10.26, and a rattrapante 19.73 cost 2800 fr. in chrome versus 1200 fr. for a standard 19.73 chronograph.

Lots to absorb.
 
DirtyDozen12
Posts
2,804
Likes
4,882
P.S. Mentioned in the catalog is caliber 12.68Z, which was introduced in 1929. So I imagine that the date is no earlier than that. Additionally, calibers 8.68Z and 10.68Z, which were both introduced in 1932, are not mentioned. Given this, I would guess that the catalog was printed circa 1930.

Edit: I just read the warning at the beginning which essentially states that watches with the 12.68Z will be delivered with caliber 13.34 instead. So maybe the catalog is from 1929?
Edited:
 
Modest_Proposal
Posts
2,958
Likes
6,308
Of additional interest are their chronometre grade pocket watches on page 11.
Edited:
 
Syrte
Posts
7,630
Likes
21,886
DirtyDozen12 DirtyDozen12
P.S. Mentioned in the catalog is caliber 12.68Z, which was introduced in 1929. So I imagine that the date is no earlier than that. Additionally, calibers 8.68Z and 10.68Z, which were both introduced in 1932, are not mentioned. Given this, I would guess that the catalog was printed circa 1930.

Edit: I just read the warning at the beginning which essentially states that watches with the 12.68Z will be delivered with caliber 13.34 instead. So maybe the catalog is from 1929?
Your theory is consistent with the styling - I was going to guess late 20s/ early 30s.
Case engravings « modern style » (ie geometric art deco) are already being offered, but the dials are still traditional— Breguet numerals throughout, no « modern » arabic numerals in sight,
Gotta love those so called « sporty » cases.
 
BA44190A-C1E7-4737-B734-D089A5E0FB8E.png 066F780F-0412-407A-947C-B1F29374E386.png
valkyrie_rider
Posts
444
Likes
751
Am I the only one that noticed that the numeral 4 (on the top right) in the catalog cover is spelled incorrectly?

IIRC, the numeral 4 in roman would be IV.
 
DirtyDozen12
Posts
2,804
Likes
4,882
valkyrie_rider valkyrie_rider
Am I the only one that noticed that the numeral 4 (on the top right) in the catalog cover is spelled incorrectly?

IIRC, the numeral 4 in roman would be IV.
This is a convention. Nearly all older watches and clocks have 4 written in this way.
 
707mm2
Posts
57
Likes
68
I'm confused in this catalogue about a caliber I've never seen : is the 19.89/90 family actually a 18.89/90 with just a larger platine ? Now I remember seeing some 18.89 with big base diameter compared to their bridges, were those referred as 19.89 in catalogues ?
 
Sign up or log in to reply...