Junghans Bund 6645-12-120-9351 88/110

      Hallo Freunde,
      ich habe nie einen Junghans J88 BUND gesehen mit Tachymeter, aber zivil war das absolut üblich.
      Hier zwei Bilder aus 'Martin Fischer Junghans Faszination' mit dem schönen Artikel von Kurt von Zeppelin von 1950!
      . Gruesse/Regards/Salute Konrad Knirim
      . knirim.de

      PS: Have a look at my books on Military Timepieces:
      . http://www.knirim.de
      Thanks so much for the reply Konrad, I’ll try and read that interesting looking article from Kurt von Zeppelin when I get the chance.

      The thing that stands out to me is that the hands, round pushers, and crown on mine are all the same as on the Bund. All the images of the civilian models have different hands, square pushers, and thinner crowns. So I’m reasonably happy that the caseback, midcase, hands, crown, and pusher all belong together. It would still be great to see a good side profile image of a bezelled 88/0110 with the bezel removed, just to rule out the possibility that it’s a standard case with a lost bezel. Can’t find such an image anywhere though...

      The dial is a different matter... as you say it looks like a civilian one. But then the lume on the dial and seem to match exactly, and there’s at least some original radium lume in there as I get strong Geiger readings from the watch. So it could have conceivably been born this way but I guess it’s unlikely. Also worth noting is that the 42mm prototype Bund on page 571 of your book has a dial layout that’s essentially identical to all the later Bunds, so it’s hard to think why there would be an anomaly in the middle.I’ll probably be leaving it alone for the moment, and enjoy it how it is. I have the J-Star dial in my drawer so I can always swap it over later. The downside would be that the lume doesn’t color match the hands so well.

      I just took the back off to get the serial number which is 6888. There are also three service marks scratched into the CB from the same watchmaker, but I guess it’s impossible to get dates from those (I guess they are job numbers as they are ascending and evenly spaced, around 500-600 jobs apart, which I guess translates to a regular time interval).

      It’s not a super early number, but it is earlier than my donor movement with the J-Star dial shown above (7628), and also earlier than my 88/0111 which is fitted with movement S/N 10676.

      Ich halte die Uhr ebenfalls für authentisch. Die Leuchtmasse von Zifferblatt und Zeigern passt perfekt zueinander. Tachymeterlunetten gab es immer wieder an Fliegeruhren der Bundeswehr. Meistens haben sie sich wohl mangels Alternativen dorthin verirrt. Felix hatte beispielsweise eine Titan Tutima mit einer solchen Lunette:

      Der TUTIMA Military Titan Fliegerchronograph für die Bundeswehr

      Auch von Hanhart gibt es BW Uhren mit ungewöhnlichen Lunetten.

      Hanhart Bundeswehr Referenz 417 Kal. 42 Flyback mit EU/2hm Zifferblatt ca. 1955

      "Ich bin ein Höhlenbewohner. Die Zimmer mit Aussicht überlasse ich Ihnen" - G. Bachmann
      Hier eine Zivile Variante der Uhr mit den Bundeswehr Zeigern die Uhr ist aus dem Nachlass eines Kienzle Mitarbeiter der die Uhr für langjährige Betriebszugehörigkeit bekommen hat.
      Noch mit dem alten ( hässlichen :D ) grauen Lederband.
      Gruß Michi
      • P1100344.jpg

        922.68 kB, 2,116×2,822, viewed 346 times
      • P1100348.jpg

        965.73 kB, 2,629×1,972, viewed 238 times
      Interesting watch @jung-hans

      Can I ask, do you think the hands are the originals ones ? They seem to have aged completely differently to the lume on the dial. The case looks civilian though with the square pushers.

      And also is it right that there’s no serial number on the movement ? I can’t see anything in the normal place.
      I have a civilian 88 basically untouched. It shows no serial on the movement either. Hands as in the shown ad from Konrad. For comparison.
      Thanks, caspar
      • 2.jpg

        172.23 kB, 1,000×750, viewed 190 times
      • 4.jpg

        188.36 kB, 1,000×750, viewed 147 times
      • 1.jpg

        195.89 kB, 1,000×750, viewed 158 times
      Hi again,

      I checked my military Junghans 88: it shows a serial on the movement. So my guess is: the military movements are marked, the civilians are not. Did anyone check their serials/movements?
      • IMG_9029 (1024x768).jpg

        266.82 kB, 1,024×768, viewed 159 times
      • IMG_9061 (1024x768).jpg

        404.48 kB, 1,024×768, viewed 155 times
      That’s an interesting possibility. I was pretty sure I’d seen numbered movements in civilian Cal. 88s but I could be wrong. I bought another donor last year and that’s civilian and un-numbered. I’ll trawl google images now to see if the idea works.

      edit: just to add, the actual architecture of the movements seems different between different examples. I mean if you look underneath and to the left of the balance wheel.

      Hello Gentlemen
      As written yesterday on a popular scocial media, I have taken off the bezel of my 0110 and I think the reason for the 0110's without bexels is simply because they fell off the watches! The bezel was so easy to remove that it was scary. Just pressing slightly with a pocket knife between case and bezel - POP!

      Video 1 - removal

      As seen from the video, I use no force at all, and there is no wire spring. After cleaning the watch and bezel I took the following pictures:



      As seen from #1 and #2 there is no room for a wire spring, but the case feature a very small change i diameter only about 0,1 or 0,15 mm. At its widest point I measure 35,70, and just below closest to midcase around 35,60 or 35,55. I think the case profile of my watch is 100% identical the Walther's and "w154"

      The bezel is very plain, light slightly flexible and feels fragile, maybe some kind of alloy. The inner diameter varies from 35,65 to 35,60 depending where you measure. When the bezel is installed you just press it down against the case and due to the flex in the bezel the lower part of the bezel flexes a bit upward allowing it to pass the small ridge on the case. It probably worked great when it came out of the factory, but these small tolerences does not allow any wear of bezel and case before the bezel get too loose. I'm really glad that I discovered just how loose my bezel is, have to be even more careful when wearing it.

      I'm afraid I have come to the conclusion that the 0110's without bezels are a result of poor engineering/watchmaking and not a delibarate design :(

      below is bezel closeups and finally the install video.

      gruss - Lars





      Video 2 - install

      travis1963 wrote:

      Look at the crown an the pushers: The watches shown in the thread about the plain bezel Junghans are different.

      Hi Walter - I'm not quite sure which pictures you are comparing, remember that this is the watch that previously was owned by Günter and restored by Siranja. Why is the crown/pusher types important in the context of the watch shown by @w154 and his case? Do you still have your 0110 - a direct side macro photo would be of great help as well as measurements of the case.

      Balu53 wrote:

      Lars, be careful with "my" watch :D
      br, Günter

      It is my pride and joy and as you can see I'm "nursing" it through life. It still runs perfect - good work by @Siranja :thumbsup:
      Three watches without bezel are known. One ist shown in this thread and the other two you can find here:

      Bisher unbekannter Bundeswehrchrono - Junghans BUND 88/110

      What I mentioned is, that these three watches seem to have a different crown type. It looks more like an onion shaped crown. Possibly this is another feature for a Junghans 0110 without a bezel?

      "Ich bin ein Höhlenbewohner. Die Zimmer mit Aussicht überlasse ich Ihnen" - G. Bachmann