Bulova 1966 Accutron

Submitted by Drj9 on
Manufacture Year
Movement Model
Movement Jewels
Movement Serial No.
Case Serial No.
Case shape
Case color
Case Manufacturer
Watch Description

I found the watch which had not been running since at least 1991. Like many other stories it was my grandfather's and I got it when he passed away in 1991. Found it and after 2 months got it working I know its a M6 "214" but it's not a spaceview or anything super-pricey. My grandfather who liked new gadgets, was a blue-colar worker so I would not expect him to get any thing else. Can any one tell me more on the watch. I put a new band on it to help pop it out. But the orginal band on it is simply a flexband and not marked Accutron.* Update I had the back removed and took picutres the best I could. Some of the markings are blurred so I wrote down the numbers as well. Here they are :Inside watch states; "Bulova 214  pat 2.971.323" While the back states 2624   8-6. The only thing I have questions on is that when I gave it to the jewler I did not write anything down; i.e. serial numbers etc. I have had family members who have had jewlers in the past take valuable parts out and replace them with cheaper parts. From the photos do you folks think it's alright?



Bulova Accutron M6 214 with an old flex band and agin with a new band:)
Bulova watch
Bulova watch
Bulova Watch
Bulova Watch
Bulova Watch
Geoff Baker
Posted August 5, 2012 - 5:41am

Agree - Accutron 214

Posted August 5, 2012 - 10:35am

I'm on board with Accutron 214. In 1967 there was also a "Spaceview" and a 14K model in this case as well. See Cooksey- Shugart's price guide, page 695, top left.

Posted August 5, 2012 - 12:27pm

In reply to by bourg01

I'm sorry I'm new to the world of Bulova. Just recently got bit by the Bulova bug. I had a jewler tell me I should convert it to a space view, I declined. I was not sure on it affecting the integrity though I like the look of a spaceview did I make the right move?

Posted August 7, 2012 - 10:18pm

In reply to by Drj9

Ditto! Estimates run as high as 90% of all Spaceviews seen now are conversions. I don't have a problem with a proper conversion but IMHO it is better to maintain the integrity of a known original watch.

Reverend Rob
Posted August 5, 2012 - 8:21pm

You did the right thing, IMO. There are a lot of converted Spaceviews out there already, which negatively affects the collectibility and value of the watches.

Accutron 214 it is, until we get an additional model name, if it has one. 

William Smith
Posted August 5, 2012 - 8:32pm

...and it looks like your jeweler didn't swipe any parts.  Your new photos look as I would have expected.   The black 2642 on the inside case back may be a crystal number reference.

Posted August 11, 2012 - 1:04pm


You're correct, sort of.

2624 printed inside the Caseback is the Case reference number, which is used for Crystal identification. The asymmetric design is not common and this one looks like it was produced in August of 1966.

There is a wealth of information in reguards to, including galleries of, authentic Accutron 214's here: http://www.accutron214.com

William Smith
Posted August 11, 2012 - 1:09pm

Thanks Fifth. I have an accutorn very similar to subject watch.  I took the battery out and throught it in the sock drawer/box.  Maybe I'll dig it out and take a look. 

William Smith
Posted January 20, 2014 - 12:39am

In reply to by William Smith

It's amazing how Bulova used similar cases, down to the assymetrical shapes and lugs, but slight variations on the outter bezel area (subject watch vs my watch).  The manufacture year and even dial variations may also result in a completly different modle name.  Here's my 1965 assymetrical.  Notice the hatching on subject watch both surrounding the bezel and on the outter assymetrical bezel area. Jim also has 1966 assymetrical watch case with hatching similar to subject watch here:


  My 1965 example has the hatching on the ring directly surrounding crystal, but the outter assymetrical areas are smooth.  Hands and hashmarks look similar to subject watch, but mine has a blue ring inside the hashmarks.  I wouldn't be suprised if we could find a model name for subject watch in the new newspaper ads, so I'm rechecking. 

Here's front of my 1966 :

Back of my 1966 looks like subject watch.   Go figure.  Off to the new accutrons for a close look for both!!


Posted August 11, 2012 - 1:45pm


Keeping the watch original is the right way to go. As far as I'm concerned a conversion, even with Genuine Bulova NOS parts, makes the watch a fake. You would always know that it was converted and therefore non-original. JMO

As it stands, you have a great looking watch.