Detex Newman vs Guardsman Watchman Clocks — Mechanical Legends Compared

There was a time when security patrol verification didn’t involve software, WiFi, or dashboards. It involved a heavy metal clock, a stack of paper records, and the understanding that if the guard didn’t make the round, the clock would know. The Detex Newman and Detex Guardsman watchman clocks were two of the most common mechanical guard tour systems ever produced. Today, both are discontinued, but for decades they defined how patrol accountability worked in industrial and commercial environments.

Both systems were designed around the same idea: a guard physically carried the clock during patrols and recorded visits at control stations throughout a facility. The result was a tamper-resistant mechanical record proving that rounds were completed. No batteries dying mid-shift, no network outages, and no arguing with the timestamp. Just embossed paper or punched tape quietly documenting reality.

Short Comparison

Detex Newman
Plastic case (Quartz version) with nylon pouch, or solid aluminum “Classic” Newman with cowhide pouch
Uses replaceable paper dials, typically changed every 1–3 days
Embossed record system
Compact and lightweight
Reading exact times required a little interpretation

Detex Guardsman
Solid aluminum case with cowhide pouch
Continuous advancing tape system
Five-day recording capacity (up to 120 hours)
Shows exact time at each control point
Designed for extended unattended operation

The Detex Newman

The Newman Quartz Watchclock was the lighter, simpler option. Weighing under two pounds, it was easy to carry and rugged enough for daily use. The quartz movement eliminated winding, and a single AA battery powered the unit for roughly a year — which, at the time, felt impressively modern.

The Newman produced an embossed record by pressing raised station numbers directly into a paper dial. No ink, no ribbons, no consumables beyond the dial itself. The system was intentionally simple and very difficult to falsify. If the case was opened, the clock marked the event directly on the record. Subtle it was not.

For smaller sites with up to forty stations or limited budgets, the Newman became a practical solution. It provided documentation that patrols were completed and helped reduce risks associated with fire, vandalism, or unattended facilities. In some cases, companies even leveraged documented patrol programs when negotiating insurance rates.

The Detex Guardsman

The Guardsman took a different approach. Instead of replaceable dials, it used a continuously advancing roll of tape capable of recording up to five days of patrol activity. This mattered more than it sounds. Insurance rules and good security practice generally prohibited guards from changing recording media themselves, meaning supervisors often had to return to the site regularly just to replace dials on shorter-capacity systems.

The Guardsman’s longer recording period reduced those trips — and the overtime that often came with them. For plants operating through weekends, holidays, or extended shutdowns, that alone justified the higher initial cost. The tape system also made reading exact patrol times easier, since the record advanced continuously rather than requiring interpretation of embossed marks.

Like the Newman, the Guardsman used a rugged die-cast aluminum case, mechanical movement, and tamper detection that marked the exact time the case was opened or closed. These systems were built to survive industrial environments and did so for decades.

Why They Disappeared

Neither system failed. Technology simply moved on. Electronic RFID-based guard tour systems and cloud reporting eliminated