The Breitling Watch Source Forums
https://www.breitlingsource.com/phpBB2/

Aerospace question - flat dial
https://www.breitlingsource.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=48824		 Page 2 of 2
Author:  yogi18 [ Tue Jul 30, 2013 8:46 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Aerospace question - flat dial
RXPete wrote:
The chimney is what missed most with the new redesign. I like the bit of flash.


+1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
Author:  termite [ Tue Jul 30, 2013 9:04 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Aerospace question - flat dial
Which bracelet feels better based on your experience? Can you put up a close up of the pro 2 and pro 3 if you have the time?


Sorry but I no longer have a PRO II in the current rotation. I can't say that one feels better than the other but I like both styles; indeed, I like all of the titanium professional series bracelets and found each series to be very comfortable on the wrist. The only Aero bracelet that I hated [and never bought another] was the early bracelet with folded metal links and pins that had the spring action. IMHO, the bracelet on the EVO seems to fit the watch just right design wise...but then again, I seem to be in a minority in hating the chimney...
Author:  dirkpitt73 [ Tue Jul 30, 2013 2:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Aerospace question - flat dial
Wow, I'm overwhelmed by the detailed, informative responses - thanks all, extremely helpful. Coming from the Rolex world, it's amazing how many variations there are over the years in the Breitling lineup, I suppose that's a double-edged sword. Now I need to decide if I go Evo (already talking to Govberg) or a 2009-ish model. Thanks again for helping out an Aerospace n00b! :-)

BTW, as an aside, I came to the Aerospace after initially searching for a minty X-33 Gen2. I like aspects of both, though X-33 prices are quite high and seem to be going higher and there's always a decent chance of an $800+ repair if the module fails, so going with a currently produced model like the Aerospace is quite appealing, seems a "safer" bet and it's a classier looking watch overall. Ideally I'd get both, some day I shall ...
Author:  TomP [ Wed Jul 31, 2013 12:14 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Aerospace question - flat dial
You're right that the Aero is more versatile aesthetically than the X-33, and although I never need to look smart it does if it needs to. I love the look and feel of titanium, the ana-digi concept and the SQ accuracy - it's a hall of fame watch for me. Good luck with the search and keep us posted.
Author:  termite [ Wed Jul 31, 2013 4:59 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Aerospace question - flat dial
I have had both the X-33 and an Aero at the same time and sorry to report, I could not get rid of the X-33 fast enough. Speaking only for myself, and I know that there is a large fan base for the X-33, it felt cheap compared to either my Aero or any of the B-1's that I have had. I recognize that this was a purely subjective reaction [aren't all of our watch decisions completely subjective?] but I just would never pick the X-33 to wear in the morning before work. Like many of us, I am sure that I will begin to doubt my recollection at some point and buy another X-33 just to make sure...
Author:  Kodiak [ Wed Jul 31, 2013 7:55 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Aerospace question - flat dial
A little off topic but I have/had both the X-33 and Aerospace and like them both. The Aero is a nicer /dressier looking piece compared to the more tool look of the X-33. I will have to say from a pure functional point of view I liked the X-33 better. It was easier to operate the crown and pushers while the watch was on my wrist and seemed more legible at a quick glance. The Aerospace can be hard to manipulate while on he wrist (at least for me) When I was flying, the X-33 was the best choice but since then have picked up the Aerospace for overall fit and aesthetics.

Both good are great pieces! :D
Author:  happy_chapie [ Sat Aug 03, 2013 12:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Aerospace question - flat dial
I've just bought a Aerospace with the textured dial and on changing the strap, I was suprised to see the date code was 49 08 B5. Is this usual for a watch model made in 2010, or is the date when the case was made and would have been for an earlier model ?
Author:  yogi18 [ Sat Aug 03, 2013 1:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Aerospace question - flat dial
happy_chapie wrote:
I've just bought a Aerospace with the textured dial and on changing the strap, I was suprised to see the date code was 49 08 B5. Is this usual for a watch model made in 2010, or is the date when the case was made and would have been for an earlier model ?


Can you put photos if the date and the dial? Is the watch new? Was the dial swapped?
Author:  TomP [ Sat Aug 03, 2013 2:44 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Aerospace question - flat dial
happy_chapie wrote:
I've just bought a Aerospace with the textured dial and on changing the strap, I was suprised to see the date code was 49 08 B5. Is this usual for a watch model made in 2010, or is the date when the case was made and would have been for an earlier model ?


The date stamp refers to the production of the batch of cases and not (as many assume) the assembly of the watch, so to answer the general question, it's common - indeed probably normal - for date-stamp to be a year or two earlier than the sale date. E.g.: I had a Colt which BUK told me from their records was manufactured in 2010 and distributed to an AD in later 2010. The date stamp was 0409. So there was apparently at least a year between case-production and assembly/despatch.

On the precise question of the earliest Aero textured dials I'm a bit surprised by that, since the textured dial was (as you say) new for 2010. But of course, that's a model year, and actual MY2010 watches appeared earlier than that. In the case of the grill-Aero, search and you'll find reviews of the new dial from the second half of 2009. In that case, a date-stamp of late 2008 sounds plausible. Hypothesis: batch of cases manufactured week 49, right at the end of 2008; used when watch assembled mid-2009 for appearance in late-2009, distributed any time thereafter. As I say, a very common interval in general.

In particular, it proves my theory that Breitling kept putting out plain dial Aeros along the textured ones, for I have a plain-dial Aero date-stamped June 2010.
Author:  yogi18 [ Sat Aug 03, 2013 3:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Aerospace question - flat dial
Tom,
How can I find when my watch was assembled?
Author:  TomP [ Sat Aug 03, 2013 3:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Aerospace question - flat dial
yogi18 wrote:
Tom, How can I find when my watch was assembled?


I don't think you can, at least easily or with any great precision. There must be factory records but I've not read on here of ling folk accessing those. You can ask the regional distributor for 'date of manufacture' but they've only ever quoted me a year rather than a specific month. They do of course know the date of distribution to AD. So the only and obvious answer is: some time between the date-stamp and the distribution date, which as I say are often over a year apart. (A watch might then sit in dealer stock for another year or two, and therefore be two or three years old when bought 'new': perfectly common and not problematic really, though people are invariably a bit surprised by it. The obvious implication I think it does have, with a mechanical, is that some might think to have their overhaul service 5/6 or whatever years after purchase when it might actually be necessary much sooner than that.)

Date of COSC testing is another bit of the puzzle. Omega folk often talk about requesting their watch's COSC certificate (Omega used to do this gratis but now there's a charge) since it will have a date on it. But again I don't see that that helps re the actual assembly date, since COSC test uncased movements which, just like a date-stamped case, could then sit in store awaiting assembly.
Author:  yogi18 [ Sat Aug 03, 2013 4:59 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Aerospace question - flat dial
TomP wrote:
yogi18 wrote:
Tom, How can I find when my watch was assembled?


I don't think you can, at least easily or with any great precision. There must be factory records but I've not read on here of ling folk accessing those. You can ask the regional distributor for 'date of manufacture' but they've only ever quoted me a year rather than a specific month. They do of course know the date of distribution to AD. So the only and obvious answer is: some time between the date-stamp and the distribution date, which as I say are often over a year apart. (A watch might then sit in dealer stock for another year or two, and therefore be two or three years old when bought 'new': perfectly common and not problematic really, though people are invariably a bit surprised by it. The obvious implication I think it does have, with a mechanical, is that some might think to have their overhaul service 5/6 or whatever years after purchase when it might actually be necessary much sooner than that.)

Date of COSC testing is another bit of the puzzle. Omega folk often talk about requesting their watch's COSC certificate (Omega used to do this gratis but now there's a charge) since it will have a date on it. But again I don't see that that helps re the actual assembly date, since COSC test uncased movements which, just like a date-stamped case, could then sit in store awaiting assembly.


Tom,
Interesting as usual. I really love reading your posts and replies. It's puzzling however that Breitling doesn't have the record of assembly. I wish the serial number would have had something to do with it.
Author:  Roffensian [ Sun Aug 04, 2013 4:28 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Aerospace question - flat dial
yogi18 wrote:
It's puzzling however that Breitling doesn't have the record of assembly. I wish the serial number would have had something to do with it.



They do have it, they just don't share it. Just like they don't provide a copy of the complete COSC certificate, just their own certificate that reflects that certification was provided. Breitling is a private company and like many such companies they tend to be fairly closed about what they share because there is no requirement to be particularly visible.
Page 2 of 2 All times are UTC - 8 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/