The Breitling Watch Source Forums

Hi Michael,
Now that is a very useful and fact-based observation--really wonderful stuff--thanks for taking the time to illustrate this and it does seem to point to a strong logical timeline of movement development (as well as a lot of dial variations in a relatively short time ).

I guess I have to ask: Where do the rare Val. 72 806s fit in? Maybe a Venus shortage for one year ca. 1954 so perhaps not really the "first" Navis as is often claimed?
Thanks again and BTW, my 806 is only 7 numbers away from the first of your "1952s."
All the best,
T.

I've never heard a satisfactory argument for why the 72s were used, either in 54 / 55 or in the later mid 60s versions.

I find it hard to believe that Venus couldn't supply movements and Valjoux could when they were both under the Ebauches SA umbrella, but I guess it's possible. I also have a hard time thinking that these were the first because Breitling planned to use Valjoux 72s in all Navitimers and then changed their mind - that doesn't seem logical to me.

Its real difficult to find a logical explanation after 60 years and the Breitling managemant was not always logic. May be Breitling had not paid his bill at Venus, may be Venus could not produce enough, nobody knows it. Its the same, why Breitling produced the Datora 785 with Venus 191 and in the same time with Valjoux 72C.

Great discussion.

Not quite related, but I've always assumed that the Venus 178 was exclusive to Breitling, a "reserved calibre",
has anyone ever seen another manufacturer use them? Whereas the Valjoux 72 is used by lots of manufacturers.

Maybe the shift to 72's was a political move by Breitling to give Venus a warning that they could find another supplier
if they needed to? Just a thought.

Does anyone have another Breitling dated the same period as the Navitimer Valjoux's that uses the Venus 178, say an AVI.

Perhaps a stretch but around this same mid-1950s period we can find Benrus Sky Chief chronographs, which also usually had some version of Venus caliber, fitted with the Valjoux 72. Could be Venus underwent a supply chain issue in the middle 1950s, forcing the marques to purchase the (more expensive?) Valjoux movements. I assume "more expensive" because we know that Breitling (and I believe Benrus) reverted to using Venus chrono movements for the bulk of their standard chronograph models after that short period for the most part until going back to Valjoux for the brief run of 77xx calibers. It could also be related to size, as perhaps the 14 ligne Venus was a better fit for Breitling's cases than the 13 ligne Valjoux.

Interestingly, however, for the calendar chrono complications, Breitling (and Wakmann) appear to have gone nearly exclusively with the Valjoux 72c & 88 over the Venus complications around or shortly after this time and in fact, AFAIK Breitling did not produce Triple Dates or Triple Date Moonpahse "Datoras" after the 1950s. (Happy to be corrected on any of this. )

Breitling history is always interesting!
Best regards,
T.

Definitely not "exclusive", although Breitling may have been their biggest buyer of 178s.
Best,
T.

If it wasn't exclusive to Breitling then presumably we should see it cropping up from time to time in other manufacturers.
Doing a little googling I can only find a ref to it in the Skychief (whch seems to have used it only breifly) and this Lip model (which looks very familiar)

http://forumamontres.forumactif.com/for ... t34824.htm

In the past few years of hunting I can't recall seeing it appear regularly in other manufacturer. Always happy to be proved wrong though.

The three big triple chronograph movements of the period were the Valjoux 72, the lemania 2310 (Omega Cal 321) and the Venus 178.

The valjoux appears in lots of manufacturers the great and the small, does anyone know if the Lemania was only used by Omega? (and lemania), or are
there other names that utilise it. Perhaps there was a tussel to control the movements and gain an edge by having an exclusive movement?

Quad erat demonstratum.

Agree that you will primarily find it in Breitlings but, as you say, you can also find it in Benrus and some other brands, Cyma and later Universal Geneve, to name a few. And the Valjoux Sky Chief is the exception, the Venus the more common occurrence. Either way, that does not indicate total "exclusivity" to me.
Best,
T.

and what is this ?

Always happy to learn more. If you have any examples to show that would be illuminating.

I looked through "Chronograph wristwatches to stop time" by Lang and Meis and the only non-Breitling Venus 178 they show is in the Universal Geneve you mention, but that's dated 1970, quite late.

I know this is moving away from the original debate but I think the connection between Breitling and movements is still a grey area (at least for me)
For example, in the Thirties Breitling invented and patented the two button chronograph. How could they do this if they didn't manufacture movements?

Did they design it and then have a thrid party make it? or was their design a modification to an existing movement?
Anyone know what the first patented Breitling two button movement was and who made it?

I'll have to hit the books for the two button dates, don't recall off hand.

Breitling did manufacture movements before going to Ebauches SA group companies (Venus, Valjoux, etc). If you look at Breitling material on B01 it is described as the first modern in house movement, not the first in house movement.

Please do not be angry now, but can you show me one ? (which was not a pocket watch)

No - because they were all (or virtually all) pocket watch movements.

Where did I claim otherwise?

But we talked about the two button chronographs. Did the pocketwatch had two buttons ?

In my opinion Breitling invented the two buttom chronograph, but never produced it.

Benrus.



BE 11 = Venus 178

You yourself said it earlier and you even mentioned LIP (although such LIPs are usually simply re-badged Breitlings for the French market). So Benrus and the others I and you have mentioned...several times now. Maybe even Zodiac, too:

http://www.farfo.com/menswatches/Page2/ ... watch.html

So yes, as I have said a couple of times already, Breitling was probably Venus' biggest customer and probably by far but other marques did use the cal. 178, therefore that cannot be called an "exclusive" relationship IMO. But maybe you define "exclusive" differently than I.

Otherwise, I'm simply not sure what you are trying to argue here...
And AFAIK, except as mentioned regarding pocket watches, Breitling was never a true movement manufacture and always outsourced their movement purchases (and probably their cases, too).
T.