The Breitling Watch Source Forums

Came across this today. I hesitate to use the word "beauty" as I'm not sure if it's a Franken or not.

Front looks like a gold plated, mid 60s, Venus 178 powered, Navitimer 806 to me.



But the back is inscribed 809 which I thought was a Cosmonaut, not a Navitimer.



I'm not happy with the chrono second hand either which I thought should have a pointed triangle shape at the end.

Any thoughts you have on this would be much appreciated.

Good spot. Also think that chrono second hand is aftermarket and the case back might be borrowed from the Cosmo.

Got a couple more pics which may help

Inside case


and movement


If I'm getting the hang of this, the W.O.G. engraving means it was made for Breitling and you can see the 78 of 178 so I'm guessing the movement is genuine. I'm thinking it may simply be an error in engraving the case back or simply the wrong one.

Short of having a display back, this is probably the Breitling I've most wanted to have. If I sell my B-1 and stick the rest on a 0% card, I may be able to afford it but I don't want to pay way over the odds. No box/papers. Aftermarket strap. Does anyone want to put a valuation on this? And because it's in a pretty tatty condition, how much would a full service be to get it back to pristine condition?

Or should I stop day dreaming and just get on with some work instead

Alright then, let's go:

Serial is 1965 which gives us nothing to worry about on the caseback itself - that's consistent with an 809.

Although the 809 is a cosmonaute, there are 809s that have the dial identified as Navitimer - of course this can't be one of those due to the rather obvious 12 vs. 24!! That alone tells you that the caseback is wrong.

Now if we lookat the movement we could actually have a very early Navitimer on our hands here. WOG as stated indicates that it was made for Breilting, but it is also an indicator that this is an early movement. I have no problems with the 178.

Turning our attention to the dial, we now have another problem - silver subdials and a non beaded bezel. This dates the piece to around 1961 / 62 at the earliest (silver subdials were around in 1959, but with a beaded bezel) - inconsistent with the movement and of course the caseback. I have no issues with the chrono seconds hand - though it's not helpful in identification - mid 50s to 60s.

Hope this doesn't read like a sermon, just wanted to walk you through my process on it. If this were right you could easily be in the $3,500+ range for a pristine condition piece (more if gold rather than plate - which it may be) - can't go by the caseback as it's clearly wrong.

In this condition, if right we'd be nearer the $2,500 range, a good service would be $600, a restoration in the same area, maybe more (although only the dial looks really in need).

I wouldn't touch this piece at all.

Thanks Roff. It didn't read as one but you can deliver as many sermons as you want because that's the way we all learn.

Cheers

Sharky