buddman wrote:
Don't think it's about "evidence" - it's about experience. For example, you've used your experience to say that the tritium is "original", but you don't really know that unless you purchased it yourself from the retailer.
My experience tells me the patination of your hands is very different from the rest of the watch - lume is different and paint on the hands is off colour and greenish, when the dial and sliderule are impeccable. Why would that happen? We all know that Navitimer are highly succeptible to moisture degredation, and while you can find near perfect examples, your spidey-senses should tingle at the site of a white sliderule or perfect lume and cause you to look a bit critically. I have a few service dials from the early 80s, and I think that's what's in your watch. Here's what they look like:
Quite like this article from a few years ago - on Rolex admittedly - but I thing good advice on patination
http://rolexpassionreport.com/14962/do- ... ers-guide/In any case, all I said was that I didn't think calling the tritium original was accurate. Just my opinion. You still have a lovely watch and I'm sure it will find a happy owner.
Good luckwith your sale.
Again this is all still conjecture. You have no way of knowing when this dial was manufactured and because it is clean you say it must be from the 80s. Then you show an 806 dial and not a 7806, which was only produced for a few years in the 70s. Then you say my dial is too perfect and the slide rule is too perfect when there is clearly aging evident in the photos (look at the angle shot in the sun and you can see some typical slide rule moisture incursion along the edges). Remarkably there are some really nice examples still left out there despite the subpar water resistance of the snap back Navis so maybe you are looking in the wrong places. Please also note that I describe the dial as in Excellent condition -- if it were all that you say it is I would call it Near Mint or Mint.
And even if it were from the 80s how does that make the Tritium luminous
"not original" to the dial?? It's not a relume (I've louped it you haven't) so even if it were a service dial it would still be
original lume to that dial, no? How do you know when the watch was actually sold rather than manufactured? Might have sat in a dealer's safe for several years for all we know. (For that matter how do you know the precise date of manufacture of the 806 dial you show? Just because it was purchased in the 80s -- or you believe it to be -- does not necessarily mean it was manufactured at that time.) Maybe the hands being pulled on and off at multiple services subsequently, as per the inner caseback markings, have contributed to their more rapid deterioration? I would also point to the fact the hands lume is often greenish during this era of production circa 1970s, which is actually a pretty basic observation for a guy who likes vintage Breitlings. Don't ask me why they just are. Again comes down to different suppliers for dials and hands and different lume compounds.
Lastly I would put my experience and reputation in the vintage watch world up against yours or anyone else's any day of the week. I would never try to mislead by omission in my ads or any of my sales posts or try to play it cute by leaving something out. If you don't like the
aesthetics of the dial hands combo on this watch that is your prerogative but you are making logical leaps here that are unfounded and unverifiable
Anyway here are some more 7806 dials with lots of variation in terms of condition and patina -- and more via Google Images if you just do the most rudimentary research. Imagine that -- watches being treated and worn differently through the decades and not all aging uniformly!
http://www.chrono24.com/breitling/ref-7806.htmhttp://www.breitlingsource.com/phpBB2/v ... 11&t=14055In future, please refrain from hijacking my sales posts when you are talking out of your hat.
T.
Login
Register
FAQ
