Way too early to have that signed bridge on the movement. I think the 'Breitling' on the dial has been added to an otherwise original dial. The uneducated often miss out that some of the models from the 1930's weren't signed at all and had no reference numbers. Adding them just ruins an otherwise decent piece.

From what I read in 1935 both the bridge and dial were signed. The following is an article on it.


Brietling did not label its brand on dials or movements before 1928 due to copyright issues between Leon/Willy Breitling and their ancestors (father/grandfather). Due to the conflict, when they started labelling 'Breitling' in 1928, 'Montbrillant' was also used along with 'no name' dial and movements, and remained in existence until 1939. The webpage and paragraph below, although in French which I translated using 'Google Translate', explains the interchangeable usage of the names/models 'Brietling' and 'Montbrillant' between 1935 and 1939 (http://www.invenitetfecit.com/modeles/p ... tling.html):

"It was around 1935, it seems, appear the first markings on the dials and movements. You can find the brand "Breitling" but also the brand "Montbrillant". It also seems that there was within the company Breitling some hesitation as to what to call the company. Montbrillant the word is regularly used since installation in La Chaux de Fonds. From 1934 to 1936 he even supplant the Breitling name in numerous commercials. But in 1937 the brand Breitling resume definitely over, although occasionally one can find the brand Montbrillant until 1939. It should be noted that only one advertisement in 1935, shows a dial chronograph wristwatch where the word appears Montbrillant. All others, both in 1935 than 1936, show dials unsigned