The Breitling Watch Source Forums

I haven't got a clue what Rolex does, but we're talking about Breitling's here, and in that respect Roff is absolutely correct that the movement number is same as what they engrave on the caseback as the serial number, which in turn is the number they put on the COSC cert. The fact that they also use the movement number as the watch's serial number, means that Breitling are correct when they say "Montre No." because it is the watch number as well as the movement number.

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator

Thanks! I guess I am just grasping the last chances not to have to go through the hassle and the fight with the seller, arrrrg.

Still curious as to what possible reason they might have had to exchange the movement when the watch is apparently brand new.

For what it's worth:

Following my recent saga with my Chrono Evo (here, here and here) Breitling replaced the movement. I raised my concerns about the serial number not matching the case (Roffensian is spot-on, by the way) and I received the following in a letter from their Customer Service Manager:

"...the Service Department have replaced the movement complete with a brand new factory fresh unit from Breitling Switzerland, and associated works...

... I would like to confirm that the yellow Attestation Certificate bearing the number 24***** relates to the complete watch and not just the movement, and it is therefore still valid for the above mentioned watch even after the movement has been replaced. It is only the white Attestation from the COSC (Control Officiel Suisse des Chronometers) which relates to an individual movement."

So, it looks like the movement is tested by the COSC and given a white certificate and then placed into a case with the same serial number and the completed watch is shipped by Breitling with a yellow certificate. The only reason why the case and movement would have different serial numbers is if the movement has been replaced.

Like Roff said; if the COSC matches the case but not the movement, then the movement is not original.

Even though I generally avoid gray market, I always thought that the "you might get a defective/lemon/returned etc. piece") argument was just urban legend. I guess this is as good a confirmation that it is reality.

_________________
-RJ

mister_mustard; Thank you for the input, helpful indeed. Shame about your watch, and IMHO shame on Breitling for not just giving you a new watch after all the hassle.

What I mean is Breitling cases do not have a serial number engraved, only the movement and the caseback has the serial number engraved. Yes, the caseback has both the movement serial number and the model number engraved.



Since the movement was replaced, the movement number no longer matches the serial number on the caseback and COSC certificate. In this case, shouldn't Breitling include a new COSC certificate for the new movement number seeing that the original COSC cert is no longer "valid" seeing it is now a different movement and the only purpose of the COSC cert is to authenticate the chronometer status of the movement???

Yes; I was a bit miffed at the time but the situation was complicated by the fact that the problem was weird and intermittent. BUK said they could see nothing wrong with it so I guess they didn't fully believe me (even though there is a video of it happening!). BUK told me that Breitling will only replace faulty watches as a last resort. Also, the watch was a present from my wife and I was keen to keep the original.



The way I see it, the yellow certificate I have proves that the movement had been COSC certified and is proof from Breitling that the piece is a chronometer. As Breitling keep the white COSCs anyway, it makes more sense for me to have the one that matches the visible case rather than the non-visible movement. My limited understanding suggests that a COSC becomes sort of meaningless over time and after service anyway because it only proves that the movement can function at +4/-6 rather than that it always will.

It's always going to be different with Breitling because all of their movements are de facto COSC certified so they couldn't have replaced it with a non-COSC movement even if they'd wanted to.

The cynic in me will always suspect they just tinkered with the original movement rather than replaced it but (as I'm never going to remove the caseback) I guess I'll never know!

Maybe my experience can shed some light on Breiting policy. I have a 1996 Aerospace II that I returned to BUSA, Wilton CN for an overhaul. I was informed that the ETA 988.332 (B56 caliber movement) was no longer available. So BUSA will upgrade the movement to the ETA 988.352 (Thermoline SuperQuartz) movement. The ETA 988.352 is designated a B75 caliber movement and is certified as a COSC chronometer. Since the model number of the watch contains a code indicating the caliber of the movement, one might suppose that a new model number might be issued. This is not the case. The only indications that my watch contains the new Thermoline movement are the repair paperwork and a new case back containing the letters SQ to indicate the Superquartz movement. The original model number and the serial number of my watch will remain the same and will be engraved onto the new case back. So clearly as far as Breitling is concerned factory replacement of the movement does not change the model or serial number designations.

While I am posting this note, I did want to add another bit of information. The service manager with whom I spoke, identified the new 988.352 movement with a string of additional digits as in 988.352.xxx.xxx as well as a specific Breitling part number. I did not get a chance to record this information, but it does suggest that the 988.352 comes in other flavors some specific to Breitling and maybe even specific to particular models. The LCD display for my Aerospace II has a dichroic filter that causes the characters to appear bright gold on a black background. This display is unlike LCD displays shown on other watches reported to be using using the 988.352 movement.

AaronM