The Breitling Watch Source Forums

Is that a LE BN? I've checked all the Chronologs encompassing the CC years of manufacture and can't find it. All I can find is A,D and K references.

I wondered the same thing. Ironically, just a week or two ago, I was toying with the idea of trying to get a Cockpit bezel put on a Galactic 41. I ultimately decided against it, but maybe somebody had a similar idea for the Chrono version and did it on purpose. That still doesn't explain the hands, though. What bugs me in all of this is that the seller has been apprised of the problem, but is still selling it as "Like New" and "100% Authentic."

I'm sure you meant B instead D.
No, it's not a LE, it's the one with the gold bezel in 09 Chronolog.
Ref# is in the 08/09 Handbook.
There's H also.

Happened with old Chronomats and happens with the service.

I understand that during a servicing, older hands might get replaced with newer hands, but do newer hands get replaced with older hands? And a CG shouldn't need the kind of servicing that requires hands replacement anyway; the model is too new.

All servicing involves hands replacement - they're single use and you aren't servicing a watch with the hands off. Hands could easily have been replaced by the wrong ones by mistake - that's what happens when humans are involved in the process.

It would be an indication that the watch had a warranty issue, so a vote against it, but could have happened.

Sorry, yes B instead of D.
I see the C now in the 09 catalog. So with that fact - absolutely -it could be a CC with a hand change by error.
Thanks BN.

I can accept that, but then we are back to the bezel. Could the folks at Breitling have bollocksed that up, too?

If it's a CC, they didn't.

But it has a CG dial. What am I not getting here?

It is definitely a CG dial. It could be either a CC or CG caseback. It definitely has hands from a CC and the bezel is CC. Given that, most parts are likely CC. So I think the most likely scenario is someone exchanged a CG dial for a CC on a CC.

OK, that makes more sense. So if we assume it's a genuine CC, but with a CG dial - either by mistake or on purpose - what does that say about the listing?

I don't think there's a category for this. It would appear that it's genuine Breitling just not in the configuration that left the factory or possibly factory modified. I would say it's simply buyer beware on this one.
Good catch on this one by the way Jacksonstone.

The buyer should always beware on eBay. However, in thinking more about it, I personally feel the ad is misleading, since it says "100% Authentic" and "Like New." The seller might be able to claim "100% Authentic," since technically all parts of the watch are (presumably) genuine, but I think a reasonable person could infer "Like New" means original factory condition. It's a tough call. If the seller would disclose the fact it's a Cockpit with a Galactic dial, I personally wouldn't have a problem with it.

It's a conundrum for me. Technically the only thing wrong with this watch, i.e., the only thing that does not make it a CG, are the hands. Even though it probably started life out as a CC as it's original intent it has been modified with a different dial only. Now, since the movement, case and caseback as well as the crown and pushers are common to both watches it has become a CG for the most part, save the hands, if the cases for both watches are identical. I don't know with certainty that they are. The dimension specifications are the same except for the weight, but that may the difference in the weight of the bezels.

The seller is claiming the watch is a Chrono Galactic, which it is, again except for the hands, if the cases are the same for both watches. However I understand your argument that the ad is misleading because as he says, it is not "as new" because the watch is wrong. Could the watch have been a factory mistake however? That does happen and when it does a watch becomes more collectible. Could the watch be a genuine CG and gone back to service with the factory replacing with the incorrect hands by mistake. That's possible I guess.

Does paperwork matter in this case? Probably not. If we had the paperwork more than likely it would be correct as well. The reference number would match the watch since it's unlikely the caseback has been changed. The serial number would also match the watch.

But if an unsuspecting buyer bought this watch and sent it in to Breitling for service what would be the outcome? The serial number if checked would not match the dial. The serial number of course is to a CC and not a CG. If a mistake in original assembly was not made at the factory then the service would likely be rejected or there would be more than the customary expense incurred and/or I guess it's even possible Breitling might replace the dial back to the original.

I don't like that.

I reported it under the fraudulent category and simply explained that the watch is a CC with a CG dial and is not likely original.

The bezel is different, too. The CG has the Buck Rogers bezel. This watch has a CC bezel.

Or perhaps it's actually a Chrono Cockpit except for the dial. Really, we don't know. Assuming the CC and CG have the same case, the only parts that distinguish the two models are the hands, dial and bezel. Two out of the three variables here are that of the Cockpit. Only the dial is that of a Galactic. On balance, it would seem it's a CC that got a dial change at some point, either on purpose or by mistake. But again, we don't really know, and neither does the seller. All we know is it's got elements of both models, which technically makes it other than what is listed in the seller's description. And I think we both agree that's not good for the buyer, unless he's a pretty savvy one.