The Breitling Watch Source Forums

Date font looks off and rider tabs look too wide, B on sec hand appears poorly defined:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Breitling-watch-A13 ... 500wt_1156

_________________
Breitling (Navitimer A23322, Aerospace, Chronomat Blackbird, Chronomat A13352 +UTC)
Jaeger-LeCoultre Reverso Gran Sport, Zenith Elite 670
Marathon (SAR, JSAR), Ollech & Wajs Cobra

The font on the subs dials is wrong, the dial color is wrong, the shape of the date window is wrong, the date window surround is wrong, and the 59, 01, 14, 16, 29, 31, 44, and 46 minutes ticks are incorrect.


In other words - "Fake, fake, fake!" ~Elaine from Seinfeld

_________________
SHARKMAN

I think the date surround and cardinal tick length are correct for an Arabic dial. The second marks should be tapered on this dial but its difficult to be sure from the photo.

There is enough to report on the date font and rider tab shape though.

Reported

_________________
Breitling (Navitimer A23322, Aerospace, Chronomat Blackbird, Chronomat A13352 +UTC)
Jaeger-LeCoultre Reverso Gran Sport, Zenith Elite 670
Marathon (SAR, JSAR), Ollech & Wajs Cobra

I've included a picture of my old Evo for comparison. On an Arabic Evo dial, all cardinal and minute ticks are long. The subdial font is also different on the Arabic dials than on either the baton or Roman dials. This watch gets the font right, and even has the correct number of ticks on the subdials. And yes, both on Arabic and Roman dial Evos, the date window has an applied surround. On the watch for sale, the date font is off, and the rider tabs aren't as angular as on a real Evo. Also, although the subdial font is technically correct, it looks like it might be a little more bold than on a genuine Evo, although it's hard to tell with these pictures. I'm not sure about the dial color. It could be black and just washed out by the lighting, or it could be Anthracite, which tends to look dark in indirect lighting.

I still vote fake, but to be honest, it's a tough call for me. I'm more confident advising anyone to avoid this auction like the plague: poor photos, no papers, a bogus strap, a high price tag, an 'as is' sale, and a seller with only one feedback rating. It just doesn't pass the smell test.

Edit: I also just noticed he claims it has a multiple time zone function. What a maroon.

Not the greatest photos, and I'm not convinced either way. I thought that the ones with the wrong date font also had the missing 11 tick on the top subdial, and while this isn't that clear it looks to be there.

I'm certainly not sure enough to report.

I stand corrected

_________________
SHARKMAN

That's partly what's throwing me. I haven't seen a description of a fake Evo version that gets everything right except the date font and rider tabs. I've declined to report it for this reason, but the whole tone of the listing smells fishy to me.

Gone

_________________

For more information on identifying Breitling replicas, please visit my web site
http://f4buz.com/watches/breitling/fakes/fakes.html

Shark, do you have any input on what were the clues, and why it doesn't seem to correspond with any fake Evo versions we know about?

Yes, I would loved Sharkmouth's opinion too. Maybe its been redialed with a gen dial.

_________________
Breitling (Navitimer A23322, Aerospace, Chronomat Blackbird, Chronomat A13352 +UTC)
Jaeger-LeCoultre Reverso Gran Sport, Zenith Elite 670
Marathon (SAR, JSAR), Ollech & Wajs Cobra

I didn't comment yesterday as the listing had gone. With only the one photo shown above to view, rather than the eBay listing, I would not be confident calling this fake. There is a frighteningly good Arabics Evo (with what I have always assumed to be the right font) which is just about perfect. Correct cardinal ticks, 10 tick and date font. Pic below. I try to keep this one under the radar as it's not something I'd like the scammers to be aware of.



On the eBay auction, the date font looks wrong to me so I was surprised to read JacksonStone's comment that the font is different on the Arabics version. I'd never picked that up before. What does look wrong are the seconds marks on the bezel. These look too big to me.



Without more photos, it's difficult to be sure but my strong suspicion is that it's a v1 fake.

_________________

For more information on identifying Breitling replicas, please visit my web site
http://f4buz.com/watches/breitling/fakes/fakes.html

Just to clarify, I wasn't referring to the date font, but the font on the subdials, in response to Tom's comment that the subdial font on the for-sale watch was incorrect. The subdials on the for-sale watch match the subdials on the genuine Arabic dial. The baton and Roman designs have different fonts, sizes and orientations on the subdials.

As far as I am aware, the date font on all three styles is the same, and the date font on the for-sale watch is clearly wrong.

Well I am more confused than ever. Safe to say I would never buy a used Arabics Evo except from someone I knew who had bought it new from an AD.

_________________
SHARKMAN

Gotcha! My mistake.

_________________

For more information on identifying Breitling replicas, please visit my web site
http://f4buz.com/watches/breitling/fakes/fakes.html

It is.