The Breitling Watch Source Forums

I recently bought a 2005 Super Ocean. It has a plain crown which i think is incorrect, and certainly looks wrong to me? So, my question for the experts is am i right to think it should be a signed crown, any suggestions on sourcing one. The watch is i believe '65.

Thanks in advance for any advice.

Jamie, we want to see more of this watch, not just the caseback & crown,
one of the greatest Breitlings ever, for me at least.

here's a pic of the correct crown, diameter is 6.45 and it is about 3.75 mm thick,
watchco might have similar crowns ?

Thanks Fred for the instant info, So the crown should be signed, i knew you would have an example for comparison!!
I will try Watchco as you suggest, they were very good on the Chrono Matic hands i recently asked you guys about.
A further picture, it needs a bit of love and attention, including the crown replacement, but all operates correctly. I think it's going to get a black Nato strap whick i've seen on others.

great piece, PLEASE do not overrestore it.

Nato or Tropic fit, though I love it on a well worn (non period correct) tan or brown OEM calf.

Great pictures Fred,
I'm also not a fan of over restored watches, so we will go steady on that and hopefully wind up with something that looks as good as your ones.

I can't see your crown well enough to make an assesment.

I would say that I think this came with both signed and unsigned crowns - I have certainly seen unsigned ones. As long as the shape matches the adverts then it's possibly correct.

Slight dilemma for me now, i think the first picture shows it fairly clearly. It's the correct shape i would say, just no 'B' on it, i'll see how i get on finding a signed one anyway, then at least i have the option.

Every one I've seen over the last 15 years that was 100% correct has had a signed crown. For the period when this watch was made 99% of the Breitling models had a signed crown and I can't think of any chronographs that didn't.

Always happy to be proved wrong Paul. I do agree that most crowns in this period you would expect to be signed. I have seen plenty of these over the years and if the crown was the correct shape it wouldn't worry me if it was unsigned. Just my personal observations though.

What I can say from the two adverts I show is that there certainly - to my eye - looks to be two different shaped crowns that are correct for this watch.


Here is one with an unsigned crown.



and here is a signed crown.

http://watchestobuy.com/images/Breitlin ... ntageb.JPG

Both watches look pretty clean to me.

Here is another unsigned one.



The more rounded crown was also used on the second model 2005.

A signed version.
Unsigned version.

http://www.swisswatches.co.uk/watch/498 ... per-ocean/

I think that's just a case of unsigned crowns being used as replacements over the years. Show me anything officially Breitling, and not a reseller, with an unsigned crown on a ref 2005 and maybe I'll change my opinion but I've had a couple of 2005's from their original owners (one ran a diving school in the Orkney's if I remember correctly) and they both had signed crowns. If I currently had a 2005 now with an unsigned crown I'd immediately look for a signed crown to replace it with. I think the 806 crown could be a close replacement and they come up regularly on ebay.