The Breitling Watch Source Forums

Hi all,

I've just bought this at auction in the UK, and I think it's "right" but would appreciate the opinions of more experienced and knowledgeable fanatics!
It has a different dial to any I've seen, with the brand above the lower sub dial instead of below the upper, is this unusual? When it arrived the case is in pretty good condition, but had years of crud around the crown and pushers, and the bracelet was evil, but a few turns and she's running, keeping perfect time, and the chrono is working, although sticking slightly at about 34secs. I've since replaced the cracked glass and filthy bracelet, cleaned the case up (but will not polish it), and it could do with a service.
I would welcome any opinions or suggestions!

sorry, but this picture is pretty useless. please post decent pics, including inner/outer caseback and movement. 460xxx would probably be a bit earlier even, though there are no yearly records b4 1944.

apologies, realised how poor pics were when it posted, have posted a few more I've just taken

More photos

If someone is going to rebrand a Chronographe Suisse as a Breitling they should probably remove all of the original name from the dial.......

Sorry, not a Breitling.

Hi Roff, I've had a colleague of mine who has been a watchmaker for almost 50 years scrutinise it, and believe me, he'd like nothing better than to take the mickey out of me for buying a dud, and he can't find a problem with it. We've looked at it under a microscope and cannot find any evidence of tampering at all to the dial or anywhere else. Everything you'd see on a seventy year old watch in terms of wear and corrosion, ageing and motling are there, and it's right. Even the filth I had to scrape off and the smell of it (disgusting I know, believe me!) is what you'd expect from a watch that hasn't been particularly cared for in the last few years. It has not been faked, manufactured or manipulated in any way, which is why I am intrigued.

Don't get me wrong, I have the upmost respect and bow down to your extensive and vastly superior knowledge and experience in the Breitling world, I could not have hoped for a better responder to my post, despite not being the response I wanted. I appreciate you have not seen the watch in the flesh, and have to rely on small and very amateur photography, but I must disagree with your opinion.

I have tried looking in every source I can think of to see the same dial, and haven't. If there were chronologs for this period I would be assured, but as records for this period are sketchy at best and can't be relied upon even for consecutive serial numbers, I'm not holding my breath. However I can't write off everything else based on the legend of "chronographe" writen on the dial, as a manufacturer would now write "Automatic" or "200m Water Resistant". As this watch was made seventy years or so ago, and there are no sources that give every dial style or finish made, unlike today, I can only go on the evidence of my own eyes, my more experienced colleague, and my gut feeling.

Also, if you were to fake a watch, you wouldn't go to all the trouble of making everything about the watch "right", even down to ageing the dial, motling the laquer, lightly tarnishing the movement and hands, having the 45 minute counter on the Venus 170, getting the right style of hands and crown, and then miss something on the most visible part of the watch. If you removed Suisse, you'd take off Chronograph. You'd then probably stick it on ebay where someone can only see it up close after they've paid. (Sadly there are plenty of others). This was poorly listed by an auction house in the middle of nowhere, in which there were quite a few items apparently from the same source who it appears was an elderly veteran (who I'm guessing has passed on).

I can't prove anything but all that I can see assures me of its authenticity. As such, I would appreciate any pointers from anyone on being able to tell either way. If there is any source that can state the matter catagorically I would be most grateful.

You need to seriously post better, larger, pics for an honest opinion. These early models are the easiest to turn into something else because the movements and backs are seldom stamped with the manufacturers name. The location of the Breitling script on the dial should give even a novice pause when he see's that. You just don't find the Breitling name there on vintage pieces. The fact that watch has the correct patina means nothing since the donor watch is of the correct age so everything else would look correct. I would look carefully at the Breitling script through a loupe to determine if it's aging is the same as the rest of the dial.

Most likely the Breitling name was added to the dial many years ago. Regardless of how it got there, Breitling NEVER signed its name on the lower section of an up/down Venus 170 dial. It is not a Breitling.

_________________
S. Craig Bergsma

well, we have a pretty unanimous position here.

not only did I never see a Breitling script at 6, why would Breitling put "chronographe" on this dial, something they never did on any of the thousands of chronographs we have seen ?

we have seen fakes that seemed to be decades old and had been in families for generations - so this probably is not a recent fake - current fakers would have added the incorrect logo engravings on bridge and caseback.

Wonder if this is the same watch. I don't really remember and the forum pics are removed.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Breitling-Chronograph-with-Venus-170-in-GWO-/111109898167?pt=UK_Jewelery_Watches_Watches_MensWatches_GL&hash=item19deaa7fb7

From memory it's similar, may well be the same.

think it is the same watch.

had another version listed before, quite a bit of creative writing:
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Stunning-Vint ... 19dea52603

goes well with that rather self important and slightly delusional blah in another thread:

My appologies for my bluntness..... However...

So the most knowlegeable people on the globe tell the OP its a piece of cr@p... The OP doesnt believe the combined 500+ years of knowledge but instead believes h is watchmaker ...

This is the moment i ask myself... "Why bother" .. I am sitting in the sun, good glass of wine, kids playing in the grass and you have to defend your opinions on a subject very few know more about than gathered here ? FI

To the OP
No matter what you believe or who told you you, I put my money on the lot here any day... And i have spend loads, and prevented spending good money on crap pieces because of the advice given here

Now i am going back to my wine, cheese and kids

Rgds
Rene

_________________
"I spent most of my money on Booze, Breitling and Boats. The rest I wasted" - mostly Elmore Leonard

Based on his description, the pics and the story of replacing the crystal and the sticking chrono which are also mentioned in this thread, I'd say so.

let me add some pics of that fake again, as member emergency10 preferred to remove them and the thread is quite worthless without those.

lug design is inconsistent with both the Breitling ref. 176 and the ref. 178, btw.

funny how somebody who "sells around a million £'s worth of Breitling a year" finds it necessary to cheat and lie in his listings and can go from "Don't get me wrong, I have the upmost (probably meant utmost?) respect and bow down to your extensive and vastly superior knowledge and experience in the Breitling world, I could not have hoped for a better responder to my post, despite not being the response I wanted" to "If you could read I didn't ask for anyone to tell me it was right, just whether they had seen similar before. Didn't mind your opinions, just the arrogance with which they were expressed".

Hope that whoever thinks about buying this "Breitling Chronograph with Venus 170 in GWO" from ebay seller "fizzfuzzpuppy" will do some research and find this thread.