The Breitling Watch Source Forums

_________________
S. Craig Bergsma

Craig Explain what's wrong with this watch. Looks very similar to the watch in Richter's book on page 17 except the lugs are different. There is a one pusher on the same page that has almost the same case and similar lugs.

_________________
"A man with one watch knows what time it is; a man with two watches is never quite sure."

Way too early to have that signed bridge on the movement. I think the 'Breitling' on the dial has been added to an otherwise original dial. The uneducated often miss out that some of the models from the 1930's weren't signed at all and had no reference numbers. Adding them just ruins an otherwise decent piece.

From what I read in 1935 both the bridge and dial were signed. The following is an article on it.


Brietling did not label its brand on dials or movements before 1928 due to copyright issues between Leon/Willy Breitling and their ancestors (father/grandfather). Due to the conflict, when they started labelling 'Breitling' in 1928, 'Montbrillant' was also used along with 'no name' dial and movements, and remained in existence until 1939. The webpage and paragraph below, although in French which I translated using 'Google Translate', explains the interchangeable usage of the names/models 'Brietling' and 'Montbrillant' between 1935 and 1939 (http://www.invenitetfecit.com/modeles/p ... tling.html):

"It was around 1935, it seems, appear the first markings on the dials and movements. You can find the brand "Breitling" but also the brand "Montbrillant". It also seems that there was within the company Breitling some hesitation as to what to call the company. Montbrillant the word is regularly used since installation in La Chaux de Fonds. From 1934 to 1936 he even supplant the Breitling name in numerous commercials. But in 1937 the brand Breitling resume definitely over, although occasionally one can find the brand Montbrillant until 1939. It should be noted that only one advertisement in 1935, shows a dial chronograph wristwatch where the word appears Montbrillant. All others, both in 1935 than 1936, show dials unsigned

_________________
"A man with one watch knows what time it is; a man with two watches is never quite sure."

Issues:
1) Breitling signature appears to be added to an old dial.
2) Venus cal 150 from this era had a script signature (or no signature) on the chrono bridge. The bridge on this one is from a much later Venus.
3) No reference number on the back.

_________________
S. Craig Bergsma

I have had many original Brietling's older than 1939 and none of them have had signed bridges. It also doesn't explain why they continued to use unsigned bridges much later as on some ref 769 Chronomat's.

The 30's and 40's are by far the easiest of the Breitlings to fake which is why it is often wiser to ask for advice from those with years of hands on experience and not to rely on reference material when making a buying decision. Not that this was the case here Rick but for those uneducated that might read this later.
Those skilled in the art of deception also use these wonderful books we use to help guide us against us also. They too know that in the majority of cases, dial manipulation is all that is needed to fool someone. The Argentine dial industry players know back in the day many manufactures used the same dial designs and just artfully add a Breitling and turn a $50 watch into a $750 watch that someone thinks they just got a steal on until someone breaks the news.
Players like Craig and Vintage who have had a multitude of the older Breitlings pass through their HANDS are the ones we go to for confirmation and not solely rely on reference material. I have said for a long time that buying online is the absolute worst way to buy a watch. The only true way to inspect a vintage watch is to have it in your hands. Period!

Wayne