The Breitling Watch Source Forums

I recently bought this timepiece. I took it to a local authorised Breitling dealer and they had a look at it. They said everything inside looked authentic to the period and it could be genuine, but to be certain it would have to be sent to the factory for restoration. The winding knob is not original. There is a 6 digit number on the inside as well, but I do not have photograph of it.

The seller was a belgian gentleman who said that the movement is based on Venus 220 and that it is a circa 1960 model.

EDIT: The serial number in the caseback would seem to indicate year 1955 ... thanks, Roffensian

Any comments?

I'll need to check the book and see if I can find anything similar, it all looks like Breitling (except the crown), but at first glance I am far from convinced that the caseback matches the rest of the watch.

If you have the serial number from inside the caseback that might allow me to date the caseback. Obviously can't comment on the movement without seeing it.

Yes, I agree.. the caseback doesn't match. I'll pm you the serial number. There's a slightly similar look on this watch:

Sorry - didn't get a chance on the weekend and am travelling for business this week, but will check when I get home again!!

OK, apologies for the delay, but here we go.

2917 is listed in the Richter book - there are two entries, one described as "round case, central second, gold plated" and one descrived as "round case, central secod, very flat, waterproof".

Based on that there doesn't appear to be much of a problem with the watch. I can't find pictures of that model, but it is certainly consistent with watches of the early to mid 50s - and we know that the serial works for that.

The Venus 220 claim may be correct - again it's the right vintage, although it's not one of the base movements that you usually see - without a picture of the movement we're speculating.

The caseback still bothers me a bit, I'm not an expert by any means, but I didn't think that anything except the script form of the name was used until the 60s. The back itself may be correct given the comment that the model is waterproof.