The Breitling Watch Source Forums

I have heard the car analogy many times - usually by Breitling salesmen. But it simply does not hold up.

I have never had a car that needed towing back to the manufacturer on average every 4 years. Or towing to the local garage. Or towing anywhere. And I drive a 23 year old 'classic'.

Maybe my point is that in this century, our expectations on reliability have moved beyond that of our grandparents. Just because Breitling recommends a service every 3 years - does not make it right.

Rob

Yeah, but your car doesn't run constantly, does it? Your car isn't banged against doorframes, walls, nor is it thrown into water, bearing swift temperature changes etc. Most of our grandparents babied their watches. They got it as a present in their youth, maybe wore it on Sundays, never used it during sports activities. Nowadays, we really expect something of our little wrist machines, they have to follow our fast moving lifestyle - nothing to be compared with our grandparents' way to threat their watches.

V.

Service every 4 years would be over 2 billion oscillations of the balance spring - and the lubrication is being provided by about 1/2 ml of oil.

I'm sure we do have different expectations of reliablility than our grandparents, but I think some of us also have different expectations of reliability from one another.

Hi guys, first time poster, long time reader ... let me start off by saying I LOVE (just about) ALL BREITLING's!! Regarding the question at hand, you can't go wrong with either. It all depends on personal preference. In terms of price, the MSRP of the GMT is actually higher than the SuperOcean ... not by much ($50 i think -therefore making it a non-issue when you're spending $$$$), but hardly entry-level despite what others think about the "Colt" label. I too had the same dilemma but ultimately chose the Colt GMT. It was simply based on personal preference and comfort level. The major deciding factor was a 1.5mm difference !! The additional 1.5mm in diameter for the SuperOcean (minuscule on paper) looked much bigger on my wrist and I personally wasn't comfortable with that. Be sure to try them both on at your AD. The Colt GMT was simply a better fit for me. Regardless of which one you decide on, you'll get the same "oooh's and ahhhh's" so don't place too much merit on what others "think" about a particular product line ... pick the one that suits you the best!


Btw, I'd like to bring my Colt GMT in for a cleaning just before the warranty period ends ... does anyone know if Breitling will service your watch for free (i.e. send it off for a nice buffing and cleaning of the parts) if there isn't anything wrong with it just before the 2-yr warranty ends?

Welcome aboard.
If nothing is wrong with the watch, it won't be free of charge.

I'm not sure you guys are using "entry level" in the same way. One seems to be using it as a price point, and Roffensian is afraid other's are associating value, and quality with "entry level". Roffensian, I think you are referring to the negative connotation that goes along with the words "entry level", as in the cheaper or the low end. I think some of us actually mean "entry level" as purely economical cost...you need to at least spend x amount to buy the brand.

entry level Aeromarine Series is for us who have dirty jobbs and live an aktive life's..Navitimer Series is for dinner suit but i love all breitling's

_________________

I was dwelling the same when I got my Colt GMT. I believe (but am not sure) that I have read somewhere on the Breitling website that the Colt is the entry level.....

BUT

When I was getting mine, I could get a SO for 1450EUR (The only reason i didnt get it was because the seller wouldnt accept Paypal) with the Pro II bracelet, but the Colt GMT was 1700EUR with a leather strap... so if the pricing is going to decide entry level..... ofcourse I do realise the prices are not set everywhere but that was the cheapest I found when I was looking to buy one.

I am still in for a SO chrono though, I think thats a great looking watch

_________________
Navitimer, Steelfish, Colt GMT, Aerospace, Chronospace, Chrono Superocean

I am just on my first Ling and I went for the SO.
I considered the SO and the Colt and decided with my monster wrists I needed a bigger watch to not look silly.

My SO came second had with all the boxes, paper etc, is 5yo and only 2 years since overhaul so its immaculate.

The Colt in all its guises is also a lovely watch as well and would also have ticked all my basic boxes I wanted ticked.

I principally wanted a Breitling (which I have wanted for years) but a practical one that I could wear every day and use without worrying about minor marks, getting it wet swiming or in the shower and yes even snorkelling or diving. I also just love the concept of self winding mechanical watches so quartz movements were not high on my list (though I also considered the Aerospace and yes I do get to claim I am a pilot ).

The decision in the end came down to size, I had to put all the original spare links back into the Pro1 bracelet to fit my rather large wrist, and overall I just marginally prefer the simple yet detailed and precise look of the face of the SO. The Aerospace was probably second and the Colt a close third.

The SO also wins bragging rights as just about the most excessively waterproof divers watch out there Do professional divers even go that deep. If I were to ascend from that depth fast enough for the helium escape valve to operate I think I would have more to worry about than a broken watch

Anyway as lots have said, its personal choice, I know people with SO, Colt, Aerospace and C B01 so I could try some without a potentially very expensive trip to an AD so that probably also informed my decision, along with budget. I could have spent more, and probably will in future but He Ho I am happy for now!

Cheers,

_________________
Ian
Ti/Yellow Gold Aerospace

Somewhere along this thread, the comparison became between ALL colts and the SO. Yes, Colts, and quartz colts in particular are generally entry level and "tend" to be cheaper though the GMT is priced at par with the SO at the begining of this thread. So, the argument this is cheaper doesn't hold water. And for a few hundred $$$ more, other models can be had. I doubt a person who drops this kinda money is going to settle for a watch just because it is a few hundred bucks cheaper. Some of the straps cost more. The GMT is an automatic, with a complication, and certainly not an entry level in the Colt range. It is cheaper than the Navitimers, yeah, but we are comparing it to SO's. GMT is comparable in price at most AD's to the SO if not a few $'s higher.

The choice of the GMT for me was mainly size and style combination. I knew very little about the colts going in, so my choice wasn't based on where they fell in the ladder. After trying out a few at the AD, I picked mine up online for much less. My next purchase will probably also be a smaller diameter watch. Some of the larger ranges simply looked unbalanced and funny on a small wrist... One can argue that the choices for those who want small diameter automatic watch is rather limited in the breitling line up and the GMT is a great choice for these peole as it also has an asthetically understated but elegant dial. Cheers!

Very tough choice indeed

_________________


- This is Ghost Rider requesting a fly-by. - Negative Ghost Rider. The pattern is full.

I have both. A Colt GMT which I bought in Oct. 2005 and a Superocean Steelfish I bought 2 weeks ago.

I like both very well. Although I can understand why the Colt is called an entry level Breitling it is a superb watch. Mine has kept perfect time since 2005 and has never had to wound since the day I bought it. Call it whatever you want but it is a workhorse and it bears the Breitling name and logo so we know it is a damn good watch.

The Superocean is big and beautiful. I have not worn it much since I bought it but I am sure it will be just as good as my Colt, only bigger!!

Now as far as being "looked down" on by others, or being an entry level watch - I pretty much don't care. I do not wear suits or dress up for much of anything. I don't need some of these more expensive, elaborate watches. Nice to look at but I don't need something like that.

I have friends who have Rolex's, Tags, etc. but people always like my Colt GMT better.

Agree that price is one of many factors but really as one poster above said, if you are looking to invest in a good watch a few hundred dollars will not dissuade you.

Personally for me size is a big consideration as I have small wrists. Also, it depends on what you are looking for - I live in Africa and travel a lot, to Europe, other African countries, etc. The GMT just made sense based upon size, utility, and ruggedness without being so obvious a valuable watch I would be uncomfortable wearing it while traveling solo in large African cities and the backcountry.

_________________
If you reject the food, ignore the customs, fear the religion and avoid the people, you might better stay home. ~James Michener

COLT GMT