The Breitling Watch Source Forums

its a very nice and clean example and supposedly serviced piece , sliderule ring could have been better though
but i dont know why there's so many bids in the beginning already , there's more than 1 person bidding with 2 quite new bidders

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

true, some fishy bidding on there early in the auction!

I didnt mean to say it was fishy , will be interesting to see where this one ends up pricewise

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

Oky, gotcha:). Btw if you look at the caseback, why is the "806" marking not in one line or is it always like that?

nice watch, have seen prices fpr 806s go quite high during the last weeks, maybe due to the rather meager supply.

the model ref. is quite strange, have not seen such unaligned numbers on an 806 ?

Rene, Kurt & others, did you see other examples like this one ?

I have seen examples where the ref number is less than perfectly aligned
here's a few that I took pics of.
so the 'not quite aligned 806' does not cause any alarm bells to ring with me

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

the minor alignment issues are quite frequent, though this one stretches the envelope a little, QC must have been asleep :

monday morning shakey hands

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

This is one of the very rare early Navitimer from 1953 with small pearls and Breitling shock, Breitling 924th where the serial number by mistake. printed on it .. 824th has taken what it would be correct.

It behaves exactly the opposite in fact, as will some clever sham Breitling top experts to fool us. . Not the "8" has been printed incorrectly by mistake, but the "9" is wrong.

First All of these very early Navitimer, which have so far emerged, have an unmistakable common feature, which shows that they were not produced later confused with serial numbers, as some of the above-mentioned semi-experts. You do not have any Incabloc shock protection, like the later models, but the Breitling proprietary shock protection "Breitling shock".
In addition, all of these very early Navitimer another distinctive characteristic which differentiates it from all produced after August 1955 Navitimern. In all Navitimern from March 1955, roughly from the serial number 845xxx is right next to the bridge always "unadjusted seventeen 17 JEWELS", as shown in the photo below. This is not in the early Navitimern prior to 1955.

The cases were made exactly to the size of the 14-linigen Venus caliber 178 designed and built. The later in 1954 specifically for the requirements of AOPA USA only built 13 ligne Valjoux 72 caliber therefore needed to balance a wide ring gear support, so the latter can never be the first Navitimer in the case have been. Of the 1953 with Venus 178 was certainly the first one.

of course !!!

why didnt I see that before !!


you have convinced me , thanks

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

And since this watch has 93 beads, I cant really call them 'small'
there are 125,124,120,98 bead bezel preceding this one

so I date this one to '59-'63 based on bead count

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=36494

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

For me, its totally irrelevant what one Dracha says.

Only this is important: http://i-am-spamming!.de/index.php?pag ... eadID=2201

thanks for that , made me smile

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

For EVERYONE ELSE, it is irrelevant what YOU say