# Old vs New aerospace



## Raye (Oct 27, 2011)

Hi,

May i know what is the diferences between the before 2009/2010 aerospace and the newest aerospace? 

2009
Lume indices
Cleaner dial

Newest
Striped dial
lume indics replace by numbers

Any other things i missed out? is there any differences to the back light?

Still considering which one to purchase...... Up for comments!


----------



## Lilac1 (May 6, 2011)

As much as I'm a sucker for the old breitling designs, the old aerospace was too plain for my tastes. When I was at my dealers the other day, we were talking about breitling pricing and he held up an old version grey dial aerospace, saying :"Can you imagine paying good money for THIS"?


----------



## ffeelliixx (May 22, 2007)

Lilac1 said:


> As much as I'm a sucker for the old breitling designs, the old aerospace was too plain for my tastes. When I was at my dealers the other day, we were talking about breitling pricing and he held up an old version grey dial aerospace, saying :"Can you imagine paying good money for THIS"?


I dig those old and grey Aerospaces.


----------



## ffeelliixx (May 22, 2007)

Raye said:


> Hi,
> 
> May i know what is the diferences between the before 2009/2010 aerospace and the newest aerospace?
> 
> ...


I've owned both models:



















I find the digital display to be far more legible on the new "pinstripe" Aerospace compared to the display on the older Avantage which I found to be very faint. I also prefer the looks of the newer model.

I don't recall there being a difference in the back light between models.


----------



## DDD3333 (Sep 11, 2011)

ffeelliixx said:


> I dig those old and grey Aerospaces.


So do I - as does the guy behind another Breitling forum who sports one as his beater.

That said, I was just at the airport today and agree that the newer version looks great!

...and really, I can't tell you how many times I have been in an AD to have him hold up his own valuable merchandise and ask me 'why pay good money for this?'

Right.


----------



## Lilac1 (May 6, 2011)

DDD3333 said:


> So do I - as does the guy behind another Breitling forum who sports one as his beater.
> 
> That said, I was just at the airport today and agree that the newer version looks great!
> 
> ...


To be fair, we were discussing my forthcoming purchase of a somewhat more expensive watch, and we somehow derailed into breitlings design evolution.

But perhaps for ADs in bangkok, a $10,000 sale is equal to a $3,500 sale.


----------



## Raye (Oct 27, 2011)

Breitling Aerospace Silver Dial Mens Watch E7936210-G606TI
Breitling Professional Aerospace Mens Watch E7936210-G682TI

Hi,

May i know what is the different between these 2 variant?


Mod edit: Links to grey market dealer removed.


----------



## DDD3333 (Sep 11, 2011)

Lilac1

"But perhaps for ADs in bangkok, a $10,000 sale is equal to a $3,500 sale. 
Oh snap!


----------



## ffeelliixx (May 22, 2007)

Raye said:


> Breitling Aerospace Silver Dial Mens Watch E7936210-G606TI
> Breitling Professional Aerospace Mens Watch E7936210-G682TI
> 
> Hi,
> ...


Good question. They have different model numbers. I have no idea what the difference is.


----------



## O2AFAC67 (Feb 8, 2006)

Raye said:


> Breitling Aerospace Silver Dial Mens Watch E7936210-G606TI
> Breitling Professional Aerospace Mens Watch E7936210-G682TI
> 
> Hi,
> ...


The model numbers you provided are from a grey market dealer. The complete and correct model number for the first example is E7936210/G606. The E indicates titanium, the 79 is caliber B79 SuperQuartz, the 3 is COSC certified, the 62 is case geometry and the 10 also indicates titanium case. G606 indicates the silver color dial option. The added "T1" is a grey market dealer designation for their own use, perhaps indicating Pro II bracelet option. The G682 dial color as in the second example is known as "Stratus Silver" and is perhaps slightly different or simply a newer version of the silver dial. My reference material only goes through the year 2009 so I can't say with certainty because only the G606 silver dial is mentioned in my material (along with blue, black, titanium, and slate dials options). A call to your area service rep at BUSA (if you're in the U.S.) may provide an answer to your question. Hope this helps... 
Best,
Ron

Edit: After going back and seeing ffeellixx's pics, I suspect the G606 is the plain silver dial and the G682 is the later (2010) striped silver dial. Take a look at the pics and see which you prefer.


----------



## Raye (Oct 27, 2011)

O2AFAC67 said:


> The model numbers you provided are from a grey market dealer. The complete and correct model number for the first example is E7936210/G606. The E indicates titanium, the 79 is caliber B79 SuperQuartz, the 3 is COSC certified, the 62 is case geometry and the 10 also indicates titanium case. G606 indicates the silver color dial option. The added "T1" is a grey market dealer designation for their own use, perhaps indicating Pro II bracelet option. The G682 dial color as in the second example is known as "Stratus Silver" and is perhaps slightly different or simply a newer version of the silver dial. My reference material only goes through the year 2009 so I can't say with certainty because only the G606 silver dial is mentioned in my material (along with blue, black, titanium, and slate dials options). A call to your area service rep at BUSA (if you're in the U.S.) may provide an answer to your question. Hope this helps...
> Best,
> Ron
> 
> Edit: After going back and seeing ffeellixx's pics, I suspect the G606 is the plain silver dial and the G682 is the later (2010) striped silver dial. Take a look at the pics and see which you prefer.


Really appreciate your effort to go all out for me! thanks bro! appreciate it!


----------



## Captaincarlos (Jun 10, 2014)

ffeelliixx said:


> I've owned both models:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I agree with you feelixx, I have the white certifie in the picture and the digital is really faint. I was wondering about the strap size on that one. Have you swapped the bracelet for a strap? I looks like a 22mm, but I thought I had heard the aerospace had a 20mm model.


----------



## ffeelliixx (May 22, 2007)

Captaincarlos said:


> I agree with you feelixx, I have the white certifie in the picture and the digital is really faint. I was wondering about the strap size on that one. Have you swapped the bracelet for a strap? I looks like a 22mm, but I thought I had heard the aerospace had a 20mm model.


That Avantage model is 22mm.



The above older classic Aerospace is 20mm.

sent from my Note 3


----------



## Captaincarlos (Jun 10, 2014)

Thanks, I've ordered both the Olive Green and Red/White/Blue Nato strap, I'll get some pics up as soon as I fit them. I think Natos are really cool, that's one thing I do agree with Archie Luxury on. 



 (Explicit Language Alert)


----------



## Novacastrian (Dec 22, 2009)

It's interesting that the new Aerospace looks much more like the older Avantage than the "tuxedo" model it replaces. To my mind the tuxedo was overly fussy. I much prefer the cleaner lines of the older Avantage.


----------



## ffeelliixx (May 22, 2007)

Novacastrian said:


> It's interesting that the new Aerospace looks much more like the older Avantage than the "tuxedo" model it replaces. To my mind the tuxedo was overly fussy. I much prefer the cleaner lines of the older Avantage.


I agree. The Aerospace should be a utilitarian design. But I think the old 40mm size makes a lot more sense than the new 44mm case.

I also don't get why Breitling insists in using an old antiquated movement in the Aerospace. A Casio, cheap as it is, is much easier to operate and a better utility watch.

For an Ana-digi, I switched from my Aerospaces to the Hamilton Flight Timer, which (excluding accuracy) in my opinion has the better movement. I also prefer the Hamilton's 40mm case.

sent from my Note 3


----------



## SCD (May 4, 2009)

Aerospace, ' Avantage, ' Evo


----------



## Captaincarlos (Jun 10, 2014)

ffeelliixx said:


> I agree. The Aerospace should be a utilitarian design. But I think the old 40mm size makes a lot more sense than the new 44mm case.
> 
> I also don't get why Breitling insists in using an old antiquated movement in the Aerospace. A Casio, cheap as it is, is much easier to operate and a better utility watch.
> 
> ...










I agree with you again, My Ham Flight Timer has taken wrist time from the aero. The count down bezel was the selling point for me. How does it compare with your sky racer feelix?


----------



## publandlord (Aug 15, 2006)

SCD said:


> Aerospace, ' Avantage, ' Evo
> View attachment 1537920
> 
> View attachment 1537924


Should be "good, fatter, fattest". Totally pointless upsizing, and the readability/clarity is now worse. Way to go, BreitBling!


----------



## SCD (May 4, 2009)

Just to play devil's advocate a little...weight may be as much worth considering as size. Sized for my 7" wrist, the Hamilton Flight Timer on bracelet comes in at 162 grams, and the Aerospace Evo comes in at 95 grams. Also...the Evo is significantly less tall on the wrist. I hear you though, the original Aerospace is just about a perfect design.


----------



## ffeelliixx (May 22, 2007)

Captaincarlos said:


> View attachment 1538471
> 
> I agree with you again, My Ham Flight Timer has taken wrist time from the aero. The count down bezel was the selling point for me. How does it compare with your sky racer feelix?


The Flight Timer doesn't run interference on my Skyracer or any of my automatics, so it's hard to compare them. I only wear the Flight Timer when I need the extra functionality. Right now, I use the Flight Timer primarily as a travel watch.

sent from my Note 3


----------



## ffeelliixx (May 22, 2007)

SCD said:


> Just to play devil's advocate a little...weight may be as much worth considering as size. Sized for my 7" wrist, the Hamilton Flight Timer on bracelet comes in at 162 grams, and the Aerospace Evo comes in at 95 grams. Also...the Evo is significantly less tall on the wrist. I hear you though, the original Aerospace is just about a perfect design.


Yes, the Flight Timer is a little stubby, but at 40mm, it's not too bad.

The problem with the original Aerospace is no backlight, and I hate that there is no constant date display when switching functions the Aerospaces.

If they made an Aerospace with a constant date display, I would buy it in place of the Flight Timer.

sent from my Note 3


----------



## AvantGardeTime (Aug 23, 2013)

The Aerospace has a Thermocompensated quartz movement. The Hamilton does not. End of story.


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk


----------



## AvantGardeTime (Aug 23, 2013)

ffeelliixx said:


> I agree. The Aerospace should be a utilitarian design. But I think the old 40mm size makes a lot more sense than the new 44mm case.
> 
> I also don't get why Breitling insists in using an old antiquated movement in the Aerospace. A Casio, cheap as it is, is much easier to operate and a better utility watch.
> 
> ...


Sorry but you sound like you don't know much about the ETA thermocompensated movement in the Aerospace. Sure, I would like to see a solar charging option but the Swiss have been very slow/reluctant to do so in their high end quartz pieces.

I have owned several Citizen Eco Drive U600/680 solar radio controlled ana digis. They have far more functions than the Aerospace, the movements have 5 separate motors, 4 years power reserve, 2 alarms, world time and even a customizable time zone in 15 min increments.

But even with all the technological sophistication they bring to the table, the Citizens fail miserable in the dial layout dept too cluttered, small LCD readouts and poor eegonomics to switch between modes.

To me the Aerospace is as close to perfection one gets to a practical, comfortable, great looking high end quartz ana digi. I get compliments on mine all the time. I am still amazed at the reaction this watch causes even among non watch people.

Casios are generally nasty looking blobs of resin. They have good movements, they are tough but they are also aesthetically challenging.

Love my 2013 42mm Aerospace, the last of the great ones in the series:










Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk


----------



## AvantGardeTime (Aug 23, 2013)

SCD said:


> Just to play devil's advocate a little...weight may be as much worth considering as size. Sized for my 7" wrist, the Hamilton Flight Timer on bracelet comes in at 162 grams, and the Aerospace Evo comes in at 95 grams. Also...the Evo is significantly less tall on the wrist. I hear you though, the original Aerospace is just about a perfect design.


I wanted to like the Flight timer when they first came out, but for a watch retailing in the mid $1000s I wasn't impressed.

The Hamilton is cheaper and it shows. The aesthetic not quite to my liking but on bracelet these are more palatable. I have seen them used in the $600 which should make for a great beater. It is a decent watch but it isn't an Aerospace substitute. Not even close. They are only offered in steel. There is no Ti option. The aesthetic of the Aerospace is unsurpassed IMHO. Sadly I think Breitling has started to compromise on that with the EVO which to me is a step in the wrong direction. Don't get me started on the skeleton hour hand....

Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk


----------



## SCD (May 4, 2009)

Gosh...I like all of these watches very much. I think they're all great designs...really. The Hamilton is an amazing value relative to the Breitlings. The sheen of its black dial and the glint that comes off the applied numbers is cool. The whole design and very smart and usable.


----------



## AvantGardeTime (Aug 23, 2013)

ffeelliixx said:


> I've owned both models:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I also owned a pre-2011 Aerospace with white dial and thought the lume was a bit brighter in that model vs the 2011-13 pinstripped versions.

Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk


----------



## AvantGardeTime (Aug 23, 2013)

ffeelliixx said:


> Yes, the Flight Timer is a little stubby, but at 40mm, it's not too bad.
> 
> The problem with the original Aerospace is no backlight, and I hate that there is no constant date display when switching functions the Aerospaces.
> 
> ...


I agree with this. I feel the top display is otherwise wasted when in regular time mode.

Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk


----------



## AvantGardeTime (Aug 23, 2013)

SCD said:


> Gosh...I like all of these watches very much. I think they're all great designs...really. The Hamilton is an amazing value relative to the Breitlings. The sheen of its black dial and the glint that comes off the applied numbers is cool. The whole design and very smart and usable.


Its OK for what it is. But to me the watch looked and felt cheap at the AD. Again, I really wanted to like it.

The Aerospace is in a totally different category. It may not have all the bells and whistles of cheaper ana digis but everything about it is just very well conceived. Not a perfect watch but very, very close.

Another high ana digi that I would consider is the Chopard Historique du Monaco Time Attack MF, also sporting a thermocompensated quartz ETA ana digi movement, slightly modified.

Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk


----------



## AvantGardeTime (Aug 23, 2013)

SCD said:


> Aerospace, ' Avantage, ' Evo
> View attachment 1537920
> 
> View attachment 1537924


Nice but why own 3 of the same watch?

Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk


----------



## SCD (May 4, 2009)

The main reason is because I want to. Beyond that, they're not the same watch. Why own more than one watch? I have no good reason whatsoever.


----------



## AvantGardeTime (Aug 23, 2013)

SCD said:


> The main reason is because I want to. Beyond that, they're not the same watch. Why own more than one watch? I have no good reason whatsoever.


I was being sarcastic. I know they are not quite the same as each represents a different generation although the theme is the same.

I am intrigued by the new B50 Cockpit but 7200 USD retail for a quartz, in house and all, is tough to swallow.

Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk


----------



## SCD (May 4, 2009)

All good...cheers. 

I don't think I'll be getting a Cockpit...the price is high...it's very big, and aesthetically it hits a lot of the same notes as the Evo, only more bulky. I like watches of all sizes, but for me going over 43mm isn't necessarily a deal-breaker but it's pushing my limits. B50 looks like a cool watch though...it'll be fun to see one. I think the new X-33 may be more interesting.


----------



## AvantGardeTime (Aug 23, 2013)

The size of the B50 bothers me as well and don't care for the conpass bezel. If the movement shows up in a future iteration of the Aerospace I will be very interested but doubt that will happen.

The EVO is OK but dont like the skeleton hour hand, the big numerals and the non slanted bracelet design. Aside from the crystal not sure if the EVO is such a drammatic improvement over the 42mm model.


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk


----------



## SCD (May 4, 2009)

No I don't see the Evo as an improvement over the Avantage either. The skeleton hour hand isn't great, particularly around 11:00 and 1:00 when it's somewhat obscured by the shiny applied wings logo...it takes an extra beat to find the hour hand on the dial. But I do like the elimination of the chimney, and the layout of the dial. The larger high gloss numbers obscure the digital windows with the matte black dial, so that at a glance it looks more like a traditional analog watch than any previous designs. To me the proportions of the dial and the case are very nice. It's a totally different appeal than with the first Aeros, but I like it alot...just in a different way. 

I wish they'd gotten rid of the slanting bracelet altogether. I also wish they'd gone back to the bi-directional bezel. The one-directional bezel really only makes sense for diving, and nobody's going to dive with an Aerospace. The original Aero had bi-, which is easy enough to be actually useable, and the all the later models are one-.


----------



## ffeelliixx (May 22, 2007)

AvantGardeTime said:


> Sorry but you sound like you don't know much about the ETA thermocompensated movement in the Aerospace.


I know enough to know that it doesn't overcome the fundamental design flaws of the Aerospace.

Thermocompensated quartz is fine, but it doesn't make the date appear on the dial when I'm using the chrono.


----------



## binmath88 (Jan 2, 2014)

The last iteration of Aerospace Advantage had the pinstripe design on the dial (the preceding ones being plain) and now the EVO is plain, so we can expect future EVO models with the pinstripe (or other similar) design(s)?

Kept beside the Advantage, the EVO did look like a more modern and evolved watch, though I have to say, I do like the pinstripe design.


----------



## AvantGardeTime (Aug 23, 2013)

I think the pinstripe gives the watch more pizzaz but likewise, I like the simplicity of the plain dial as well.


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk


----------



## yankeexpress (Apr 7, 2013)

Titanium


----------



## Kid_A (Mar 2, 2014)

these green digital letters are brutal


yankeexpress said:


> Titanium


----------



## yankeexpress (Apr 7, 2013)

Kid_A said:


> these green digital letters are brutal


Just like an aircraft instrument panel.

Actually, In some light it's a more yellow shade:


----------



## AvantGardeTime (Aug 23, 2013)

I like that Momentum better than the Hamilton Flight timer.


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk


----------



## Beechparty (Apr 10, 2013)

AvantGardeTime said:


> I like that Momentum better than the Hamilton Flight timer.
> 
> Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk


Agreed, but even the aesthetics of the Momentum don't come close to the Aerospace


----------



## AvantGardeTime (Aug 23, 2013)

dittyfour said:


> Agreed, but even the aesthetics of the Momentum don't come close to the Aerospace


No question my friend. I feel that in this segment (High end quartz ana digi) few to none match the aesthetic and form factor of the Aerospace.

I feel the Aerospace is a future classic in the making.

Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk


----------



## ffeelliixx (May 22, 2007)

yankeexpress said:


> Titanium


Wow. That's really cool. Sapphire crystal?


----------



## yankeexpress (Apr 7, 2013)

ffeelliixx said:


> Wow. That's really cool. Sapphire crystal?


Sapphire is optional

http://www.momentumwatch.com/media/specifications/Format4_SpecSheet.pdf


----------



## ffeelliixx (May 22, 2007)

Although it is clearly derivative, I find the Momentum's design favorable to the Aerospace's in a few ways. The Momentum's bezel is more attractive, and I prefer the Momentum's lack of chrome on the dial. Of course, the finish won't be as nice on the Momentum, but finish should be secondary on a utility watch like this. 

That people are eager to pay 10x as much for the Aerospace speaks volumes to the power of marketing and prestige. 

Too bad the Momentum doesn't have a constant date. I would probably buy one if it did.


----------



## AvantGardeTime (Aug 23, 2013)

I disagree. 

Breitling's marketing and country of origin weighed very little on my purchasing decision.

I actually prefer Japanese high end watches, Grand Seikos et al to most Swiss Made offerings.

The Aerospace is a darn good watch that clearly stands on its merits.



Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk


----------



## pantagruel (May 30, 2010)

How do you guys feel about the Certina DS Multi-8? In my opinion it is the cleanest looking ana-digi I have seen.


----------



## SCD (May 4, 2009)

The Certina is a beauty. It also wears very big for a 42mm watch. It's slightly tall...fits on the wrist like an IWC 3717 Pilot Chrono. Pilot watch gets used for two different kinds of watches....the German tradition of the analog watches, and the newer multifunction ana-digis. I particularly like this watch because it's a bit of both in one package.


----------



## Brian Hatton (Jul 7, 2013)

Here's another variation 2010, note the 24 hour and outlined markers.

The date is always displayed I prefer with seconds or you can have the day or month if you want.










Sent from teh interweb thingy


----------

