I was under the impression that the flat link was introduced in the mid/late 1950s, but I stumbled upon the below 1951 brochure the other day. Granted the Seamaster Calendar case looks more like a 2757 than a 2627, which I thought was introduced closer to 1953 than 1951.

Either way, is anyone aware of a 7077 being used in the early 1950s? If so, when was it introduced? And was it introduced only in gold to start or also steel?

I’m guessing the one advertised is similar to the 18k ones seen in this thread. I’m curious if the split buckle type shown in this thread may have been part of this early set of flat link bracelets.

Unrelated, I also found the reference number on the Seamaster Calendar interesting as they must have changed the 7101 reference to 2757. And the crown in the second photo surely wasn’t used in actual production?

Look forward to hearing thoughts.

 

That reference number is specifically for gold watches in that catalog, which is not always (frequently not?) the same as the case number at that time.

Tom

 

The Ref. 7101 with gold case and bracelet was Fr 1550 in 1951, with inflation that is Fr 15,300 in 2019. The current price for a Seamaster Aqua Terra in yellow gold with gold bracelet is USD 32,100, or about CHF 31,800 at current exchange rates. So we pay 108% more in real terms. Better movement, better case work, heftier and better bracelet.......worth double the price? Just an interesting data point from the days of yore.

 

The ref-numbers in sales catalogues (most of the time) are completely different from the real ref.## embossed in the caseback.
I am sure these numbers were only "internal" dealer numbers for the ordering process from the factory.

I found these differing numbers widely spread in catalogues when doing research for my chronometer book.

Concerning the bracelet: I think expandable flat link bracelets have started well before the "-master" models.

 

I'll wager that the gold weight is nearly doubled going from Seamaster Calendar to Seamaster Aqua Terra, not least - as you point out - due to the much heftier bracelet.

Stainless steel models are probably a better (if even more down-putting) reference point.