Surfing the net, I came across this picture of a calibre 1071 with steel rollers instead of ruby. Is this an early version, Alex, or some Frankenstein?
I'm not sure about the rollers. It may be the lighting, but they do look metallic. The movement number is mis-described I believe as 1701 instead of 1071 but that's probably just a typo. (second photo below)
Here is another watch from a different dealer, same movement with the rollers looking more reddish.
However both are described as having 29 jewels. A bit bizarre.
The rotors are 180 degrees apart.
1071 came only on ruby bearings
of reading an article that mentioned steel rollers used in the earliest models, but soon replaced with ruby rollers due to unsatisfactory performance. As with all these memories, finding the actual reference is the hard part
cal 1071 was AP's 2071
As you can see Alex, this Audemars cal. 2499 lacks the ruby rollers but is otherwise similar to the AP cal. 2071. I wonder if the 2499 was an earlier version in the movement family and if VC also had a similar calibre?
I've found references to a VC calibre 1070 but no details...can you provide any?
indirect central seconds.
I can't really find the equivalent of the 1071 /1072 with JLC, maybe it was made exclusively only for VC and AP?
Perhaps, I do not think your comment to find the mistake. Because these three companies were in an amiable relation from about end in 1930's. Moreover, AP was a big shareholder of JLC until JLC was purchased for Richemont.
exclusively for Audemars and Vacheron without using them in their own production (ie: the cal VC 1120 and AP 2120).
Yes, the Ketterer family owned VC and JLC then sold VC to Sheik Yamani in the mid 80s. Audemars owned 40% of JLC until its sale to Richemont.
Maybe this is why many of the watches from VC and AP dating from the 60s-mid 90s looked the same!!
Does AP's Cal.2003 believe product beginning as for you in 1946?