The year of manufacture is a piece of information pertinent to the watch. Regardless if, in this case, it makes a difference on the ID or not. It is good style, and allows all who see the record to know what year the watch was made. I had thought it was a required field. The field for year of manufacture is the very first piece of information admin has listed in the root record. However, following this logic, we would not have to enter the movement model, since the this model only came with one movement. We could skip entering the jewel count since it only came w/ 17 jewels. We don't need to enter case shape, as they were all round. Sometimes folks are in a hurry and don't follow directions to properly enter the watch record or they just don't have the info quite yet. That's understandable. How many forced entry fields can we leave blank and still confirm the ID. IMO only the ones which are not important pieces of information.
It is most definitely without a doubt a chrono C and I'll give a confirmed three checks when the correct information is entered in the root record. Without this information, I would be confirming that the single picture is that of a chrono C.
This is why we have soo many incomplete, misleading records in the database.