Printable View
https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/iw...ute-to-mark-xi
Presenting their latest half-assed attempt at vintage. Faux lume that doesn't match the numerals, bloated size, date window. Maybe if you had never seen an original it would be OK? I don't actually mind the latest Mark too much, but this seems like a nasty cash-in. Especially when they have a 36mm model, and could conceivably remove the date window from the Sellita easily?!
https://hodinkee.imgix.net/uploads/i...format&usm=12&
It is kind of crazy what companies charge for a 3 handed watch in stainless steel on a Nato with a modified Sellita SW300-1 all for the bargain basement price of £3,790. I can't see anything worth more than £500-800 here.
I think timex did it better :D
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CkcXInKXAAEzm2l.jpg
The lume on the archetypal IWC mark XI doesn't match the numerals either. The numerals aren't in fact lumed
Why should the lume match the numerals?
I'm not an expert on IWC watches, but pretty sure they haven't lumed the numerals for a while...
It doesn't have to (and you are right that they haven't), but it looks jarring to me at least.Quote:
Originally Posted by Broussard
Make's the Speedbird look like a bargain, no faux lume to be seen.
http://i380.photobucket.com/albums/o...2/SAM_4575.jpg
I believe their attempt was to create a homage and not a 1:1 model. I was interested in that model since the day I heard about their intention to release a homage of Mark XI. I wasn't thrilled when I saw it and since I already have a Mark XVIII, I wouldn't pay that cash for exactly the same case with only different dial and hands. And the NATO bothers me, looks cheap. For that kind of money you can get Mark XVIII on a bracelet.
Such a shame.I remember when they did a much better dial that was true to the original with a jaeger movement,proper classy.
Sent from my E6653 using TZ-UK mobile app
This is the one I was talking about above
Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk
This onehttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...2225d91439.jpg
Sent from my E6653 using TZ-UK mobile app
It's just a one off edition of 1948 so a lot of people not liking it means there will probably be enough to go round.
:smug:
I'd rather have the original. 1948 Mark XI
http://i1073.photobucket.com/albums/...psqt8mnyjm.jpg
It is not Faux lume but real lume with a faux vintage coloring
The numerals are not lumed,hence the white color
Me too ! The original MkXIs are though rather rare/expensive and I think the 40mm case of the "new" MkXI is more in keeping with current trends.Quote:
Originally Posted by trident-7
TBH, I quite like the new model, not a lot, as Paul Daniels would have said, and I think it is far too expensive for what it is as well. At a couple of thousand I would have nibbled to go alongside my other IWCs but not at way over £3500.
The MKii Hawkinge looks a lot nicer and is about £3000 cheaper.
That Timex is really nice.
Won't get much love in the bubble world of WISdom though I suspect, nobody wants to wield the pin in company!
I actually quite like a lot of Timex watches.
Four grand?!?! That pricing is utterly ridiculous, there's barely 1.5k of value in that watch.
Why the hate? The only thing I'm not keen on is the size/width of the hour hand... otherwise, it's a lovely watch (and i say that as a former Mk VII owner).
Possibly because in the watch world where tiny details seem to divided between love and hate...they might have crossed a line for many.Quote:
Originally Posted by learningtofly
Added to that the price (though i do appreciate that price/worth have become wholly disconnected) which seems to be gouging, itself an IWC habit of late.
Drifting OT, but...Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikee
Got one when it first came out - strap is by Red Wing Boots. I'd forgotten how much fun a cheap watch can be - and the Indiglo light makes me smile each time I use it (reminds me of the Electroluminescence on my first Casio pre-G diver).
Liked it so much that I bought this one for a friend:
https://media.endclothing.com/media/...green_sh_1.jpg
[photo via EndClothing.com]
I don't think it's that bad at all. In fact I am quite tempted to go and take a look.
It's the perfect watch for someone who wants a less attractive, larger, Mark XV with fake vintage lume. That has to amount to 10s of people.
The £3700 price for a start. If you can see anything on that watch that justifies the price other than the text on thee dial I would love to know.Quote:
Originally Posted by learningtofly
For clarity I was talking about the design. I share the view on price, although in fairness that's an issue that could be levelled at most (if not all) of the major brands.Quote:
Originally Posted by robert75
Fair point, the design is OK I don't really have a problem with the lume Tag recently did the same. Not a fan of the case shape though and I do think the MKii has done a better job of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by learningtofly
Probably just annoys me about IWC I like quite a few of their designs but the price gouging (granted all do it but IWC seem to be especially bad)
I think it's okay, not too bad, but way too big and I just don't like dates on any Mark 11 look-a-likes.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
That date window!
Again!
It's looks horrible.
Speedbird over that all day.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
It's not 'that' bad, but can't forgive that date. Hate it on all the current pilot generation, just shocking. Prefer the XV (even the XVI wasn't that bad IMO).
Might try to see one in the flesh this morning.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
IWC = International Watch Cr*p
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...5ffeb4518f.jpg
The mix of the two really doesn't work for me.
A watch that I would like to want, but just can't.
The price is also mind boggling. I guess that they try to justify it by declaring this a 1948 piece limited edition. Still think that they have been optimistic on the size of the production run!
Just seen it. Thoughts and a photo to follow this afternoon, possibly with side-by-side comparison to XV
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote:
Originally Posted by flareslove
Yep i think your right
Quote:
Originally Posted by flareslove
and available online for £39.00 :eagerness:
Surely you mean £50-80 rather than £500-800?? I'd expect something half decent for £500.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frakius
On Friday I called in Harrods to have a look for myself, especially as I was about to pick up a Mark XV, and wondered how they'd compare and whether I'd be sorely tempted.
First thing to note is that the Watch Room area is undergoing a refit and the work is no longer being done at night as residents have complained about the excessive noise. And so the excessive noise is during the day. It's horrendous, and you need to nearly shout to be heard - hardly the atmosphere for weighing up a sizeable purchase.
The watch itself isn't bad - it's certainly better in the flesh than in the photos and will sell I'm sure. But, it is a bit too large to merit the title of "Tribute". It could've been an absolute winner if it had been 38mm like the XV; any smaller might have been to difficult to sell to the mass market.
http://i.imgur.com/Oayswzi.jpg
I do like the date window black on white; I know most don't. Looking at my XV I wish it was black on white.
I'm not a fan of patina and so don't feel the right person to make a call on the colour, but I wonder whether they could have called it a Tribute and marketed the history if it didn't look "vintage".
It feels a decent size on the wrist at 40mm and were it not for the marketing it might have been able to stand on its own merits as it's a respectable size for most people. Many other manufacturers have increased the diameter of their watches and pleased all but the WIS community.
I thought I might be tempted to pick one up, but not enough. It'll be perfect for anyone who isn't aware of/wanted the XV, or someone who simply wants an IWC pilot and a new model at that.
I was expecting, in fact partly hoping to be won over by it, but I wasn't. But if you're London go and see one - you never know! I'll stick with the XV...
http://i.imgur.com/oiMxhV5.jpg
Thanks for the write up David.Quote:
Originally Posted by OldHooky
I still think you have the vastly superior looking watch, as that XV looks stunning.
I couldn't bring myself to repost a picture of the other 'thing' :grief:
That wrist shot makes the 'homage' to the MkXI look even more tragic and even makes the MkXV look half decent.
How good does a MkXII look in comparison?
The XV looks way better to my eye. I'm a big fan.
Not at all keen on the fake aging of this new model. Just makes it look cheap.
I think that looks terrible. Worse than I expected actually. They're hitting the "make it bigger without actually doing it right" well pretty hard on this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by OldHooky
I don't dislike the watch in any respects except the price, as a tight Yorkshireman £3500+ seems expensive.Quote:
Originally Posted by learningtofly
Oh dear, I agree. Didn't think it looked that bad in the OP, but that pic above is a complete miss for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by JP Chestnut
Same here. The case looks too big at 40mm and the hour hand just looks wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tetlee
Sent from my SM-J320FN using TZ-UK mobile app
I agree.
I think it is some time since IWC designed a good watch. I was window shopping at an AD recently and there wasn't one IWC that attracted me - too big and blingy.
Although I might be biased...
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...53630facf3.jpg
Mark
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
IWC makes many good looking watches, more so recently than say 3 years ago. Some of their classic looking hand wound gold models are absolutely great. However, they're all approximately 10mm larger than anything I'd buy in that design.
They peaked with me during the Mark XV, 3536, and 3711 era. They were a proper alternative to Rolex back then. These days, I'm not sure I'd pick one of their entry level offerings over an Omega.