IWC Mark XII vs XV

[Dave Downing]

Folks,

I've been looking at one of these as a next buy, and I'm interested in the views of those who have tried/owned both. Beside the movement, and the slight increase in size, they don't seem that different at all except for tiny font differences. How are they on the wrist? Does anyone have a side-by-side comparison? WIS-Dom hands down prefers the XII, but is this just rarity? And is that extra 2mm noticeable? All help and comments appreciated!

Thanks

David

[silvax]

I would also like to read reviews.
And to know the difference between diameter and lug-to-lug.
Thanks!

[JPCain86]

I have had both and I didnt know about the size difference until someone told me. So I would say not very noticeable.

[Henk Hoving]

Try both if you can, the XV is a bit more 'modern', but has a very plain ETA 2892 as movement, if I'm honest I do find the XV too expensive for what you actually get as a watch. Plus, I do find the XII much more interesting due to the movement and the bit more classic looks.

[pepere13]

I heard the XII JLC caliber is not reliable enough (?)

[monogroover]

Folks,

I've been looking at one of these as a next buy, and I'm interested in the views of those who have tried/owned both. Beside the movement, and the slight increase in size, they don't seem that different at all except for tiny font differences. How are they on the wrist? Does anyone have a side-by-side comparison? WIS-Dom hands down prefers the XII, but is this just rarity? And is that extra 2mm noticeable? All help and comments appreciated!

I've had both (although my XV was the limited edition white dial 'Gadebusch Uhr' variant) and the XII is the one I could never part with. The XV is noticeably larger on the wrist, but not much. The XII JLC movement is a bit finicky - the minute hand can jump a little when pushing the crown in. It feels unbelievably silky to operate but the XV's modified ETA did feel a bit more workmanlike and robust.

[Henk Hoving]

I heard the XII JLC caliber is not reliable enough (?)

They're very reliable, and the base JLC 889 is a very elegant movement, 36 jewels even down to the click and barrel, but some do need a new rotor-assembly after a while, which makes servicing a bit pricey and parts are hard to get, especially when compared to the good ol' plain ETA.

I just don't think a comparison horologically is fair, the JLC is much more refined and interesting per design and construction, the ETA just another tractor you'll even find in 500 quid watches..., they're just too different.

[fourtaelsgold]

Depends on what you're looking for in the watch I guess.
If it's a do-it-all daily wearer, then I suppose the Mk XV will be better suited.

You couldn't really see the JLC movement from the outside anyway and from what I've heard it's not very good at standing up to knocks.

[Dave Downing]

SO Mono, what about the XII made it impossible to move on versus the XV?

I've had both (although my XV was the limited edition white dial 'Gadebusch Uhr' variant) and the XII is the one I could never part with. The XV is noticeably larger on the wrist, but not much. The XII JLC movement is a bit finicky - the minute hand can jump a little when pushing the crown in. It feels unbelievably silky to operate but the XV's modified ETA did feel a bit more workmanlike and robust.

Is the fact you can get the awesome bracelet for the XV a factor? (The XII one doesnt look as good)

Thanks

David

[monogroover]

SO Mono, what about the XII made it impossible to move on versus the XV?

Well to be fair it was probably mostly the fact that I'd wanted one for a long time before I got it and once I had it, it became my favourite watch. So it's sentimental really.

But there are a few things I could point to. Firstly the size is perfect for me and while the XV was fine, the XII was just right. For many these days they'd both be too small, of course. Secondly for me the XII has a certain legitimacy that the XV doesn't - it is an obvious evolutionary step from the XI, in that it has an auto movement, a sapphire crystal and a date. The XV seems to me to be a new Mark for its own sake; it doesn't add anything substantive to the XII. The main difference is essentially cosmetic. Thirdly it's just a little bit more elegant and understated than the (regular) XV. I couldn't have justified owning both if my own XV wasn't very different in style.

I've moved it on now, but here's a pic taken on the day I received it:



As a practical watch I have to give the nod to the XV. It was more accurate than the XII, and it felt more robust. But of course if those were the main considerations I'd never have bought the XII; I already had a quartz Tag, a few Seikos, a Rolex GMT and an assortment of other accurate, robust watches. It was just a beautiful, elegant thing to own and wear in a way that the XV wasn't - quite.

The bracelet wasn't a factor for me as I never had one with either.

[JPCain86]

I did find the XII more comfortable. The Deployant clasp dug into my arm on the XV

[Bradt Pitt]

That is stunning

[monogroover]

I did find the XII more comfortable. The Deployant clasp dug into my arm on the XV

Yes, I had the same problem. Wasn't a good fit for the strap. I took mine to an IWC service centre to have them replace it with a regular buckle which was fine.

[Dave Downing]

Thanks Mono...and that was a lovely, genuine limited edition. I'm getting the chance to try on a XII hopefully next week, so that might help.

Thanks

David

Yes, I had the same problem. Wasn't a good fit for the strap. I took mine to an IWC service centre to have them replace it with a regular buckle which was fine.

[Toodlepip]

Depends on what you're looking for in the watch I guess.
If it's a do-it-all daily wearer, then I suppose the Mk XV will be better suited.

You couldn't really see the JLC movement from the outside anyway and from what I've heard it's not very good at standing up to knocks.

Never had any problems with the JLC in my Ingenieur 3521. The reputation for it being a difficult movement seems to stem from an early batch where the internal barrel finishing was different from JLC's, and that could cause overbanking. IWC corrected this whenever they serviced these early movements so it should not be a problem.

One thing worth noting on the cosmetics - the Mk XII dial is less dark than the Mk XV and more matt. This improves visibility and it looks rather more "military". From the Mk XV onwards, the dials are a much darker black and more striking - if that's important to you...

[barneygumble]

Any idea of prices for a good example of each on leather? Would I be in the ballpark with £2500 for XII and £1500 for an XV?