OK fellas...

Those not familiar with this model would be wise to read these reviews/pictorials for a more wellrounded, objective opinion as mine is flawed, as purely subjective, from the get go:

Timezone classic - sisters in titanium

TZ-UK: Stefans (S.L.) pictorial of ti and ss 3536

IWC Forum - the backgrounds of the Aquatimer

Time2watch - A review of the GST 3536īs in ss and ti

Les Revues de Montres: Aquatimer 3536-01 ti (French)

Dive (into) watches: Statussymbol auf Tauchstation - IWC GST Aquatimer (German)

rruegger on youtube: how to operate the 3536 bezel & IWC Aquatimer evolution



This is it - the IWC Aquatimer GST 3536-01 titanium




Please understand that this is not a real review but rather a compilation of something Iīve written about the Aquatimer on various threads since I got it. Why I did it? Because I noticed while seeking information regarding this watch once on the market to get one that though there was a lot written about it there really wasnt much said about whats bugging the owners with it. Yet there has to be something, as there always is. - There is no such thing as a perfect watch.

So, my motive here is to add a slightly different point of view to the IWC Aquatimer 3536-01 to compliment those excellent postings and reviews to be found on the internet (those I consider best are listed above). With this I proceed to the subject it self. I am not going to bother with measurements, bezel movements etc as those are easily found on the resources mentined earlier.


Instead Iīll let the pics speak for the watch and proceed to whats bugging me with it:

Light titanium is comfy when its

Hot...


or cold


Date is dead centered


Now... a few words about IWCīs titanium for those who are afraid it might scratch easily. I don?t know whether IWC uses the most expensive or advanced processes available for finishing their titanium cases but I think they do know something of the material and how to manufacture cases of it. After all - they were among the first ones using the material on tool watches since 1977.

I strongly believe that the "poorly finished investment casting" looking grainy surface is a well though out design decision that IMO fits the watch and its mil pedigree well. The finish is achieved by abrasive blasting with sapphire beads. Simply said, if you like the looks fine, if you don?t, that s fine too. What is objectively addressable however are the technical specs of the case material were talking about. Based on my experience the specs hold true:

"IWC pioneered the use of Titanium in watches 20 years ago (this was written in 1998), first in the startlingly original Porsche Design Titane, then the revolutionary Ocean 2000. In attaining this status, IWC has attained probably more know how in exotic case making than any other - especially in working with Titanium.

The Titanium cases are machined by the removal of metal in complex processes. The case and its components are painstakingly turned, milled and drilled, allowing closer tolerances than a stamped product. That is why, it is said that the Ocean case is water resistant even without its back case gasket because of the precise fit of the machining of the case back screw threads with the case itself!

Newly developed in-house processes include covered or hidden welding of titanium (previously thought to be a material not able to be welded), controlled environment soldering and high vacuum annealing and ways of bonding the titanium with the sapphire glass by using a non-aging, non-deteriorating silver-platinum thrust ring to produce dive watches capable of 2,000m resistance to water ingress.

The latest innovation (remember, written in 9 years ago) has been the nitriding process for hardening titanium and other alloys. IWC achieved a level of Vickers Hardness of 2,400Hv, compared to the Ventura achievement of 1,300Hv for their hardened Titanium!! This is at the level of synthetic sapphire and just short of Lanthanum/Boron Carbide (9 on the Mohs scale). In comparison, normal Titanium is approximately 180Hv and hardened Stainless Steel is 700-800Hv.

In addition, IWC has developed techniques for polishing and abrasive blasting of Titanium (with sapphire beads). The Titanium alloys used contain Vanadium and aluminium with extreme high temperature stability and a tensile strength of 1000Mpa.

Quoted from: http://forums.timezone.com/index.php?t= ... 2170&rid=2


Yeah, sure. - As astonishing as it might even IWCīs titanium isn?t immune to the elements of everyday usage. Nothing is. So yes - there are marks on the watch, which can be best seen on these following pics taken by its previous owner, Mr. Matt W. from UK:





This has been pretty much an appraisal until now and you might be asking allready what?s negative about the ti IWC 3536 then? Well, based on my experience this is what I think are the drawbacks:

Price
I consider it worth the expense but it is an awful lot of money to be tied up on just one watch, or watches in particular for that matter. The good part of it is that the money you put on this particular model is very likely to be had back choose you to sell it at some point as they are appreciated and somewhat collectible if not just yet, most likely on not so far away future.

Height
The watch is 14,5mm tall and though it doesn?t feel that tall on the wrist because of the low weight of the titanium it is still somewhat tall. I haven?t had problems with the height because I like to wear it snug but I would prefer if it sat a tad lower on the wrist (something like 12mm).

Bracelet(!)
Yes, it is as good as they say. The sizing is the easiest I?ve come across but lets face it - you rarely size your bracelet more often than once or twice so the ultimate sizing method aint that important on the long run though it is kinda cool. There are a three issues that I reall do not like on the bracelet though:

- for my taste it tapers too much towards the clasp. This is strictly a personal opinion and your mileage may vary. Nuff said.

- with bad luck you wont have a proper fit with the bracelet (I dont) as there are only full links and one "one-and-a-half" link (see below pic, its on the left side of the clasp). So, because there is no micro-adjustment possibility on the clasp and my wrist happens to be just a tad too small for having the "half" link on and a tad too big for having the "half" link off I cant find a proper fit for my wrist - its either a tad too loose or a tad too snug. If there would be a 2/3 link in addition that would solve the issue completely - as of now I don?t wear the bracelet because of that.

- the buckle has a release button on one side only. Though I have never ever had it open accidentally it would be, or at least feel, much safer (IMHO of course, some people like Jon Wallis sees this differently) to have two release buttons on both sides on the clasp that you should press at the same time.



For a serious diving watch with military watch pedigree I find the decision for a one-button release clasp a bit "off". Then again for serious users there is the velcro strap which is superb :D





This is how it looks on a 7,5 wrist(NOTE: this is a pic of a home made strap - the real thing however is exactly as long as this one)


Lume
The lume aint even near to the standards set by say Omega Seamaster nor Seiko Monster. On this area IWC leaves much to hope for. Anyways, please note that there are two dial versions on the 3536. First came the "T SWISS MADE T" dial, which is mixture of tritium (12 and hands) and superluminova (rest of the markers). Latter ones were made with a pure superluminova dial which is recognizable from the "SWISS MADE"

Notice the difference on 12 and hands to the rest of the markers:


This lume shot is taken after a 15second blast under a lightbulb


Yet, with all these shortcomings Iīve listed this watch is a grower like nothing I?ve experienced earlier. Once I got I was disappointed actually, thinking it was ok but nothing what I?ve expected it to be based on what I?ve read of it and having handled a SD earlier the same day I found the AT a bit boring and flimsy (bezel). I complained it to Jon Wallis, a friend and a well-known WIS from down under with whom I had talked on many occasions about the IWC Aquatimer before taking the plunge for it and he said something like "just wait and it?ll grow on you. And if it doesn?t just sell it".

That?s what I did: I waited. - And within a week or so something started to happen like he had described. The Aquatimer is so stealthy and so low in appearance it fools you at first. In the end you cant help but to let go and be astonished by the quality that is apparent once you learn to appreciate it. Its a bit like women: there are those you like to fool around and play with and those you want to marry. The latter are few and between and you want more than just meets the eyes at the first glance. And that takes some time.

Thatīs all then? Not exactly as I haven?t yet addressed the last minus that, for some, might be the biggest of them:

The movement
I had a talk with my watch guy yesterday as he called to say my AT is ready for pick up from service. Now this guy isn?t just some watchmaker who changes batteries for G-Shocks behind a counter at the local Wall-Mart but a pro as good as they come. - And, he is an IWC man to the boot. He was very, very, impressed with the case, bezel etc but said that it isn?t a "real" IWC anymore as the movement is a standard 2892-2 ETA which IWC has tweaked a little on the most important places:

- the gear train
- wheels and levers
- mainspring and barrel
- a 21 K gold mass is added to the rotor for winding efficiency

Hereīs a blow-up of the movement
 (NOTE: clicking it will take you onto a TZ article of the movement)


(above picture courtesy of IWC & Michael Friedberg)

Whether these changes and modifications make a real difference to a well adjusted basic ETA 2892-2 you can find nicely finished on many more moderately priced watches I leave for you to decide.

For my watchmaker Yoda the heart on the AT just isn't what he feels its supposed to be: an in-house movement worthy the legendary name. - And on that regard the Aquatimer is a second runner for say the Rolex Sea-Dweller.

I personally couldn?t care less because what I want is reliability and ease of maintenance. For me the tweaked ETA is good enough especially as I don?t have to pay absurd prices for servicing it. - Wouldn?t I yet prefer an in-house IWC movement? - you bet I would, but I necessarily would not want to pay the premium that would come with it. IMHO the company played it wise putting the money on the case instead of the movement, which is good for the purpose the watch was designed for and good enough for most of the Aquatimer clientele already. Itīs supposed to be a tool watch, remember?

So, like it or not, IWC uses a 2892-2 kit on the Aquatimer instead of a true in-house movement of the likes that once made the company what it is today.


(above pictures courtesy of IWC & Michael Friedberg)

Bottom line:

- If you are a "movement guy" the SD is a better choice for you I guess.
- If you want something reliable that?s not on your face go for the ti AT.

There you have it - my opinion on whats bugging with the AT.

I end by saying that trying to find the "one watch" to rule them all has been my quest for long. Until now I haven?t come across anything that could dethrone the 3536 ti from the top of the imaginary hill I have placed it on in my personal tool watch hierarchy. Yes. The Rolex Sea-Dweller has the crown. It can have it. The IWC Aquatimer 3536-01 has the throne and the high ground.

There can only be one.




EDIT September 9 2007

Iīve now had the watch for a few months more after my initial review. A hefty portion of that time it was on the custody of my watchmaker waiting of being serviced as the guy is not only good but busy as well as a consequence of his skills. So, for a couple of months I had other watches on my wrist.

Did I really missed the AT? Not really as I had other things to do and some neat watches to compansate. Nevertheless the time came to pick it up which I did on last weeks friday. Boy was I in for a surprise! The time I strapped it onto my wrist it felt sooooo right I immediately understood I hadīnt appreciated it as much as I should of. - Mind you, Iīve even played with the idea of selling it while it was on the works. Not anymore :!:

So, has it grown to be the perfect watch while at my watchmaker? No. It hasīnt. - It still hasīnt grown crown guards that I now think it should really have (the B & M Capeland S XXL is the top dog what comes to crown guards and crown functioning). It still is a tad too tall to my liking and the velcro strap as nice as it is has a design flaw: The end of the strap is folded on the inside and then sewn to form the tunnel for the pin screw. Because the fabric is nylon it is burned in order to not fray. This and the excessive sewing of the loop has created a hard surface on the inside of the strap which is irritating as hell before one gets use to it :evil:

It aint a biggie but something that they should of have made better really. - At 90? a piece it aint exactly the cheapest velcro around nevertheless it comes with the special endlinks attached. Other than this little caveat the strap rocks and if you dont use other watches you soon get use to it.

So, in a nut shell I am still very happy with the AT. The question of would I buy it again should I have the funding for acquiring it? Honestly said I am not sure. - I have created a lust for a titanium Panerai and it would be a hard decision though I do feel the Pannies are way overpriced. Still I doubt if I could for ever refuse the subtle elegance and no-nonsense ruggedness of this pre-richemont era IWC. Most possibly not and remembering the initial feeling when strapping it onto my wrist once I had it back from the service I doubt any Panerai really would have a chance of a long time survival should I ever see a 3536-01 in flesh again.

Itīs back!


So yeah, I think I would get it again and I am happy I dont have to as this one aint going anywhere.

Thanks for reading.