An in-house movement designed for the watch as opposed to a generic eta that costs around £225?Originally Posted by JGJG
Fin seem to have a permanent 'sale' on. I haven't bought of any of theirs but have come close a few times. I did buy a strap for my Mark XV from De Griff straps. Given the relatively short lugs on the watch, I got them to curve the ends so that it fitted against the case better and I was very happy with it.
Yes. Why?
If one believes mechanical watch making has reached it’s pinnacle with the eta then good on you, there is no why. But as a mechanical watch enthusiast variety is the spice of life. Researching, understanding and choosing new advancements in watch making whilst supporting the industry to improve and grow.
Why not?
Personal view:
1. With a price tag of upwards of 5k I would expect to have a movement that is specifically designed for the watch. If Tudor and Omega can do that, albeit with much higher volumes but lower RRPs, I would like to see the same from IWC.
2. If I accept a 3rd party movement, then I would like to see that reflected on the price with a much more affordable RRP
3. Isn’t manufacturing your own movements the foundation of haute horologerie?
In automotive terms it’s like you were going to buy a Merc S-Class but the engine is manufactured by PSA. Might be super efficient and reliable but it will still leave me…meh…
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by dade.c; 19th May 2021 at 22:38.
None of which I dispute. The assertion I challenged seemed to be that the customer would necessarily receive higher value from an in-house movement. This seems to me to be the insidious creep of marketing from the usual suspects, and it fails to consider the long and storied history of the ébauche on the one end of the horological spectrum, and the real value to the consumer of massive r&d volume amortisation on the other. I have owned and enjoyed many movements, some in-house, some not. A blanket view that one would be preferred in the abstract seems to misunderstand watchmaking and many pleasures of the hobby, both high and low.
IWC at £5k isn’t in the business of haute horlogerie. The unit cost of an ébauche within the overall consumer cost of the watch delivers development value to the consumer amortised and qualitatively refined over a very high volume of units.
No reason not to want in house, but possibly not just for its own sake; and there are plenty of recent examples where in-house has been beset with problems in the real world. I don’t see value in that.
Last edited by JGJG; 19th May 2021 at 23:04.
I do think this is particularly true; to argue against myself, the pursuit of variety in modern era watchmaking has had certainly some spectacular results, such as the Chopard 1.96.
This I can agree. In-house does not necessarily equal quality and/or reliability.
It would still signal to me that the company made an effort to create something special and contributed to the technological advancement of the industry.
In simple man math though, at RRP parity, I’m paying way more marketing for a watch with an externally sourced movement, than for a watch with an in-house one. Nothing wrong in this either but would rather fund R&D.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by dade.c; 20th May 2021 at 09:43.
The current model Aquatimer looks odd in photos but in the metal I really liked it. Would need a hefty discount mind you.
I have had QC issues with IWC before on all 3 watches I owned (dust on the dial, chrono not resetting to 12, low power reserve). I appreciate I might be unlucky of course.
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
£300 movement in 4-5k watch doesn’t sit well with me either. Particularly since IWC has long history of being a well respected movement manufacturer, pellaton system and 89 movement etc. They took too long to go in house, and only finally made moves in the last few years on the core range, sign of greed from Richemont and resting on laurels.
I do think a company of IWC’s credentials should be able to do better than a generic movement, however decent such movements are.
Whether the 693xx chronograph movements are really in house is a little questionable, as there is a lot of 7750 architecture in there. Sure the running seconds is now at 6, and it winds bidirectionally. I’m not sure it’s worth going dewy-eyed over the change from cam to column wheel switching, as with modern manufacturing methods this must be pretty easy to manufacture, in contrast to pre computer controlled times. I’m sure the changes are necessary for the price point.
Dave
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I’ve just sold my limited edition Aquatimer to a dealer for a really low price. I had listed on eBay and didn’t get a single bid, which I was shocked by. I’m not a flipper I buy watches to enjoy and keep (although I am in process of reducing my collection). But I will prob think twice about buying another IWC in future.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That is simply absolute perfection
Gesendet von iPad mit Tapatalk
Perfect example because Mercedes really fits the M282 engine in its cars which is basically a Renault engine. Open the bonnet of the Mercedes and look on the motor block for the Renault logo.
The engineering team of Daimler developed the french engine to perfection.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by Ginpopy; 22nd May 2021 at 22:47.
Certainly not in a S class
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote