A word in support of the new IWC Ingenieur

[Nav01L]

So today, I had a brief opportunity to handle the new IWC Ingenieur, a watch that has generally been welcomed with great fanfare until people realized what IWC intends to charge for it. I have read consistently that it was a fantastic watch but that it was completely overpriced, seeing as it had the same movement as a mark series.

After seeing the thing in person though, I can confidently say that I would pay 12k for it. And indeed I will, once I get the call. It’s a phenomenal watch in person. In terms of wearing experience, it has that same delicacy you get from a 5711 or 15202. it doesn’t quite have as beautifully sharp a set of indexes as a VC Overseas but then again, a. neither do those other two watches, and b. (for having had one for so long) I can confidently say the overseas feels less delicate overall.

The main point of attraction on this new Ingenieur to me was the bracelet. It is a full class above what we know from IWC and has that „liquid“ draping quality to it that you’d otherwise have to go to the 5711 for. A sort of luxurious finesse that makes your typical watch bracelet in that price tier feel a bit blunt. At least that’s how my Rolex Jubilee felt next to it.

Another frankly stunning aspect is the Aqua colored dial. The black is pretty, but pretty flat at the same time. The Aqua though, that’s something else.

Altogether, what you get in terms of wearing experience is well above what you’d expect from a simple IWC three hander and in particular, in a different league to what you’d get in a Mark series or a pilot chrono (I got one of the latter).

Granted, the movement is no different from the one in the Mark. But you don’t see it and provided it works precisely enough (always a bit hopes and prayers with IWC) it doesn’t much matter. It’s not like the 5711 has that fabulous of a movement either, it’s nice, but pretty basic too compared to what else Patek can do when they pour their heart into it. So for one third the price, if that’s the only difference (which you can’t even see given the closed caseback, the Ingenieur is almost a bargain.

I know it convinced me. I‘m on the list and being told to look forward to a delivery later this year. They don’t expect long waiting lists over time, though I believe once this permeates beyond the initial reviews, it could well become quite popular.

[Nav01L]

[GB-man]

Thanks for the first hand perspective. Still not a fan but maybe it’s because I haven’t tried it on. Hopefully everyone who wants one can get their hands on it in due time

[APWorldTour]

For me titanium is the one that impressed me. Although I’m not quite as sure about the €15k+ price tag.

[dannyp]

My objection to the price has been less about the comparison to others from IWC, and more about relative price/quality vs competitors. For example, I doubt the movement is comparable to the Laureatto, but the price is almost as much. On the other hand, it’s 50% more than a Defy which comes also comes with an arguably better movement (based on one of the most legendary chronographs of all times).

Feels like IWC tried to price to what a Rolex three-hander was going for on secondary market back when pricing decisions would have been made…

[Nav01L]

Originally Posted by dannyp

My objection to the price has been less about the comparison to others from IWC, and more about relative price/quality vs competitors. For example, I doubt the movement is comparable to the Laureatto, but the price is almost as much. On the other hand, it’s 50% more than a Defy which comes also comes with an arguably better movement (based on one of the most legendary chronographs of all times).

Feels like IWC tried to price to what a Rolex three-hander was going for on secondary market back when pricing decisions would have been made…

Have you tried the Laureato on wrist? It’s pretty, it no doubt has a somewhat more refined movement (though it’s not like the GP03300 would win any beauty contests either), but it doesn’t quite exude the same feeling. Much like the Vacheron Overseas, it’s that little bit more robust, which makes it ever so slightly less luxurious as a physical thing to touch and wear, as opposed to the knowledge of how refined the movement is. Hard to describe. It’s not so much the physical dimensions, as the 38mm Laureato actually has quite elegant ones, it’s more that it has more blocky shapes and that perpendicular brushing that makes the bracelet links seem so broad. The IWC just has more flow.

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by Nav01L

Have you tried the Laureato on wrist? It’s pretty, it no doubt has a more refined movement, but it doesn’t quite exude the same feeling. Much like the Vacheron Overseas, it’s that little bit more robust, which makes it ever so slightly less luxurious as a physical thing to touch and wear, as opposed to the knowledge of how refined the movement is. Hard to describe

Tried the 38 years ago and actually really liked it. I also have a PP 5065 and it felt slightly more sturdy than that, ironically. So all a matter of perspective I suppose.

Though I could see your point particularly with the 42, because at that size you’d expect to be able to knock it around a bit.

Maybe I’m just bitter that iwc neglected to return to the original 36mm size as an option .

[ap1]

I’d like one, as long as I don’t have to buy a Portugueser and big pilot too

[shammad10]

Can’t believe I’m saying this, because when it was released I thought it was awful. But I tried it yesterday at an event and I must say it was pretty great. But I still won’t buy one I think.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RTG]

Thanks for the information. Nice looking watch! Probably a tad to small for myself, but eager to see one in person.

[trackingtime]

thank you for the review

can't wait for mine when it arrives, i heard its probably in july/august

[Batmannr1]

Thanks for the elaborate review. Also on the list for the aqua Ingenieur. Just have seen pics and vids, so I am anxious to get the opportunity to slap this one on the wrist and get the first hand experience.

[londonpilgrim]

I wasn’t that fussed either until I saw it and tried it in at W&W; immediately put my name down for it.

[charger_vital]

The comparisons to the 5711 or 15202 are amusing... But on a serious note: how would you compare it to watches in its comparative category, like the Zenith Defy, Bremont Supernova, or the Breitling Chronomat?

[1William]

Nice watch that I look forward to seeing in person. No way would I pay retail or AD discount on this one. In the pre-owned market, in a few years at 50-60% of msrp I could see picking it up.

[londonpilgrim]

Originally Posted by charger_vital

The comparisons to the 5711 or 15202 are amusing... But on a serious note: how would you compare it to watches in its comparative category, like the Zenith Defy, Bremont Supernova, or the Breitling Chronomat?

Beats all of those by a country mile apart from the Defy (but the Ingenieur is still way ahead)

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by londonpilgrim

Beats all of those by a country mile apart from the Defy (but the Ingenieur is still way ahead)

Curious why you feel it's so much better than the Defy? I've not tried either on the wrist, nor examined up close, but based on specs I'd find it hard to choose the IWC over the Zenith. The latter is priced 30% lower (at MSRP, before any discount) and the 41mm version comes with the legendary El Primero movement. I also like the fact that it comes in 36mm (albeit Elite-powered).

I always give an edge to what I call the "kingmakers" (JLC, GP, Zenith) whose movements are found in watches far better known and more expensive. To me, it's cool to have something from the "watchmaker's watchmakers" but that's personal opinion.

That said, the Defy styling is slightly more avant garde and probably not universally appealing. Previous Classic incarnation was a bit more mainstream (but didn't get the El Primero and was titanium-only as I recall).

[Nav01L]

Originally Posted by charger_vital

The comparisons to the 5711 or 15202 are amusing... But on a serious note: how would you compare it to watches in its comparative category, like the Zenith Defy, Bremont Supernova, or the Breitling Chronomat?

Originally Posted by dannyp

Curious why you feel it's so much better than the Defy? I've not tried either on the wrist, nor examined up close, but based on specs I'd find it hard to choose the IWC over the Zenith. The latter is priced 30% lower (at MSRP, before any discount) and the 41mm version comes with the legendary El Primero movement. I also like the fact that it comes in 36mm (albeit Elite-powered).

I always give an edge to what I call the "kingmakers" (JLC, GP, Zenith) whose movements are found in watches far better known and more expensive. To me, it's cool to have something from the "watchmaker's watchmakers" but that's personal opinion.

That said, the Defy styling is slightly more avant garde and probably not universally appealing. Previous Classic incarnation was a bit more mainstream (but didn't get the El Primero and was titanium-only as I recall).

I think both you guys are going at this from a very rational perspective, looking at what the tin says. And that’s fine. If you do that, of course an IWC would not contend with a Patek or an AP.

But if you go merely by the actual experience, that’s very different. What IWC has done here is looking at where the rubber really hits the road when you wear a watch. And for an IWC, like for any other industrial grade watch, be it a Rolex/Zenith/JLC/whatever, heck even for lower tier AP, that’s never really going to be the caseback. All the caseback ever does on these watches is show you what the advancements of CNC machining have been over the years. But none of it is truly pretty to look at until you reach the likes of a VC Traditionelle or a Lange Saxonia, and even there, things remain fairly basic.

Granted, when you select a watch as a watch nerd, you may be thinking about how the movement is made, how it’s finished, what complications it may bear, etc. etc.

But when the excitement of having a new watch has died down, or if you never were a watch nerd to begin with, you end up wearing certain watches the most that respond to an entirely different set of criteria.

And this is where the Royal Oak and the Nautilus excel. They a. feel great when you wear them, b. you can do anything in them, c. they work great as status symbols and d. they are very delicate designs visually, with an elegance and finesse that other watches which fulfill a. b. and c. above often lack, while other watches that also have d., for example the Octo Finissimo, lack in a. b. and/or c.

The new IWC is like the Nautilus and the Royal Oak in that way. It fulfills a. b. c. d. in a similar-ish fashion. Granted, at a lower level overall, but in a way where it costing 1/3 the price of the 5711/15202 seems more than fair.

None of the „peers“ like the Zenith or Breitling do that in any way that would come close. They feel more „blunt“ for the lack of a better term. The same is true for the older 2010ish rendition of the Ingenieur btw. So that’s not to denigrate any other brands in comparison to IWC.

So you have to choose, whether you want to wear something that feels less refined but that you know to have a slightly more meritous movement (albeit still industrial grade, it’s not like Zeniths were that pretty either), or something that feels quite amazing but where you‘ll be thankful the caseback is closed, so that you don’t have to look too closely at what’s inside.

And in many respects, that too is not too different from a Patek or an AP. If you elect to spend 39k on a steel watch with a very basic three hand movement over the fantastic watchmaking in a gold case that money would get you at Lange or Vacheron, just to name a few mainstream ones, you’re not doing it for the movement either. You’re doing it for how the thing looks and feels on your wrist.

I‘m confident that the more folks will experience this new Ingenieur, the more they’ll come to realize what it actually has to offer, and the greater success it will have.

The initial rush on it already points into that direction. I have, in my entire life, not seen as many people push into an IWC boutique at once, and especially not on a weekday. All of them wanted to see the exact same thing and all of them wanted to get on the list after trying it.

[psv]

Thanks for the input, I too spend some time with it and I have to say my conclusion is the direct opposite. IWC/Richemont has hybris and charging brand tax way above what they should.

I agree, it is a nice watch and a very welcome release, but it should be in the $6-7,000 range IMO. The bracelet is nice but a) it has no micro adjustment, b) the clasp has an irritating overlap, i.e. you have to close one side before the other (instead of just closing either side like on e.g. the VC Overseas bracelet), and c) there is no facility to put the watch on a rubber strap. All of those items are hard fails IMO, I even suspect they will rectify them over time.

More on IWC's pricing, and I took this up with the Head of IWC North America - here in the US IWC charges $,8750 for the new 41mm ceramic case with day and date complication, chronograph, etc while they are asking $8,950 for the Big Pilot 43 - a standard steel watch without even date function. There is something wrong with that equation (and it also makes the ceramic chrono 41 top gun very attractive...)

[Nav01L]

Originally Posted by dannyp

I always give an edge to what I call the "kingmakers" (JLC, GP, Zenith) whose movements are found in watches far better known and more expensive. To me, it's cool to have something from the "watchmaker's watchmakers" but that's personal opinion.

Also more generally on that point, as it’s a very interesting one, the reason why those other brand watches that use (or used, in most cases) those „watchmaker’s watchmaker“ movements are that much more expensive is that the finish is done at those other brands and that’s the part that’s a. beautiful, b. truly difficult and c. because of that, expensive.

Look at the legendary Lemania chronograph. All Lemania ever did was make the parts in a somewhat consistent quality. Omega then refined that into the 321, a somewhat pretty but not particularly refined workhorse. At the same time, both Patek (back until the 5170) and VC (to this day) made some of the most beautiful chronographs on the market out of those same parts by virtue of how they finished them.

Back in the day, both parts of that process were quite admirable. While the engineering of the movement layouts was not necessarily that difficult (they’re often pretty basic, at least that Lemania sure is), sourcing parts of consistent quality from all the subcontractors and workers who often made them in their homes was really hard. That’s why the brands like Patek and VC did not traditionally do that themselves but liked to have a Lemania or JLC be a one stop shop to get these things from.

Today things are very different. In the age of CNC, the machined parts fall out of the lathe in absolutely consistent quality. You don’t need a separate company sitting in some remote mountain valley who knows what to get from which farmer at what time of day before they get too drunk anymore. You can just throw on the machine and make some more in your factory‘s ground floor, while your workers concentrate on the finishing they perfected over centuries.

And that’s also why the high tier brands still flourish while the traditional motoristes like JLC and Zenith struggle and kling to the few distinctive designs they released over the years to remain relevant.

The horribly overplayed and overextended Reverso story is a good example of that and the El Primero isn’t much better.

The only way to be successful as a motoriste today is in a large group, where you can put all the CNC lathes into one place. That’s what makes ETA so successful within the Swatch Group, and the lesser known Valfleurier (that also makes 90% of that IWC movement btw) within Richemont.

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by Nav01L

I think both you guys are going at this from a very rational perspective, looking at what the tin says. And that’s fine. If you do that, of course an IWC would not contend with a Patek or an AP.

But if you go merely by the actual experience, that’s very different. What IWC has done here is looking at where the rubber really hits the road when you wear a watch. And for an IWC, like for any other industrial grade watch, be it a Rolex/Zenith/JLC/whatever, heck even for lower tier AP, that’s never really going to be the caseback. All the caseback ever does on these watches is show you what the advancements of CNC machining have been over the years. But none of it is truly pretty to look at until you reach the likes of a VC Traditionelle or a Lange Saxonia, and even there, things remain fairly basic.

Granted, when you select a watch as a watch nerd, you may be thinking about how the movement is made, how it’s finished, what complications it may bear, etc. etc.

But when the excitement of having a new watch has died down, or if you never were a watch nerd to begin with, you end up wearing certain watches the most that respond to an entirely different set of criteria.

And this is where the Royal Oak and the Nautilus excel. They a. feel great when you wear them, b. you can do anything in them, c. they work great as status symbols and d. they are very delicate designs visually, with an elegance and finesse that other watches which fulfill a. b. and c. above often lack, while other watches that also have d., for example the Octo Finissimo, lack in a. b. and/or c.

The new IWC is like the Nautilus and the Royal Oak in that way. It fulfills a. b. c. d. in a similar-ish fashion. Granted, at a lower level overall, but in a way where it costing 1/3 the price of the 5711/15202 seems more than fair.

None of the „peers“ like the Zenith or Breitling do that in any way that would come close. They feel more „blunt“ for the lack of a better term. The same is true for the older 2010ish rendition of the Ingenieur btw. So that’s not to denigrate any other brands in comparison to IWC.

So you have to choose, whether you want to wear something that feels less refined but that you know to have a slightly more meritous movement (albeit still industrial grade, it’s not like Zeniths were that pretty either), or something that feels quite amazing but where you‘ll be thankful the caseback is closed, so that you don’t have to look too closely at what’s inside.

And in many respects, that too is not too different from a Patek or an AP. If you elect to spend 39k on a steel watch with a very basic three hand movement over the fantastic watchmaking in a gold case that money would get you at Lange or Vacheron, just to name a few mainstream ones, you’re not doing it for the movement either. You’re doing it for how the thing looks and feels on your wrist.

I‘m confident that the more folks will experience this new Ingenieur, the more they’ll come to realize what it actually has to offer, and the greater success it will have.

The initial rush on it already points into that direction. I have, in my entire life, not seen as many people push into an IWC boutique at once, and especially not on a weekday. All of them wanted to see the exact same thing and all of them wanted to get on the list after trying it.

Good perspective on this . Yea, I'd say this is pretty spot on. I will say that the other thing that comes into play for me (eluded to before) is size. I don't like anything over 38. So that's innately part of why the GP and Zenith appeal (38 and 36 availability respectively).

On that note, curious your thoughts on some other "contenders" in this category we hear from on here:

Tonda
Polo
Alpine Eagle

I know the larger versions are typically in vogue around here, but I've noticed these as all are available in 36 as well.

I'll have to go try the IWC at some point, just to know what all the hype is about, and perhaps my entire tune will change.

[Nav01L]

Originally Posted by dannyp

Good perspective on this . Yea, I'd say this is pretty spot on. I will say that the other thing that comes into play for me (eluded to before) is size. I don't like anything over 38. So that's innately part of why the GP and Zenith appeal (38 and 36 availability respectively).

On that note, curious your thoughts on some other "contenders" in this category we hear from on here:

Tonda
Polo
Alpine Eagle

I know the larger versions are typically in vogue around here, but I've noticed these as all are available in 36 as well.

I'll have to go try the IWC at some point, just to know what all the hype is about, and perhaps my entire tune will change.

Have unfortunately not come across one of the newer Tonda PFs yet. Much to my regret as I would be very interested in seeing that first hand. Don’t like those triangular surfaces on the bracelet visually in the pictures, but otherwise it’s a very pretty watch from a brand I have a particular soft spot for, despite their many failings and disappointments over recent years.

The Alpine Eagle is a more robust construction, it lacks elegance both as a design and in how it’s executed, in my eyes at least. Like the VC Overseas it’s „sturdier“ than the IWC, in the same way that a Mercedes All-Terrain Model is sturdier but less elegant than the equivalent regular model without the black plastic on the wheelarches. But it isn’t as well finished as an Overseas either. Plus I just don’t like the placement of those screws visually. So not a fan of that one, but it’s very subjective.

The Polo I never really had an interest in, so can’t really speak to that one. With its lugs it’s more of an Aquanaut adjacent design and less of an integrated one. But FWIW I‘d expect it to do pretty well in the finesse of how it wears/feels. That’s something Piaget is typically pretty good at.

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by Nav01L

Have unfortunately not come across one of the newer Tonda PFs yet. Much to my regret as I would be very interested in seeing that first hand. Don’t like those triangular surfaces on the bracelet visually in the pictures, but otherwise it’s a very pretty watch from a brand I have a particular soft spot for, despite their many failings and disappointments over recent years.

The Alpine Eagle is a more robust construction, it lacks elegance both as a design and in how it’s executed, in my eyes at least. Like the VC Overseas it’s „sturdier“ than the IWC, in the same way that a Mercedes All-Terrain Model is sturdier but less elegant than the equivalent regular model without the black plastic on the wheelarches. But it isn’t as well finished as an Overseas either. Plus I just don’t like the placement of those screws visually. So not a fan of that one, but it’s very subjective.

The Polo I never really had an interest in, so can’t really speak to that one. With its lugs it’s more of an Aquanaut adjacent design and less of an integrated one. But FWIW I‘d expect it to do pretty well in the finesse of how it wears/feels. That’s something Piaget is typically pretty good at.

Still find it interesting that you consider the GP to be a "sturdier" feeling design than the new Ingenieur, based on pics. But again, will have to try it.

I should also admit, I'm not a great IWC lover these days, but that's largely because (as I believe we've discussed previously) of the fact that it loves to brag about its history of developing watches for the Luftwaffe, though having scrubbed that word from its marketing materials. It has not, on the other hand, realized the irony in engraving the back of the Mk series (developed for the RAF) with a Luftwaffe aircraft.

[Nav01L]

Originally Posted by dannyp

Still find it interesting that you consider the GP to be a "sturdier" feeling design than the new Ingenieur, based on pics. But again, will have to try it.

I should also admit, I'm not a great IWC lover these days, but that's largely because (as I believe we've discussed previously) of the fact that it loves to brag about its history of developing watches for the Luftwaffe, though having scrubbed that word from its marketing materials. It has not, on the other hand, realized the irony in engraving the back of the Mk series (developed for the RAF) with a Luftwaffe aircraft.

Yeah, that’s one of the great idiocies of the modern IWC offerings. Calling it spitfire adds insult to injury. Also, the fact that the modern mk. watches have the hands and dial layout of the German design is a bit tough to accept intellectually.

But as much as all of that is hard to take seriously, I am still one to give credit where credit is due on that new one.

I also have to say that while I have as much of a bad view of that whole pilot watch subject as you, I do like the people at IWC a lot. All of those I interacted with, from the top down and from the bottom up, have been great folks that do their jobs with great passion. So I maintain a lot of respect for what they do despite the obvious misstep with the pilot line. To the point where I actually do own and actually quite like to wear a pilot chrono. Because difficult history and stupid marketing aside, it is a very nice watch to wear. And a very practical one on top of that.

As for the GP, it’s hard to pinpoint. I think it’s due to the proportions. The 42mm is obviously huge and covers the wrist like some sort of medical device, so there it’s clear, but on the 38 it’s hard to say, I think for the lack of a better description it’s the verticality of a slightly thicker watch with a slightly smaller diameter that, in addition, has very strong vertical lines from the bottom of the case up, all the way though the sides of the bezel. It has no crown guards either, which accentuates the verticality, same for that two layered bezel, that gives it even more visual depth. Then it has a bracelet that becomes thicker as it gets to the watch head, which makes the head and the endlinks one big chunk. The continuity of the shapes as the watch transitions into the bracelet is also different, the GP is more of a round watch, going into an integrated bracelet, whereas the IWC is almost a rhombus, with a straight flow into the bracelet. That all makes the GP feel thicker/higher, and thus sturdier, even when it isn’t according to objective measurements.

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by Nav01L

Yeah, that’s one of the great idiocies of the modern IWC offerings. Calling it spitfire adds insult to injury. Also, the fact that the modern mk. watches have the hands and dial layout of the German design is a bit tough to accept intellectually.

But as much as all of that is hard to take seriously, I am still one to give credit where credit is due on that new one.

I also have to say that while I have as much of a bad view of that whole pilot watch subject as you, I do like the people at IWC a lot. All of those I interacted with, from the top down and from the bottom up, have been great folks that do their jobs with great passion. So I maintain a lot of respect for what they do despite the obvious misstep with the pilot line. To the point where I actually do own and actually quite like to wear a pilot chrono. Because difficult history and stupid marketing aside, it is a very nice watch to wear. And a very practical one on top of that.

As for the GP, it’s hard to pinpoint. I think it’s due to the proportions. The 42mm is obviously huge and covers the wrist like some sort of medical device, so there it’s clear, but on the 38 it’s hard to say, I think for the lack of a better description it’s the verticality of a slightly thicker watch with a slightly smaller diameter that, in addition, has very strong vertical lines from the bottom of the case up, all the way though the sides of the bezel. It has no crown guards either, which accentuates the verticality, same for that two layered bezel, that gives it even more visual depth. Then it has a bracelet that becomes thicker as it gets to the watch head, which makes the head and the endlinks one big chunk. The continuity of the shapes as the watch transitions into the bracelet is also different, the GP is more of a round watch, going into an integrated bracelet, whereas the IWC is almost a rhombus, with a straight flow into the bracelet. That all makes the GP feel thicker/higher, and thus sturdier, even when it isn’t according to objective measurements.

At least with the Spitfire they have a Spitfire engraved on the case back (like with the Top Gun pieces). And blame on the Pilot front (engravings aside) falls on IWC's marketing department. Until not long ago, the Luftwaffe history was still cited on the company's website. I don't know whether scrubbing the word (but keeping the story of its military origins) makes things better or worse.

[trackingtime]

Originally Posted by psv

Thanks for the input, I too spend some time with it and I have to say my conclusion is the direct opposite. IWC/Richemont has hybris and charging brand tax way above what they should.

I agree, it is a nice watch and a very welcome release, but it should be in the $6-7,000 range IMO. The bracelet is nice but a) it has no micro adjustment, b) the clasp has an irritating overlap, i.e. you have to close one side before the other (instead of just closing either side like on e.g. the VC Overseas bracelet), and c) there is no facility to put the watch on a rubber strap. All of those items are hard fails IMO, I even suspect they will rectify them over time.

More on IWC's pricing, and I took this up with the Head of IWC North America - here in the US IWC charges $,8750 for the new 41mm ceramic case with day and date complication, chronograph, etc while they are asking $8,950 for the Big Pilot 43 - a standard steel watch without even date function. There is something wrong with that equation (and it also makes the ceramic chrono 41 top gun very attractive...)

so what did IWC reply?

[trackingtime]

Originally Posted by Nav01L

I think both you guys are going at this from a very rational perspective, looking at what the tin says. And that’s fine. If you do that, of course an IWC would not contend with a Patek or an AP.

But if you go merely by the actual experience, that’s very different. What IWC has done here is looking at where the rubber really hits the road when you wear a watch. And for an IWC, like for any other industrial grade watch, be it a Rolex/Zenith/JLC/whatever, heck even for lower tier AP, that’s never really going to be the caseback. All the caseback ever does on these watches is show you what the advancements of CNC machining have been over the years. But none of it is truly pretty to look at until you reach the likes of a VC Traditionelle or a Lange Saxonia, and even there, things remain fairly basic.

Granted, when you select a watch as a watch nerd, you may be thinking about how the movement is made, how it’s finished, what complications it may bear, etc. etc.

But when the excitement of having a new watch has died down, or if you never were a watch nerd to begin with, you end up wearing certain watches the most that respond to an entirely different set of criteria.

And this is where the Royal Oak and the Nautilus excel. They a. feel great when you wear them, b. you can do anything in them, c. they work great as status symbols and d. they are very delicate designs visually, with an elegance and finesse that other watches which fulfill a. b. and c. above often lack, while other watches that also have d., for example the Octo Finissimo, lack in a. b. and/or c.

The new IWC is like the Nautilus and the Royal Oak in that way. It fulfills a. b. c. d. in a similar-ish fashion. Granted, at a lower level overall, but in a way where it costing 1/3 the price of the 5711/15202 seems more than fair.

None of the „peers“ like the Zenith or Breitling do that in any way that would come close. They feel more „blunt“ for the lack of a better term. The same is true for the older 2010ish rendition of the Ingenieur btw. So that’s not to denigrate any other brands in comparison to IWC.

So you have to choose, whether you want to wear something that feels less refined but that you know to have a slightly more meritous movement (albeit still industrial grade, it’s not like Zeniths were that pretty either), or something that feels quite amazing but where you‘ll be thankful the caseback is closed, so that you don’t have to look too closely at what’s inside.

And in many respects, that too is not too different from a Patek or an AP. If you elect to spend 39k on a steel watch with a very basic three hand movement over the fantastic watchmaking in a gold case that money would get you at Lange or Vacheron, just to name a few mainstream ones, you’re not doing it for the movement either. You’re doing it for how the thing looks and feels on your wrist.

I‘m confident that the more folks will experience this new Ingenieur, the more they’ll come to realize what it actually has to offer, and the greater success it will have.

The initial rush on it already points into that direction. I have, in my entire life, not seen as many people push into an IWC boutique at once, and especially not on a weekday. All of them wanted to see the exact same thing and all of them wanted to get on the list after trying it.

yea, IWC is finally going towards the right direction.
last year lake tahoe was a hit and there's actually a waiting list for a IWC.
amazing.

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by psv

More on IWC's pricing, and I took this up with the Head of IWC North America - here in the US IWC charges $,8750 for the new 41mm ceramic case with day and date complication, chronograph, etc while they are asking $8,950 for the Big Pilot 43 - a standard steel watch without even date function. There is something wrong with that equation (and it also makes the ceramic chrono 41 top gun very attractive...)

My guess is that these watches were never priced relative to one another, but against the watches from which they were derived.

The BP43, on the one hand, was probably priced based on the price of the original BP (which does have a substantially more special movement), and lowered accordingly.

Pilot chronographs, on the other hand, seemed to have worked their way up from the basic Pilot watches, with adjustments for materials, etc. So, when you compare the two BPs, pricing makes sense, same as when comparing the Top Gun 41 to the steel version and the steel version to the Mk XX.

[Wahlberg]

Originally Posted by Nav01L

Looks too big, especially when wearing it this high.

[Nav01L]

Originally Posted by Wahlberg

Looks too big, especially when wearing it this high.

The bracelet was not sized, not my watch. I trust mine will end up sitting more naturally on my wrist.