Discussion
In the past on here, I have railed against what I see as the 'forum favourites', IWC.
Well, I've finally found one that I 'get'.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cB8ftBRJGM&fea...
Wow.
Well, I've finally found one that I 'get'.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cB8ftBRJGM&fea...
Wow.
You'll like my Casio. It has 5 separate alarms and lights up in the dark. 
I don't see what the problem with IWC is - you either like the designs or not; it's not a crime to choose either side.
I'm boring and would have the basic, cheap flieger. If I had bigger wrists and they used a standard lug, I'd go for an Ingenieur as it's like an upmarket G-shock.
I don't see what the problem with IWC is - you either like the designs or not; it's not a crime to choose either side.
I'm boring and would have the basic, cheap flieger. If I had bigger wrists and they used a standard lug, I'd go for an Ingenieur as it's like an upmarket G-shock.
Miguel Alvarez said:
The grey bezel one. very nice and subtle. I think we have similar tastes or my tastes follow yours. I've seen a few pics of your watches and I always have thats the watch in my head feeling.
I meant 'which Andy' - they're his watches - but yes, the Aquatimer 3536-01, from around 2000; the yellow bezel is the next generation on from this. There're two other main versions of the 3536 in s/steel; the titanium really works well though - I'm sure Andy will be along later to let you know what he thought, having actually had the watch!My tastes are a bit funny sometimes; the IWC for example - it's a working watch so I'd like to see either hands with full lume or white borders - silver egded hands aren't attractive in this context personally; I like the dull grey titanium which is also light and allergenic, very practical and yes, a bit different from stainless.
The dial has no numbers - as long as you can differentiate where the 12 o'clock is then how often do you refer to the numbers around a dial? Taking the numbers out makes the dial very legible and 'instrument' looking. The only 'conceit' with the IWC imo is the bezel - the graduations should be white on black really but it's so well executed on the IWC (and quite clever - less parts) that I'll forgive it - the 'castellation' at the 12 o'clock position is in keeping with the construction of the bezel and is a bit of flair that just emphasises the design.
The lugs are IWC rather than standard and this may restrict what strap you use on it but it looks very good on its bracelet - again, maybe Andy can comment on quality.
There's no fancy stuff to distract from the job yet somehow IWC have made a very elegant solution at the same time - it looks different while being very plain, there aren't too many about and any WIS worth his salt will at least offer a knowing nod in its direction. (Metaphorically speaking)
That's why I quite like it anyway, perhaps it seems like I'm quite conservative but if I hadn't recently emptyed my 'Noriega' funds (how apt?!) and had been a bit quicker this would be adorning the 'incoming' thread:
(One, well, three on the left - not the Rolex, that was more Cuba...)
(TZ-UK)
So, no accounting for taste - and I do appreciate dressier watches and watches from the whole price spectrum and wide time-spread - but the IWC I would say is in or pretty close to top ten territory.
Edited by andy_s on Monday 4th October 16:25
The one Andy doesn't like is the one I do 
It's not getting any wrist time so it's for sale, as it has been for ages… really not marketing it hard enough!
One thing that's *really* cool about IWC divers is the bracelet link design… I think it's the same from the earlier models past mine to the current ones. Absolutely ingenious - adjustment only requires a couple of soft pins and won't (unless you're completely malcoordinated and shouldn't be entrusted with watch tools anyway) ever scratch the bracelet. Press a sprung recess in the centre of the underside of each link, and the connecting pin retainer is released, allowing the pin to be slid out from between the links. Replacing is as simple as pushing the pin back in until the sprung centre retainer 'clicks'. This is particularly critical in the case of their titanium watches, because titanium is notoriously easy to scratch unless you resort to Sinn-type surface treatments...
IWC even provide two soft pins for this very purpose in the box.
Best, and most comfortable, bracelet linkage design I've seen IMO - closely followed by JLC (IWC's is more simple, more elegant and hence better IMO). At the end of the day, the most comfortable *bracelet* remains the good-old Rolex / Tudor / homage / replica Oyster bracelet - for some reason - but the screwed links are a bit out of date and prone to damage / wear / thread strippage / etc.
It's not getting any wrist time so it's for sale, as it has been for ages… really not marketing it hard enough!
One thing that's *really* cool about IWC divers is the bracelet link design… I think it's the same from the earlier models past mine to the current ones. Absolutely ingenious - adjustment only requires a couple of soft pins and won't (unless you're completely malcoordinated and shouldn't be entrusted with watch tools anyway) ever scratch the bracelet. Press a sprung recess in the centre of the underside of each link, and the connecting pin retainer is released, allowing the pin to be slid out from between the links. Replacing is as simple as pushing the pin back in until the sprung centre retainer 'clicks'. This is particularly critical in the case of their titanium watches, because titanium is notoriously easy to scratch unless you resort to Sinn-type surface treatments...
IWC even provide two soft pins for this very purpose in the box.
Best, and most comfortable, bracelet linkage design I've seen IMO - closely followed by JLC (IWC's is more simple, more elegant and hence better IMO). At the end of the day, the most comfortable *bracelet* remains the good-old Rolex / Tudor / homage / replica Oyster bracelet - for some reason - but the screwed links are a bit out of date and prone to damage / wear / thread strippage / etc.
Cyberface, have you tried the new Glidelock Deepsea bracelet, it's very clever but simple to adjust, It seems to be more comfortable then the Oyster or the president. It thins down, which some people don't like, I think Rolex researched it to death though, it's very close to being as comfortable as a leather strap.
andy_s said:
I'm sure Andy will be along later to let you know what he thought, having actually had the watch!
The lugs are IWC rather than standard and this may restrict what strap you use on it but it looks very good on its bracelet - again, maybe Andy can comment on quality.
Both my Aquatimers were great - I don't have either anymoreThe lugs are IWC rather than standard and this may restrict what strap you use on it but it looks very good on its bracelet - again, maybe Andy can comment on quality.
The 3536-01 (the older one) has a super external bezel with a really clever mechanism that stops it getting accidentally knocked. The whole watch oozed quality & as has been said the bracelet adjustment is both easy & accurate.
The 3536 family are all quite sought after now & prices seem to have risen in the year or so since I sold mine.
Picture shamelessly blagged off the net.
My other Aquatimer was the 3719, the chrono version of the 3538. It was subjectively not quite so special, but still a lovely piece & the internal bezel worked superbly.
You're limited to either the IWC bracelets, the IWC rubber strap, or an IWC velcro strap that has metal end links. I tried the 3536 on the rubber & didn't like it, compared the the bracelet.
The 3719 on the other hand just looked so good on the rubber I never even tried it on the bracelet.
Some gratuitous shots to illustrate the quality of these pieces
HTH, but ask away if anyone wants to know more
ShadownINja said:
xPOW said:
I love IWC. i have a few, but think this is my favourite. Vintage Aquatimer. Looks gorgeous (IMO).. will try and take pics of few others and post soon.
Always wondered if anyone bought the Vintage collection. Got any more from the Vintage collection, then?I have a ceramic non-Top'd Gun version of the Doppel Chrono one. Ltd to 1000 pieces so only wear that now and then. Also have a Spitfire and older white-faced Portofino that looks very classy when wearing a suit or black tie etc..
xPOW said:
ShadownINja said:
xPOW said:
I love IWC. i have a few, but think this is my favourite. Vintage Aquatimer. Looks gorgeous (IMO).. will try and take pics of few others and post soon.
Always wondered if anyone bought the Vintage collection. Got any more from the Vintage collection, then?I have a ceramic non-Top'd Gun version of the Doppel Chrono one. Ltd to 1000 pieces so only wear that now and then. Also have a Spitfire and older white-faced Portofino that looks very classy when wearing a suit or black tie etc..
ks, sorry about that...Don1 said:
And I still don't 'get' anything else posted here. Seriously - this was about the amazing build and complexity of the skeleton repeater - nothing else on here so far has hit the mark, or even come close.
:huff:
Oops, sorry about that, was a bit of a tangent - time for 'Order...order....order me a taxi...':huff:
Adrian W said:
Cyberface, have you tried the new Glidelock Deepsea bracelet, it's very clever but simple to adjust, It seems to be more comfortable then the Oyster or the president. It thins down, which some people don't like, I think Rolex researched it to death though, it's very close to being as comfortable as a leather strap.
If it's like the clasp on the new Sub, which is a tool-less adjuster too, yes it's cool. Even the fake one is brilliantly engineered The normal-ish (but big-ish) Oyster bracelet on my Tudor is very comfortable as the watch itself curves round my wrist - Tudor couldn't have the new adjustment mechanism as befits its location firmly *below* Rolex on their 'product matrix' but instead I've got four sprung pearls to retain the clasp… which probably costs more to make than the Rolex part… weird world eh?
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff