Reply With QuoteI'm liking this one as well, but brace yourself for the usual carping about the base movement.
As an aside, I hear IWC are going to offer their own range of NATO straps to accompany this one, à la Omega, but I can't find any details of them?
Wow!
The new IWC Pilot Mark XVIII is absolutely beautiful in my opinion. Everything about this watch exudes class. Wonderful case, perfectly understated dial, perfect hands, nice size at 40mm. It will retail at around 3.5k which isn't off the scale. I personally haven't seen a pilot watch as perfect as this in many years of drooling.
I'm liking this one as well, but brace yourself for the usual carping about the base movement.
As an aside, I hear IWC are going to offer their own range of NATO straps to accompany this one, à la Omega, but I can't find any details of them?
There's already a thread about this watch and its smaller 36 mm sibling. http://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.ph...-pilot-s-watch
Most comments concentrate on the positioning of the date window, general concensus is it's too near the centre of the dial. Overall, I quite like this new look but agree about the date window position. However, I'd be more interested in it if it looked like this photoshopped mock-up I saw on the WUS forum.
@Seamaster73
There were two posted on IG earlier in the week by the Horologium: https://www.instagram.com/p/BAzXgJDM2Ph/
Last edited by Broussard; 24th January 2016 at 11:09.
For me the white dialled version looks great and the date window position doesn't bother me at all. I think 3.5k is a bit steep but will be interested to see UK pricing when confirmed.
This one goes on the to-do list
Thanks, but can you check the link?Originally Posted by Broussard
"Sorry, this page isn't available. The link you followed may be broken, or the page may have been removed."
I haven't seen an IWC Mark I liked since the XV, and this one doesn't change that I'm afraid.
https://instagram.com/p/BAzXgJDM2Ph/
I like the brand and this watch but it looks the same as the MK XV & MK XVI
The date window is a killer for this watch for me
Indeed, the illiterate mixing of Luftwaffe and RAF design elements that began with the XVI turned the formerly legitimate Mark-series into a fashion watch.
And yes, that's a lot of money for something with an off-the-shelf generic movement. I'd either get something from a real watchmaker if I'm paying a premium, or get a Sinn if I'm going with an ordinary ETA/ETA-clone movement; at least they have integrity.
Another bonus of Sinn is that they have reasonable service prices and will supply parts to independent watchmakers. Though that IWC's movement is rather cheap, their service costs unfortunately aren't.
Thanks. I'm enjoying the trend Omega began for high quality OEM NATOs.
Can't believe that date window. Cheap.
I agree with those who don't appreciate the positioning of the date window; I also think it's a bit too far from the edge of the dial........but have you noticed the positioning on Rolex submariners (without the cyclops) and on more recent sea-dwellers - the positioning looks very similar to me and yet I hear very little criticism of them
I think if the date was closer to the outside it would line up too closely with the hour numbers and sort of look a mini version, a mistake if you understand. Imagine on the 3rd of the month...
That is why it looks better offset in my opinion.
Love a simple sword hand watch in 40mm - winner for me.
Will definently be checking these out. I do love a Pilot watch.
I entirely agree with you. And I'll throw in the Damasko pilot watches too along Sinn.
Last edited by tanatron; 24th January 2016 at 17:21.
I wouldn't have noticed the positioning of the date window. Now that it has been pointed out to me, ugh!
What has been seen, and all that.
I'm still jonesing for the 36mm, mind.
I think that the 36mm version is better. The date window puts me off the 40mm version.
Pete.
Reading that this will be priced around £3.5k had me looking up the price of the 39mm OP: £3,750
I'm probably in a minority, but I actually prefer the previous version...
The dial appeals to me more with the lack of 9 and 6, the little hint of red at the date and I actually quite like the altimeter style date as it allows the date to be identified when minute hand at 3.
I've always thought IWC were a bit over priced for what they are, however, if this new encourages people to flip the previous one I may keep an eye out should a reasonable priced piece pop up.
I love it, the white dial version in particular.
As for the date placement, that's dictated by the movement, and given the 40mm size of the case, I'm glad that they didn't go smaller.
Regards,
Adam
PS - For you "purists", there's an LE in the works that will basically re-create the original Mark dial and square hands, and it might dispense with the date altogether. That's the good news. The bad news is that there will only be 20 and they're all spoken for.
The date-placement-is-dictated-by-the-movement excuse doesn't wash.
Oris uses the same Sellita movement in a 41 mm case on their pilots' watch, yet they've managed to produce a date window that fits the large dial:
Obviously the placement can be done properly even with a commodity movement, and at well under IWC's price point.
Last edited by Belligero; 25th January 2016 at 22:07.
Good point. I always assumed that the date track was a limiting factor, but you could make a wider datewheel that pushes the numbers further out. Odd that IWC chose not to. Doesn't really bother me, though, since most likely mine won't have a date anyway. ;-)
Regards,
Adam
PS - Not that it matters much, but the Marks use the 2892; the 36mm collection uses the Selitta. I specifically asked this question at SIHH.
^
Good info; thanks.
It's a bit disappointing that they'd only do twenty examples of the Mark series with the distinctive MoD hands, by the way. It would be nice to see that design back in regular production.
I can't help but feel the price is on the expensive side considering that a Sinn 556 is around 600-650 pounds. Is the IWC 5 times the watch? It certainly doesn't seem like it to me despite all the heritage.
Yup I saw the pics a few days back and really liked it, now the date wonkyness has been pointed out it sticks out like a sore thumb, really shoddy IMHO.
Then why did you mention it? You got me all excited for nothing :)
Ablogtowatch says they use base Sellita on Marks.
I know. They're wrong (ain't the first time, either).
Regards,
Adam
The Sellita "is" a 2892.
Nothing wrong with the date position to my eye... everyone has their own opinion, and that's mine. Seems it's fashionable these days (especially when it's IWC) to bang on about date position being wrong due to shoddy/slack work or 'small movement big case syndrome'.. whatever that syndrome actually is. I guess there had to be something to grump about now that the usual 'uuurgh triple date' line can't be used.
As has been said, Oris are capable of extending the date wheel out... I'm pretty sure IWC could do it if they wanted... so I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that their designers were quite happy with the date placement rather than it being anything more sinister.
^
That's rather trusting of you. ;)
I'm a trusting kinda guy.
I love everything about this watch apart from the movement. Tudor and Nomos Glashutte can sell watches with in-house movements for less than £3000 and yet IWC can't?
Save for that fact that it's called an SW200 (2824) or SW300 (2982), there's an extra jewel tucked in and it's made by Selitta, not ETA.
But otherwise, yes.
Regards,
Adam
Just hunt down a Mk XII - 36mm, much nicer, JLC movement.
This one's starting to get to me:
(No, the date doesn't bother me.)
At approx. $4400USD, there's a very good chance that I might bite.
Regards,
Adam
Nothing wrong with the movement.
I love this Cal. 30110 movement whether it is made by ETA or Sellita.
My Mark XVI runs constantly +1 sec a day since I purchased in October 2011.
Eddie makes a more perfect example for peanuts, top grade ETA included.
Daddel.
Got a new watch, divers watch it is, had to drown the bastard to get it!
Finally some pictures with the bracelet...
https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/the-iwc-mark-xviii-2
Hodinkee's tongue must be getting tired by now
Matching your over used keyboard...
I wonder if we could persuade him to do one with a white dial, I would certainly buy one.
After 500 posts I was beginning to fear that I was never going to get flamed gratuitously by one of the old soaks propping up the bar, so in a way this is strangely satisfying, but tbh, I had hoped for something wittier :'(
I can only give as good as I get, so perhaps practice your currently substandard quips a little before posting..,
;-)
Now there's an idea...
Regards,
Adam
I guess Hodinkee got it wrong too.
From Jack Forster's "Hands on with the IWC Mk. XVIII":
"The movement is purchased as a kit from Sellita however; we’ve been to visit IWC in Schaffhausen and we can tell you they’re adjusted to five positions and IWC’s internal chronometry standards, which is value added where it counts (and the Mark watches have had supplied engines inside since the Mark XII anyway)."
Sigh...
Yes, Jack (who's a friend of mine), got it wrong, too. It's not his fault, however, as he wrote that up when the literature being handed out had yet to be corrected. The c.30110 is, and always has been an ETA 2892 base. Trust me, I confirmed it directly with their head watchmaker.
Over dinner.
In Geneva.
Regards,
Adam
PS - And for the pedants, yes, the Selitta SW300 is, for all intents and purposes, a 2982 clone, but that movement in IWC parlance is referred to as the c.35111.
Posting Permissions
