Hi there,
I am curious if anyone has an opinion on the mid size IWC Ingenieur.
(Stolen internet picture)
I have owned an IWC Ing 3227, but after some time, I had to sell it due the size. It was to large for my wrist. A Sub date 16610 is the perfect size for my wrist.
This smaller Ing caught my eye. It is 34mm, but I can't find if that is with or without crown. Furthermore, it is 10mm high. Is there anyone that can tell me if it wears big or small? Or any other opinions?
I know about the new Ing 3239, but I am not that fond of the crownguards...
EDIT: I am also curious about the opinions on: IWC 3521. A nice forum member talked me in to that watch.
Both IW4145 and IWC 3521 have my attention, but I would like to know others experience.
Last edited by Time Cat; 14th February 2016 at 17:59. Reason: I thought this would give me a better view upon my (possible) next watch.
Hi, what typically determines how a watch wears is the bezel width and lug size. With a thick bezel, and integrated braclet (eg very short lugs), it would suggest it wears small. A better measurement than width is the lug-to-lug size. I also think the the proportions makes it look small.
If you think a 16610 is perfect for your wrist my guess would be that you will find this too small.
Last edited by jonasy; 14th February 2016 at 18:57.
I've just bought a 3227. I wear a Aquatimer, so knew the size would be OK. Can't comment on the mid size, apart from that I think it looks fantastic.
I know you said you don't like the 3239 crown guards, but if you can get past that, I think it could be perfect size. I wear a GMTII (perfect size for me) and have just bought a 3239, which also fits very well.
I own one and it does wear a bit larger than 34mm would suggest, the integrated bracelet gives it a bit of heft. But it still feels a bit under a 36mm watch, as you might expect, and will look better with some clothes than others. Once you wear it for a few days your eyes adjust and you can see why it was considered the right size when it was made - it's the whole bracelet you're looking at, not just the dial. Probably one for those is us with slimmer wrists though.
I can't for the life of me work out why IWC abandoned that wonderful bezel. For me, that's the best looking of all the Genta designs (yeah, minority opinion, I know!)
Watch porn! No help but I love IWC 3 handers. I can never move on my MkXV and would love an Ingenieur (same sh*t, different shovel really)
Originally Posted by jonasy
I am anxious about that. I never owned a watch smaller than 40mm. You must be right that it wears small, because of the integrated bracelet and short lugs.
I owned a old Aquatimer as well. The main thing of the 3227 and Aquatimer is the hight of the case. It is to big for me. My wrist is about 6 inch total.
Isn'tthat the jumbo? It looks different than the one I pointed out...I own one and it does wear a bit larger than 34mm would suggest, the integrated bracelet gives it a bit of heft. But it still feels a bit under a 36mm watch, as you might expect, and will look better with some clothes than others. Once you wear it for a few days your eyes adjust and you can see why it was considered the right size when it was made - it's the whole bracelet you're looking at, not just the dial. Probably one for those is us with slimmer wrists though.
Man, I love that new Ing. :) I certainly is one of my favourite watches, but those guards. I might look for one of those, remove the crownguards and polish the side. It is such a beautiful watch..I know you said you don't like the 3239 crown guards, but if you can get past that, I think it could be perfect size. I wear a GMTII (perfect size for me) and have just bought a 3239, which also fits very well.
I doubt a lot between the Ingenieurs. The 3227 felt so good and looks fantastic. It really hurt to trade it in the end. :(
Last edited by Time Cat; 15th February 2016 at 00:36.
Not the Jumbo but the smaller second generation 'skinny' Ingenieur Quartz, 34mm. Basically similar to the one you posted, but for a few details.
I want to love the new one but the crown guards just push it over the edge in size. It's like they tried to make a smaller watch with the original proportions, but couldn't bring themselves to do it, they had to make it slightly bigger. I'm curious to see if they tweak the design in future.
like the OP, I had a 3227 which I sold - it was simply too big, too thick, never mind the weight (which was significant.) The new 3239 looks like a good compromise between the bigger 3227 and the older, smaller neo-vintage models. I'm certainly going to keep my eyes out for one - it sounds like a perfect size for me!
Have you considered the 3228? 40mm, no crown guards, in house movement and as far as I'm aware only around 600 produced. Love mine and it's one of my keepers.
That is it: the thickness and weight.
But the 3228 isn't any different compared to the 3227? Except the colours.
Ah yes, like that. But I am not very fond of quartz watches. The SL Jumbo 1832 would be nice, but that is out of my price league. :(
The 3227 is 42mm, 14.7mm thick and 216g in weight. The 3228 is 40mm, 13.3 thick and 182g in weight.
Thanks! That sounds appealing.
That's a very attractive daily wearer.
I had a 3521 myself; despite a few flaws (crown smooth and too hard to get hold of, date not easily visible through the cyclops and bracelet not as adjustable as I'd have liked) it radiated quality and class.
That looks great on your wrist? What size do you have? It doesn't look 'that' small...I had a 3521 myself; despite a few flaws (crown smooth and too hard to get hold of, date not easily visible through the cyclops and bracelet not as adjustable as I'd have liked) it radiated quality and class.
My left wrist is about 7.5". It's a 36mm case, which is my ideal size. I agree, it did look good on the wrist.
Are you quite sure about that? A quick look at Chrono24 shows all 3521s listed as 34mm, like my 'skinny' Ingenieur Quartz posted previously.
Another vote for the Ingy 3228, 40mm and a lot lighter than its bigger cousin 3227.
It also has the benefit of a display back to show its beautiful in-house movement (as opposed to the newer models, which house an ETA).
Raffe's photography skills put mine to shame. Here's a couple more mediocre shots to wet your appetite.
Hairy wrist shot
A group shot of my collection, all 40mm for comparison
Good luck with the search.
Aaron
Really? That's interesting. It wore much the same as my Mk XII, with which it shared the same JLC movement (albeit differently modified in the Inge). I would be surprised if it was 34mm, but am happy to be corrected.
Google turned up this old thread: http://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.ph...-blah-and-pics
Which does support the proposition that it's a 34mm case. I'm honestly surprised.
That does however give support to the idea that it wears a little larger than you'd expect for a 34mm case, due to the integrated bracelet.
My daughter in law has the 34mm Ingenieur and it looks very good on her. She is quite petite and it suits her well.
This is looks too small to be a mans watch IMO and although I regularly wear my 34mm Constellation I could not wear this.
There is a very nice mid 90's 3521 at a dealer near me. But if I recall correctly it does not have box and papers, and as such I think the price is a little steep tho compared to a Milgauss, maybe not. The JLC movement is appealing also.
This thread is good timing for me. Some good info from owners.
Like many watches published sizes are useless, you need to try them on.
I was taken with a 3239 that was on SC before Christmas and have been researching ever since. Firstly the lack of in house movement doesn't bother me and at 40mm and 10mm high it sounds perfect. The sticking point is that I would have to sell my 42mm PO 8500 (does that sound like madness?) which I love but the size always niggles me with my 6 3/4" wrist.
Like the OP I need to get into Bond Street and try it on.
That does look good. The size sounds perfect, but it will be difficult to find one of those I guess.Another vote for the Ingy 3228, 40mm and a lot lighter than its bigger cousin 3227.
It also has the benefit of a display back to show its beautiful in-house movement (as opposed to the newer models, which house an ETA).
I also like this dail more than the one on new Ing.
I am petite. :D
Well, I guess it must be too small for me, albeit the picture of Monogroover looks like it could suit my wrist. :/
I'm not really petite (6'2" and medium build). On me it just looked like a rather elegant gent's watch, certainly not too small.
Love that.I know you said you don't like the 3239 crown guards, but if you can get past that, I think it could be perfect size. I wear a GMTII (perfect size for me) and have just bought a 3239, which also fits very well.
The angular crown guards actually give this model a real 70's feel which appeals to me much like the PP and AP.
What is the lug to lug size of the 3239 Downer and what was the bracelet like to size, any half links?
Thanks
Lug to lug is tricky on this watch - due to the integrated bracelet. However, I measured it as shown below...
The bracelet is very simple to size - IWC use a system (licensed from Cartier, I think) that means the bracelet can be sized without specialist tools. Press down on the push-button on the inside of the link and push the pin out from either side - dead easy. The bracelet is supplied with a half-link, but there is no other micro-adjustment mechanism, so it's still a bit of a crap-shoot whether or not you get a good fit. I was lucky.
Usually I like Engineers and usually I like smaller watches, but this one looks like a cheap Casio to me, sorry (I'm referring to the first watch shown on the thread).
Thanks Downer, much appreciated. It should be a perfect size for me, I'll have to get into the boutique and try one on.
I had the same problem with the PO bracelet and ended up using two half links.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
