Inside the Pure Classic: Calibre 62060

Courtesy of another forum member, I'm pleased to show you the first image --at least to my knowledge-- of IWC's calibre 62060. This rare calibre, used in only 1000 IWC watches, is an ultra-thin movement, and special in its own right. It is made for IWC by Piaget.

If you'd like a huge copy of this image, you can download it directly by going to www.iwcforum.com/Movements/Cal62060.jpg

I'm very impressed with the finishing on the movement. You can easily see the Geneva stripes on the bridges and cocks, and also note the perlage on the plate near the balance wheel at the bottom. What especially strikes me is the finishing of the edges: note the Anglage, and how they're chamfered and polished. This really is traditional high quality Swiss movement finishing.

Wow, I thought Mark was kidding.

I'm impressed, thanks for sharing.

Kevin

Thank you for the wonderful picture Michal, the movement looks great!

Kind regards,

Clemens

@ Alan, you said it ... Quote:" you know you want it" - LOL.

Actually, I had returned the Pure Classic to the AD earlier in the week. Then, the debate burst lose on the forum in my post Under the Influence.., and the itch cycle started all over again.

My leanings are IWC legacy, and that Jubilee with my name on it is out there somewhere, but although the counter arguments and opinions were there too ( and I appreciated all inputs" MF's take on things was spot on. For someone like me who still dons a suit most days for work, it's a very dressy And classic watch which will get wrist time.

So today I returned to the AD - and made him an offer he could not refuse....I agreed to discuss the price of the watch with him, conditional to his watchmaker opening it up and allowing us to see the mysterious 62060! i actually showed him the debate / forum pages on my ipad, and we went upstairs to the workshops.

On seeing the quality finish on this movement....

The rest is History!

Thanks for posting Michael, terrific watch!

So finally Mark made his choice and he was so (healthily) crazy to open the case-back of a new watch!

This forum makes it to surprise me everyday, fantastic!

That's, well, pure classic! Thanks for the excellent image you shared!

@ Mark,

I didn't think you were crazy enough to open up the watch back. That's why I thought you were kidding.

I had the same reaction. Congratulations. Now we can wait with anticipation the arrival of a Jubilee.

Beautiful movement!

Great watch, Mark. Congratulations on an excellent choice from a pair on which you could not go wrong. I'm looking forward to more pictures!

what 'dinky toy' Mark were u writing to me about, lol ??? big big congrats ! I think the movement finishing is excellent - this and the Portofino 8 days are very well executed IMO.

wrist pics, and pics please. and we are still waiting on the Jubilee !

Finally I get to see what is inside! I was considering taking the back off of mine just to get a peek.

Thanks!

I still find it surprising that IWC did not provide a photo or two of the movement themselves.

Wow Mark, that's amazing! Enjoy this rare beauty and wear it in good health.

Kind regards,

Clemens

Thanks Michael, for sharing this beautiful photo of a beautiful movement.

Dear Michael

Many thanks for this very interesting information and the picture.

Enclosed I place as thank a picture of an other rare movement, most probably of the same manufacture Piaget. The c.171 with a height of only 1.73 mm is the flattest movement IWC ever used.
A remark: 1.73mm instead of the 1.71mm which the caliber number indicates, as it was unsusual in the late 60's for c.185 c, c.320, c.325, c.375 to indicate the height with teh caliber number)

It's a beauty Mark, and having a LE of 500 each black and silver dials as well! Does anyone know why there was no silver dial in RG or even turning the clock back to the days of YG? Maybe the case thickness does not lend itself to being in gold without it being a thicker model?

Just to orrect the record --there are 500 silver and 500 black dial Pure Classics. There weren't more variations because the movements are very difficult to obtain; Piaget cannot produce them quickly enough for their own watches.

Hi Mark,

Just for comparison purposes:

Finally I had last week the possibility to see the pure classic myself in the new Boutique in Zurich.
In addition there was, what a coincidence, an "old Portugieser" nearby. So I had to take a picture.

I just wanted to share this image. A real nice watches, the "pure classic pure".

The "pure classic" is really nice. There were two points, why I did not bought it immediately:
- As a pocket watcher, my heart is beeding, the watches heart is not really a pocket watch movement.
- When you have a look at the the "classic pure" (right hand side), you may understand why I love the old signature.

May be next time I could get weak.

regards

Ralph

P.S: When you look the image precisely, you could get the impression the old watch is flatter. The case is thinner, but the old watch has a raised plastic glass. The new one got a flat saphire glass, a shock protection of the balance and is waterproof.

Pure Classic, both the case and the movement are purely classic!

@ Ralph, I have to admit O love that finishing on your piece. Nice to see Switzerland spelt out fully and prominently there too...

@ Ralph, that sure was a PURE coincidence that a true original classic was so close at hand. Great to see the comparison shot - and yes, I must agree I too prefer the old font / logo on the dial. Might even consider to redial my Pure Classic !

Great shot with such a lovely pair of watchs. Judging from the shadows beneath both watches. I would guess that the Pure Classic is more "elevated" by the lugs. A shot on my Pure Classic for your reference.

Hi Ralph,
The 171 movement was made by Frederic Piguet.Their calibre 21.
The equivelent Piaget movement was the 9p. A bit thicker at 2mm and not used by IWC.

Many Thanks for the correction. Some you may know that I am not too strong with mames, I prefer numbers...
...Piaget and Piguet are so close, so for mee it looks and sounds like the same ;-) (in reality they are differernt, I know)

So sorry for the wrong information and Thanks again for the correction

Ralph