Hi Donald,
Interesting points. I woudl never deny the "tractor-like" qualities of the ETA 2892 movement, or even 2824s (which IWC doesn't use).
However, I think the article's author made a typical amateur's mistake of looking at accuracy rather than precision. Because that also is so common here in "evaluating" movements, I would commend this excellent recent article by Jack Forster explaining the difference click here.
I would raise the somewhat rhetorical question, then: should IWC move to more sophisticated movements but at a higher price point? My view --not as a collector but as a purist-- is yes, even if that makes it harder for me to afford as many. It's what fine mechanical watches are all about.
I agree.
Thanks Michael the article really does an excellent job of explaining the issues.
Regards,
Kevin
Michael--
Thanks for forwarding the interesting Forster afrticle. He makes the perfectly valid point that the casual wearer of a highloy imprecise watch gaining ten seconds one day and losing ten the next might think, the gain and loss having cancelled each other out when he came to wind it on the third day, that he had a fabulously accurate watch.
My response would be that IWC owners are by and large NOT casual owners. We're crazy (neurotic?) about our watches' high quality and reliability. No doubt many us (maybe even a majority) track our watches' rate on a daily basis; I know I do, and my Mark XVI Fliegeruhr gains a shadow over two seconds everey day, as reliably as Old Faithful.
Hence I repeat the assertion that a movement regularly gaining eight seconds a day, be it ever so beautifully crafted and precise, is less than ideal. At the very bleast, it will have gained an entire minute before you know it, necessitating freq
I agree 100%. It's the same theory with boutique's vs AD's. AD's would cost less which is good, but I'm happy to pay a bit more.
I think.
Well, Michael - I would prefer an accurate watch that runs with +2 seconds in a week much more than precise watch gaining 8 seconds a day LOL
All the experiences I made with the ETA-based IWCs I owned were perfect. Adjusting was - if at all - needed only on the watches featuring an in-house movement. This is one of the reasons why I will sell my 5026-18 and if I ever will look for a replacement made by IWC, it will be the last "round" DaVinci, Valjoux-based, for an everyday "carefree" wear. I am sure there are people who made perfect experiences with in-house movements. For me, however, this has not been the case.
Still, I agree that the exclusivity of an in-house movement can make a watch very exclusive and therefore more collectible. However, everyone must decide individually about the value - price aspect.
Michael,
Absolutely agree that lume and case engineering on the YC doesn't equate to a $1,000 premium over the Classic. However, while the Santoni "retails" for around 450.00 that OEM rubber strap on the YC is no bargain either. There's just not a big difference in pricing of the two straps if purchased individually. From a IWC pricing strategy, if one compares the 5001, Classic and YC it would seem the Classic is priced about right.
I remember when the Classic was offically announced and first appeared on the IWC web site. The steel variation was set at 14,400 USD. There were a number of negative responses to the pricing also brought out as well on other forums. Comments questioned what justified a premium over he YC which I believe was 13,100 at the time. I'm sure these initial responses played a role in the repricing of the Classic.
I personally buy watches based on the look. With or without a In-House, if it sings to me .... I go for it. I never feel I'm missing anything. I suspect there are many like me.
Andy
Greetings Jarrod,
I hope I'm interrupting your reply correctly ( if not, please forgive me ) but are you saying if you can purchase the same watch at an AD for less, you would still be OK spending more at the boutique ?
Please share your thoughts on this if my interruption is accurate. Curious as to why?
Regards,
Andy
There are several interesting comments here, but we do wander afar from issues involving the review of this watch (perhaps including by me). My suggestion is that some of the ideas here are worth new threads.
That is not what I mean. What I mean, when agreeing with Michael, is that I would rather pay more for a fine mechanical watch than less for a watch with an unremarkable movement.
Boutique vs AD is a non issue to me.
Hi Andy,
What I meant was I am ok with IWC moving away from AD's towards boutique's. ultimately this will mean paying more for the watches but I think it will better protect the values. I may be wrong. But in the meantime I'm happy to buy from an AD. I'm not saying I would currently pay more at a boutique for the sake of it.
Michael is right, this probably requires a different thread for discussion.
Cheers,
Jarrod
Well, I also agree with that.
The article on precision vs accuracy linked by Michael is definitely a useful read.
I saw the Hodinkee review and the over-emphasis on external looks vs internal machinery is bit unfortunate. But he is writing about things that most buyers are interested in. There is a separate thread with my review and comments from a few of us pointing out many things collectors may care.
I have had mine for close to two weeks now. Despite his gaining 8 sec a day, mine hasn't changed more than a second over a ten day period to the extent I can tell against time.gov. This is stable in comparison to say my Portofino that gains 6 sec/day when fully wound to losing 4 sec/day towards the end of the 8-day cycle.
About the price, I know this went from $14,400 to $13,000 retail before the release. And now that these are available through ADs, it doesn't take long to find them in the grey market already just below $10k. This steep decline is troubling. Unless IWC is willing to control its AD network and distribution channels such declines will remain the case with all future releases.
Ray
Great thread about a great watch. In my opinion, the Chrono classic is a grand slam. Is it overpricd? That's a very tricky question. In some sense, any watch that can't be purchased at the corner drugstore is overpriced because that watch will keep time as well as an IWC or any other luxury watch. We all know very well that timekeeping is only part of what gives these watches value. We buy them, I think, because of what they say to us and for the pleasure that wearing them gives us. We buy them with our hearts, not our heads so trying to apply logic to pricing schemes is rather pointless.
A watch doesn't have a single value -- that is something determined individually by each of us. To me, the Chrono Classic is absolutely not overpriced, it is worth every penny of its substantial price tag. Others will feel differently. Note that I wrote "feel" rather than "think" because make no mistake, thinking isn't really involved.
Just my humble opinion.
I "feel" exactly the same. Well put !
Yes. I would agree with that too.
Generally speaking, prices increased tremendously in these last few years.
I remember I was finding close to outrageous the price of a famous sub-something, 3 years later the same watch costs € 1500 more. The watch hasn't changed since then, no technical improvements to justify the new price.
That's the trend. Brand re-positioning, new markets arrival, call/find the reasons you prefer, the standards to evaluate the quality of a product haven't changed.
Higher prices may give the illusion to make a product more exclusive, boutiques may increase the feeling of a satisfactory purchase process but, at the very end, it's just about you, your new watch and its (objective) quality.
A review should help increase potential buyers and watch-fans awareness. I wrote before the review in subject is helpful somehow but I didn't mean to be flattering when I wrote MF could do something similar but much better.
This review seems to consider parameters I personally don't care, it seems to be worried about the outfit that best fits with the watch. Pictures help a lot but the analysis remains superficial, there's lack of depth (thinking movement, finishing and everything really matters).
Just another brief comment about in-house. I've never considered something in-house necessarily better. New technologies help producers immensely, this thing changed likewise immensely the flavor of watchmaking to me. I surely wouldn't contemn a Valjoux 7750 produced by IWC in the 80's.
EDIT
Agree 150% about Oechslin
Well, Roberto, the issue with MF (or anybody else with great expertise) being on the payroll of IWC is that the review will never be perceived as neutral, which is what people expect, at least to some extent.
Naturally, everybody will have her / his own perspective, and of course this drives the nature of the outcome. Reading the review, however, gave me the impression that the points that really matter to me - as a devoted fan - were covered perfectly and balanced.
One additional remark regarding the aspect of more complicated in-house movements being more attractive:
I am sure that most of you here know the genius Ludwig Oechslin who really built probably the most impressive complications of watches for different brands in Switzerland. I am mentioning him here because what he is doing right now is actually the opposite of what he used to do and some collectors here would like to see: Reducing the complexity of "complications", making them better and simple to read: For example a moon phase that is more accurate than the one we all know (1 day off in 3,478.27 years), but only needing 5 additional parts to be added to a simple standard movement.
For me as highly interested person and collector this is as fascinating as any complex movement, because it shows the genius in a completely different light.
I'd prefer the reviewer to state clearly whose side he is, that's the main problem with the sector's journalism in my country, for instance.
Just to share, I'm devoted to this forum, not to the brand and I don't think MF gets literally paid by IWC, maybe refunded at the most.
A friend of mine and collector also is used to say: "I don't hate any brand, I dislike those who get married with a brand, they're fans and, it's known, fanaticism dazzles".
:)
EDIT
Agree 150% about Oechslin
Very well said, David.
I totally subscribe your opinion, I love watches and I love what they make me feel when I look at them and when put them in my wrist and that's my criteria when I buy them. I wish they could also be a great investment money wise (I'm referring to new ones) but we know that is not the case, nevertheless I do know they are a great investment in terms of personal satisfaction and aesthetical pleasure and one can't get much better than that, in my opinion.
Regarding the Portuguese Chronograph Classic I can only say that I find it remarkably beautiful and a great addition to the Portuguese family. The review in Hodinkee is not bad, I agree with some others in which it could be more in depth and could have focused in other parameters but, having in mind that it is directed to the general public and not to IWC collectors, it is fair enough. After all an opinion is just an opinion.