IWC reference 9503 with cal 8541?

Greetings fellow collectors,

I have a question regarding the IWC gold Jumbo line from the '70s. I have an interesting watch that looks like a ref 9232 with a diamond bezel (more than likely aftermarket). However, the set of archives that came with it claims it is a ref 9503 with a cal. 8541 movement. I thought the difference between the two references was the movement--9503 came with a cal 3003 movement while the 9232 came with the mechanical 8541.

The watch does have a cal 8541 movement but I am curious if this is "original"? And for the purists, the watch does have an original bezel without the diamonds. :-)

I'd be extremly carfull with this watch.....

Kind regards

Ralph

An interesting watch.

At that time, many watches were converted from mechanic to quartz and vise versa.

If the extract confirms a C.8541(B), it points to a conversion.

Regards
HEBE

Hello Ralph and HEBE,

Thank you for your comments and your shared concerns. I would tend to agree that some aspects of this watch are indeed “interesting” which is not always a good thing!

To answer the question about the movement, the archives says that it has a cal 8541 12 ½ lig. movement. I honestly don’t know if that is version b.

I would tend to agree with you that somehow this 9503 was converted to a 9232. I guess my question is did this watch ever have a quartz movement in it? Was it sold as a ref 9503 originally and someone decided to convert it? Or did it leave Schaffhausen as a ref 9232?

Also of note is a statement in the archives: “These indications recorded in our main ledgers are related to the original watch built in our factory”. If this indeed what happened, why don’t they record it as a ref 9232 in the archives? Could it be that an incorrect movement was placed in a ref 9503 case? I can see how that could happen as the cases are essentially the same.

Again, thank you for your comments and insight!

Thanks for the pictures.

Again I did not read exactly...
Thanks to Hebe for the correction, Yes this coversions happened.
I think it was made after the watch had left the first time Schaffhausen.
I was reading has not an c.8541. Without this caliber it would be critical.
An other interesting story is, at the steel version of the ref.3003 had the same case (height) as the Ref.1832. So it was possible to exchange the movement from quartz to automatic (c.8541). Later the Ref.3003 became flatter and it was not possibl to convert anymore. If also the Ref.9503 chaged the height, I do not know. It is funny that when converting the type sometimes also the Ref. number in the case was changed.

regards

Ralph

P.S: I know a similar story, but in the opposit direction.

There was a customer complaining about the accuracy of an automatic YachtClub II (Ref.3212) IWC made a revision of the movement and added for free a quartz movement in case of, the accuracy is not sufficiant.

Here the Invoice of the revision.

Maybe I can also get a picture of the watch and the movement...

Regards

Ralph

Hello Ralph and HEBE,

I may have found the answer--and it is here on the Forum!

Please refer to the link below....
IWC FORUM LINK

It seems that ten of the 9503s were converted into 9232s before they left Schaffhausen due to customer demand. I would guess this means that there were/are 65 watches with cal 8541 movements (55 orginal and 10 that were originally 9503 cases that were repurposed to contain cal. 8541s) and there were/are 35 9503s with the quartz movement. It looks like my extract from the archives is correct and this would explain how a 9503 case ended up with a cal 8541 movement. Also,this watch is one of the ten 9503 cases that never had a quartz movement. Mystery solved!

Thanks for correcting me on the movement--it was a cal. 2405 that is the quartz movement and not the 3003 which as you pointed out was the quartz gold/steel reference number.

Many thanks!

George

Hi George,

your post points to another very rare item, the box !

Do you have hints that it belongs to the Ing. ?

I have such a box in NOS, but could not figure out yet, with which watches it was delivered ?

Regards

HEBE

P.S. The movements ref. 1832 - 3003 - 3303

Hello HEBE,

Thank you for providing the different movements. It is a helpful picture for me. I have never seen the later IWC quartz movements—they are unique! I am glad IWC decided to go away from that technology.

To answer your question about the box being original to a 9232/9503, it was presented to me that this is the correct box for this watch. It may be true but I find it “interesting”. The IWC logo on the inner part of the box has worn away but it still present on the outer box. As you can see, the IWC logo on the box is the more modern style than the one on the watch dial itself.

I also compared this box to other watch and box sets that I feel are correctly paired—a very early 1970s quartz DaVinci (that has the older style IWC logo on the box that matches the Davinci dial and the 9232/9503 dial) and a 1984 Portofino Moon phase Pocketwatch from 1984 (that has the newer style logo on the box and hang tag). Sometime during that timeframe, IWC changed their block logo. If it was 1979 or before when this watch was delivered to IWC Frankfurt, I would be more comfortable to say this is original watch for this box. If it was sometime in the 1980s, I would have my doubts.

One more point to consider is given all the stories that I have heard about the quartz crisis during the 1970s and its impact to IWC, I question if IWC would spend so much to make a box like this—the craftsmanship is incredible and in my opinion is second only to the box that contains the ref. 1868—at least from what I have seen.

I welcome anyone to question my logic—it is just a guess on my part based on what little information that is available to me. I welcome the opportunity to learn. I am sure that some of our resident IWC experts may be able to provide us additional insight.

Thansk,George

Thanks for the box information etc.

I did some investigation about Ing. boxes in the past.

Now I can add this wooden box :-)

This is an older post, if you are interested.

The 5 dot Ing. boxes

Thank you to all for the interesting additional information.

Regards

Ralph

Dear HEBE,

Thank you for the information on the IWC boxes. It is is very informative. It looks like you may need to get the box lineup together again to take a picture to include the new family member--assuming the box is part of the family. Either that or learn photohop!

Again, I appreciate your knowledge and insight.

Respectfully, George

I

Thanks for your positive reply, George.

Your Ing. seems to be in authentic condition, so the answer to another question would be interesting for me:

Has your ing. a glass with anti reflective coating ?

I am not totally sure, but so far my investigations are:

Not all produced Ings. got anti reflective glasses.

And, if glasses were exchanged at a service, ONLY glasses without coating were used.

This could give some hints, how to figure out, if the glass has a coating.

Regards

HEBE