Sometimes I Just Don't Get It - Like This New Aquatimer

What is apparently one of IWC's new Aquatimers showed up on another site. I'll wait to hear the official details here, but based on the news there, I don't get this one at all.

Really? A dive watch with a gold case, a chrono and a Perpetual calendar, with a display back, and a rubber strap but with an alligator leather inlay? All at a svelte 49 x 19mm? Huh? Would anyone really wear this on the outside of a wetsuit while diving? Would anyone really wear this monster on their bare wrist?

I like the new Aquatimer Automatic, but this one goes way over my head. It strikes me as something I might expect from Hublot: we did it because we could, whether it makes sense or not.

Sorry to say something negative about an IWC. Maybe I'm just missing something. As always, it's just my opinion. Others may vary.

I couldn't agree with you more, Dick; and I am glad you are computer -savvy enough to take this picture from Watch Insider (I am guessing?) and post it here. I clicked on a link David from Switzerland posted, yesterday, and saw that watch. My immediate reaction was "huh". Then "huh?". It doesn't seem to serve any need a diver might have.
I imagine it will look terrific in the display case, and in a customer's hand when the dealer pulls it out. And I am sure some will sell. There will be collectors who will feel a need to buy it because it is there to buy. It is certainly not a "tool watch" as some of the forummers like to call some of the other Aqua and Pilot watches. It seems completely unhelpful under water.
Just saying...

Just wait til you see the price!

It's hard to argue with what you say in terms of it being useful or necessary as a true dive watch. But it looks bloody cool if you ask me. 49mm is getting up there.

This one will not be cheap. It doesn't need to be: gold case, perpetual calendar movement. And great looking! Easily looking better than about any Hublot, which to me are downright ugly.

So, there you have a fantastic big watch, impressive, not to miss on any wrist. And, o yes, a small detail: you can dive with it too, if you ever feel like it. Quite possibly you like that possibility, but you let others do the dive, sitting on your ship, sipping a Campari/orange juice (you should try this, it tastes great!).

For these kind of people this watch is meant. Not for me of course, but it will surely sell quite well to its target group.

Kind regards,
Paul

Totally agree.. I have no idea what IWC is thinking with this watch.. Just terrible.

I think it's just an over-the-top watch for the guy who doesn't care about money (at all) and wants a well-made unique eye-catcher. That type of person wouldn't hesitate to wear the watch underwater, whether diving, swimming, or hot-tubbing. If the watch got lost or damaged they'd just buy something else cooler. I believe it's a limited market, but I believe it exists.

Everybody has different tastes. If I had the money, I would buy it. I think it looks mint. There must be TONS of people on here who own Pilots watches but will never fly a plane. So what? If someone spends the money on this and never goes diving with it.... good on them.

Gents, as a qualified Diving Instructor I concur - there is no discussion around the fact that a diver has no need to know the month and date of the month, underwater. Neither, the fact that it's a leap year.

Does a diver need a gold case? No, from the development of Staybrite steel more than 50 years ago, divers are more than happy to have stainless steel on the wrist.

But, the market apparently demands such watches - and IWC has sold the red Gold Vintage Series AT's as well as other precious metal AT - and no doubt there are significant number of people who will buy this watch and YES MAYBE some of them will be affluent divers.

The ONE MAIN SAFETY FEATURE THAT ALL DIVERS WANT IS A BACKUP DIVE TIMER - and I am willing to bet that this AT's bezel lock mechanism is superb, and better than most on the market. I will reserve final judgement on that. for when I dive with one of the new AT's with this new bezel lock mechanism, and report back on that here.

I guess one of the things I like about IWC is they do offer choice ... A lot of choice ....

Different strokes for different folks :)

One could think that it does not hurt to have a perpetual calendar on a diving watch. But in case I would go diving with it: Why is it that the watch has been made so badly legible? Look at the perforated dial, distracting from the big date that should actually serve to be read easily? And the climax of it is that the minute indicators have been even omitted to make this perforation possible?

One can always argue that there is a market and that the watch will be sold. But this argument would also apply to a version completely in pink with precious stones on the bezel.

it is like 'found footage' horror!

I guess the other side of the argument is they should never make a watch unless it is 100% made for it's exact use. And if it is not going to be used for it's "exact" purpose it should not be made/sold. Therefore they should give up and stop making 99% of the watches they sell. It is a silly argument if you ask me. Which you didn't. But there you go.

I've been thinking about this watch ever since I posted in response to Dick's post. I have never, and will never, pilot a plane. Yet, I own pilot watches, and have one which is gold, and a Perpetual Calendar. So, what's up with me?
I haven't changed my mind on this watch but I have changed my mind about the necessity of my original post. If dive-watch aficionados fall for this like I fell for the Little Prince, well, enjoy!

I'll look forward to your dive report (IWC could lend you a new Aquatimer) and the reports from SIHH regarding the mechanism. At this stage I wonder whether it offers much, if any advantage, over a normal external dive bezel or if it is a case of a "solution in search of a problem".

Look forward to the reports.

Cheers from the cellar

Thats my point exactly mate. Each to their own. But your point about Pilots watches with PC's and in gold is bang on. Totally unneccessary but very cool.

Oh, I don't disagree with the feeling of "to each their own" or the thought that one doesn't have to dive to like dive watches. I don't dive and I have two Aquatimers.

It just strikes me that IWC has been especially known for purposeful watches, "tool" watches, and more often than not (but not always) understated elegance with superior engineering featuring "the good stuff on the inside". This one just confuses me because it goes not only in a different direction, but in about 6 different directions with no apparent intended purpose other than "we think someone will buy it". Even if one accepts the broadly defined "lifestyle strategy", just what lifestyle does this fit? Certainly not one with which I associate IWC! Now, maybe that is the whole idea. Shame if true, in my opinion.

Surely there will be buyers out there who have the money/want a perpetual/love the look and design/dive occasionally. It's a big world and they are only making 50? This would fit the bill for them, so why not? I just don't get what the problem is with it.