Hello IWC Community,
I'm thrilled to finally join this esteemed forum after patiently waiting for my account activation by Tonny - a two-month journey that only heightened my excitement to share my story with you all.
If you're interested in sharing my joy and perhaps even helping me with some of the questions I have, feel free to take some time to read about my journey. It's one filled with emotion, curiosity, and newfound respect for the craft of watchmaking.
My Journey Into Watches and a Family Heirloom
I've been fascinated by watches for a few years, occasionally diving deep into research about various technologies and finding out what speaks to me the most - manual winding wristwatches with a really flat design have always been a favorite. Over time, my focus on watches faded a bit, as life got busier and time for hobbies grew scarcer. Yet, my interest lived on through watching well-known YouTubers disassemble and repair intricate timepieces (no names here, but you probably know the ones I mean!).
This changed drastically with an unexpected turn of events. My grandfather, who sadly passed away many years ago, had left behind a wish for my grandmother: that once I completed my studies, I would inherit his pocket watch.
This came as a tremendous surprise, as I had no idea such a treasure existed in our family paired with the last wish of my grandfather. When my grandmother shared this story with me, it struck an emotional chord. It took six more weeks before I could visit her and finally lay eyes on this heirloom for the first time.
The First Encounter
When
I first saw the pocket watch, I was mesmerized. Its condition is stunning -the housing, the dial, and the hands all appear pristine. I immediately became
obsessed with uncovering every detail about her story.
The first step was to identify the watch and its movement. I started with the case's serial number (635 323) using IWC's myiwc.iwc.com/en/register/ but sadly, it yielded no results. Further research led me to resources like www.iwcpocketwatch.com yet even this detailed database with pictures couldn't definitively match my watch.
Struggles and Success in Opening the Watch
Prying open the back lid for identification was an unexpectedly nerve-wracking experience. I feared damaging the soft 585-gold housing and was unwilling to risk crude methods, such as using a steel knife. I contemplated taking it to a watchmaker but worried they might handle the watch with less care than I would myself. So, I trusted my own hands.
Using plastic cards (and sacrificing some thumbnails in the process), I patiently worked at the lid over a few days, carefully warming the watch to loosen any potential grease. At last, success! The back lid opened, revealing the inner workings and allowing me the first glimpse:
First of all, I was able to check all the serial numbers, and the front and back case numbers matched perfectly (SNo: 635 323).
Additionally, there were no service marks left by any watchmaker, which aligns with my grandmother's repeated claim that my grandfather never had the watch serviced. This puzzled me, as my theoretical understanding suggested that servicing would have been necessary over such a long period.
As I continued digging through sales listings on various platforms, I eventually found watches that looked exactly like mine, down to the smallest details. However, these were listed as featuring a Caliber 52. This couldn't be correct, as the examples of the Caliber 52 I had previously seen on iwcpocketwatch.com showed notable differences. I concluded that those listings were incorrect and likely contained copied-and-pasted details, with little attention paid to the true specifics.
To avoid wasting more time, I decided to focus on identifying the movement based on its characteristics. After extensive research, I'm now convinced that the movement is a Caliber 53, 19 lig.. My reasons for this conclusion are based on several key details:
- The jewel configuration and
- The overall arrangement of the movement's backside, especially
- The fine adjustment screw used to regulate the clock's speed, which differs across the various revisions of Calibers 50 to 58.
A helpful supporting image for this identification can be found on Ranfft Watches: ranfft.org/caliber/6641-IWC-53-19-H6?__cf_chl_f_tk=kpp8pz8PVGXH0ZFcn7b3SN5MUzzZn4ABpedm5GNhXw8-1732465627-1.0.1.1-xgrdPMHoHLLJ6s8G5Xbii6n27Geu3DrSooDyzkxYvO0
Additionally, the markings on the movement provided further leads. The "+ 31457" appears to be a Swiss patent number, while the partially covered "(4)55 231" seems to correspond to a part number seen on similar watches. The true movement serial number, in this case, is 573 191.
As I delved deeper, I found that IWC had published both the 2001 Movement Index and the 2002 Movement Index, which many websites reference to varying degrees of accuracy. Some resources were detailed, others less so, but none felt entirely reliable.
Finally, I discovered the DateYourIWC Program, which seemed promising. Setting it up on my Linux machine added a bit of a side quest, but I managed to get it running.
Long story short, I was able to gather enough information to feel confident about my findings. While some doubts remain, I believe this to be the most accurate and well-supported identification of the movement so far.
Maybe my confidence is misplaced, and there is more to uncover - but at least, for now, this seems to be the most detailed and well-reasoned identification I could achieve, allowing me to cross-reference neighboring serial numbers.
Then came a huge plot twist
Initially, my grandmother believed that the watch had been purchased by my great-grandfather (born in 1910) and passed on to my grandfather (born in 1942). However, after sharing my research with her, we both came to a new conclusion: this watch was not bought second-hand but likely belonged to my great-great-grandfather, born in 1881, and has remained in the family ever since.
What I find particularly fascinating is that he might have bought it during World War I, which is fascinating to me as we are German. Whether it was to celebrate his survival after the war or as an investment in gold during those uncertain times, the story becomes all the richer to me. This realization made me determined to learn more and try to contact the jeweler - if only I can figure out which one.
While researching, I discovered the possibility of requesting a "Stammbaum-Auszug" (a genealogical extract) from IWC, which could potentially provide further historical insights and lead me to the jeweler. Unfortunately, I learned that IWC no longer offers this simple service due to the rise of "Frankenstein watches" but only provides certification and the extract if the watch is sent in for a professional evaluation.
So I decided to contact IWC directly and ask for more information about their service.
Their first response puzzled me. They claimed the movement was a Caliber H/52 and provided me with the following details:
Uhrwerk mit Handaufzug
Oberflache vergoldet
Anzahl der Funktionssteine 16
Art der Unruhspirale: Breguet-Spirale
Bewegungshohe in mm 6,00
Werkbohrung in mm 43,00
Frequenz in Halbschwingungen pro Stunde 18000
Frequenz in Hertz 2,50
Gangreserve ca. 30 Stunden
Produktionszeit 1888 - 1940
Anzahl produzierter Uhrwerke ca. 280'000
Again, I distrust this information, as Mrs. Pracz from IWC did not receive any pictures of the actual movement but only relied on the movement and case serial numbers. While this response left me with some doubts, what truly baffled me is that the publicly available IWC index, such as the DateYourIWC program, seems more accurate than the information IWC provided. The designation of Caliber 53 aligns perfectly with the pictures of my movement and similar ones I have found. This discrepancy troubles me and doesn't instill confidence in trusting IWC to handle the watch with the same emotional care I do - especially considering my existing apprehension about prying open the lids with harder metal tools.
The day will come when I schedule an appointment at my local IWC boutique in Berlin to send the watch in for servicing and evaluation. However, until then, I want to gather every possible piece of information to ensure I am fully prepared when engaging with IWC. For this, I am reaching out to you, the community, to leverage your expertise and ensure no mistakes are made - either by me or anyone else.
Questions and Concerns
A) First and foremost, I consider the hairspring to be of immense value. Having studied material science, I understand the original alloy of the hairspring to be irreplaceable, which is why preserving it is my highest priority. I would like IWC to replace the mainspring and hairspring but return the originals to me so I can start a collection of original parts. I hope this is something you can agree with and support, right?
B) The watch is in supreme condition, as I tested the balance wheel with a small bump and some very light (1 or 2 clicks) spring tension added to the main spring - it runs fine. Next on my list is giving the watch the desperately needed service it deserves: replacing the old grease, fully disassembling it, cleaning each part, and visually inspecting everything. As I am inexperienced with owning watches, I would like to ask if you recommend proactively replacing specific wheels or springs prone to wear and tear? My intention is to occasionally wear the watch, so I would like to conserve the precious original parts by storing them and using replacement components that can be swapped again later. This way, the watch remains a family heirloom for future generations, continuing its journey well beyond me as the fifth caretaker.
C) Are there any public sources you would recommend for further research?
D) What specific questions should I ask IWC, and what information am I eligible to request? So far, I have considered the following:
- Obtaining the original patent information (+31457).
- Sourcing an original box for the watch, as the one I received seems to be from a later period (not 1915 but later, more like 50s).
- Requesting any available documentation such as advertisements, brochures, sales information, part lists, blueprints/explosion drawings or service manuals. Although IWC did not provide these when I contacted them via email, is this something I could insist on during an in-person appointment?
- Exploring accessories available at the time, such as chains or protective pouches, so I can search for and purchase suitable vintage additions.
- Requesting a Stammbuch-Auszug to trace the original jeweler that sold the watch. This could allow me to further investigate and possibly obtain original receipts or proof of ownership - if the jeweler still exists. I do not consider an IWC certificate necessary since I have no intention of selling the watch and am confident it is not a "Frankenstein" piece. My only lingering doubt is whether it was originally purchased by my great-great-grandfather and passed to my great-grandfather, or if my great-grandfather bought it second hand.
- What other information do you think I should request?
E) The watch has minor scratches on the housing. I am torn between two options: preserving these marks as part of its history or asking IWC to polish it, potentially applying a new layer of 585 gold for the minimal material removed during polishing. I assume most of you would advise leaving it untouched, but are there compelling reasons to polish it?
G) Are there any other steps, either essential or optional, that you would recommend? My imagination is limited to the points I've outlined here.
H) How would you recommend displaying the watch at home? I want to enjoy it but also protect it from humidity, dust, and UV light exposure.
I) With a new mainspring, how should I maintain the movement at home? Should the spring remain untensioned when not in use, or is there a better approach?
J) If I use the watch for less than two weeks per year, how often would you recommend servicing it and replacing the oils and grease?
K) Despite being a Cal. 53/H6, do you know any more detailed designation of this particular Variant/revision? As the second to last DateYourIWC screenshot states there are 3 different variants of the Cal. 53, the regular, one with "tr" in its designation and one with this double dagger "‡ vue" designation. I am not familiar what this means for now?
L) This is the last point and more of a curiosity: What value would you estimate for this watch if the story is accurate? I will never sell it, but having a rough number would satisfy my curiosity. Online offerings for similar models range between €2,500 and €5,000, which seems reasonable, but perhaps the original hairspring in working condition adds something to its value. What's your opinion?
Thank you all for taking the time to read my story and for sharing in this personal and emotional journey. I hope it brought you as much enjoyment as it brought me to write it and reflect on the history of this cherished heirloom.
Your expertise and advice would mean the world to me as I continue uncovering more about this watch and ensure its preservation for future generations. I look forward to your thoughts, suggestions, and perhaps even your own stories.
Warm regards,
beMotion
Ps: To counter scammers and optimise search engine results, the watermark states "DO NOT TRUST ANYONE CLAIMING THIS PICTURE IS THEIR PROPERTY - THE REAL OWNER IS "forum.iwc.com" MEMBER "BeMotion""
