Unraveling the mystery of this 60 year old IWC Ca

I have a question on a watch I've had in my collection for some time. It requires a repair and during that process, we began to try to unfold the watches mystery. It is bar-none the most beautiful vintage watch I have owned. The question is, what is its history?

First, the movement has a serial number of 1,198,174 dating it to between 1945 and 1950. That makes it one of the first calibre 89's produced. In fact that screw balance wheel and other attributes support that.

The case is the mystery. The case serial number is 67,929. Online references that I have looked at (simply google on IWC serial number) indicate that no serial numbers were assigned from 50,000 to 100,000 (that is a gap.) Now it is true that up 100,000 to 200,000 puts the watch to over 100 years ago but clearly that would make no sense for this watch.
So here are some questions/thoughts

(1) Did IWC reserve the serial number range of 50,000 to 100,000 for some purposes (special order, repair, other?) The reason I ask is that if you have an assembly line running through serial numbers and you also have one-off activities, you need to reserve serial numbers for that—it must plain makes sense. So I was wondering if that was the explanation.

(2) The case back has service markings going back 30 years. The spacer ring for the movement appears to be solid gold. I find it difficult to impossible to believe that someone went to this much effort to fake the case. It just makes no sense. Furthermore the markings on the back of the case (the insignia etc) would have been extremely difficult to fake given the lack of financial motivation to do so.

The figures below tell the story of the watch. Note that I have a close-up of the backside of the lug at 11 o’clock. There appears to be an insignia of some kind in there (it is recessed) but I cannot discern what that insignia is. It could have been added at the IWC factory or possibly later though I wouldn’t understand why anyone would do that.

So the question is, what is the history of this watch?

Note the recessed insignia on the lug:

Additional Pictures #1

Additional Pictures #2

Additional Pictures #3

Additional Pictures #4

Note the recessed insignia on the lug, I couldn't make out the design.

Additional Pictures #5

there's obviously a disconnect....

between the movement number and the case number, The movement number (1,198,174) is clearly correct for this calibre 89. It dates the movement production to 1949. (By the way, you'll do better using the Date Your IWC program --scroll down this page).

However, the apparent case serial number (67,929) makes no sense. Case numbers are always slightly higher than movement numbers for IWC. That would date the case to the 19th century, which makes no sense. IWC did not reserve case numbers for wristwatches, let alone of this style, let alone with such a gap.

Possible explanations:

1. A misprinting. Strange things do happen, but this is not one I've not seen with such a major variance.

2. A polishing which omitted some digits (like a 1,1 before the 66... Possible.

3. A fake case and a marriage. Nomally the answer, but unlikely here given my quick evaluation from the photos.

I can;t answer which of the above, but frankly I wouldn't spend a lot of time of this. It is a common watch and the mystery isn't epic. And, yes, I recall you from when this forum first opened and you posted under a different name.

Regards,
Michael

thanks, I'd still like other's thoughts if any,

this has raised a debate/discussion between a few folks including a 30+ year watchmaker knowing IWC very well.

Just wondering....

... out of curiosity: could IWC match a movement number to a case number in the archives or is the impossible to do and are the two seperate records?

Regards
Norbert

I think searches are ......

instigated by case numbers and are checked manually . Not sure whether or not its as easy to do it by movement . I guess if it was all on computer data base then it would be easy to data source but I don't think these records are.
Perhaps MF would clarify.

Regards
Ivan
iwcforme

Additional information- the watchmaker has stated

the case is different from anyone he has seen. The easy answer, though not made easy I think by the points raised (30 years of service marks, etc) is that it is a hybrid but there is not much motivation to have done that years ago. I believe the service marking and this isn't exactly a Rolex worth doing all this mock-up to raise its value and furthermore the work on the case is exceptionally well done. Anyone have any comments on the imprint under the lug at 11 o'clock? Have you seen that before?

Lug imprints...

I can't see yours well enough, but watches imported to Portugal had a left top lug import mark. You can find out more about that by searching the archives here.

very helpful - Lug imprints...

MF, thanks that's valuable information I didn't have. That's where the imprint is, on the left lug. So that may be a clue that this watch was imported to Portugal. I will also search the archives for that further.

Hmmm, I see that particular imprint

was on the front of the lug (dial-side.) An imprint on my watch on the dial-side would have been impossible given the design of the lug. Mine is on the inside (back side) of the lug as seen in the picture. I searched the archives but may have missed a posting with an imprint on the inside (backside) of the lug-- have you seen the stamp there as well?

Similar if not identical case on my Cal 89

even though the dials and hands are different.

The same mark is on the upper left lug (and another mark on the case near the lower left lug) but it will be some time before I get the watch out of safe custody to get a more detailed image.

Maybe the employee marking your case was half asleep on the day and omitted stamping "11" at the beginning of your case number. If "11" was added at the beginning your case number it would be approximately 4000 different to mine.

Hope this helps.

Cheers from the cellar

Thank you! This was very helpful especially

The information you provided on the lug stamp. The upper bezel on mine is a bit different (more rounded) and the spacer for the movement is rose gold (at least the outside is) but the lugs on yours and mine look identiical. This helped quite, the lug marking validation is very helpful, thanks again.