IWC never signed a dial "International Watch Co. Ltd.". As well the punches on the back are forged.
The watch in total is nothing but bogus.
Regards Th. Koenig
or press F5 key.
IWC never signed a dial "International Watch Co. Ltd.". As well the punches on the back are forged.
The watch in total is nothing but bogus.
Regards Th. Koenig
Dear John
Dial B is no civilian dial, but Royal Australian Air Force.
To judge on dial A is hard without having it in flesh in hand or at least having high res pics of front and back. Did you check the thickness and whether or not it is soft iron?
Regards Th. Koenig
Dear David
Firstly I have to admit my phrasing of my post imprecise/misunderstandable: Of course to make a wristwatch from a<ladies pocket watch case you need a hunter orientated movement, but a Lepine case (except for the few real hunters and halfhunters seen on the market).
Regarding dating I didn't say, the date of the sale to a wholesaler should be defined as the production date. But many people do so for the simple reason that the Certificates of Authenticity issued by IWC give the date of the bill to the wholesaler (except for few watches billed to individuals or directly to retailers). Others have a look in the Tölke/King and some look in the case or movement book. And I mentioned these different possibilities for the simple reason to explain the difference in time given for the watch we talk about in older and younger catalogues of the 21st century.
To me a watch has been"produced" when it is in terms of bookkeeping no longer "work in progress", but ready for sale. The production from the first production steps until the status "ready for sale" is reached for sure takes months, with slow movers years.
Besides that my notion is we agree, that in the early days there were no special wristwatch cases, but ladies watch cases were modified by soldering lugs on serial products.
Regarding that watch from 1899 (year the case was sourced and the watch sold) the IWC Museum might have additional info. But I'm pretty sure they can't say for sure, whether the case was already ordered with lugs soldered on, the lugs were soldered on at IWC or soldered on by its Russian customer or even later years after the first purchase. The respective ledgers are not that detailed, not the case books nor the sales records. And to determine by an examination of the case, in which year and by whom the lugs were soldered on, in my opinion is impossible. At best by checking the ingredients of the solder it might be possible to give a range of a decade or two, when this job was done.
Th. Koenig
Dear all
When dating a vintage/antique IWC people tend to be imprecise: Which date is given? Year of production of the movement, year of production of the case, year of sale to a wholesaler, year of sale to a retailer, year of sale to the end customer?
I'm not a member of the marketing nor of the museum team of IWC. But I assume the statement, the first IWC wristwatch is dating back to 1899 refers to a watch in the stock of the company's museum. The movement, a pin set Cal. 64, has been produced in 1898, the gold case in 1899 and it was billed to a Russian jeweler in 1899, who might have acted as wholesaler, but had a retail outlet as well. As in these days it was customary in the trade to take watches on commission only, he presumably resold the watch in 1899 and was charged afterwards for it by IWC. That might explain the different dates given in different IWC catalogues: Until the early 2000s the IWC archive comprised only the notes on the production series of the movements. So the watch presumably originally was dated according to its movement number as 1898. Later on the movement control and sales ledgers were found, what allowed to redate the watch as of 1899, the year of sale to that jeweler.
It is said the end customer was a young cadet of the garde. However, the ledgers of IWC in most cases show only its direct customer, in this case said Russian jeweler. So I would not qualify the information on the young cadet as information, which is undebatable.
With respect to conversions: We have no information on details of the case orders placed by IWC those days. From an economic point of view in these days serial production of wristwatch cases made no sense due to the low to not existing demand. On the other hand single-unit production would have been very expensive. So my educated guess is, that until around 1910 all wristwatch cases made of precious metals are based on ladies watchcases in hunter orientation and got logs soldered on. The case might be different with steel cases as it is more difficult to attach lugs to steel. But as said: It is an educated guess only.
Best regards
Th. Koenig
The problem with this auction is, that it is hard to register for bidding. I myself and a fellow collector, who wanted to register, only received the note, that something did go wrong and were asked to return later. Only to experience the same.
Th. Koenig
One watch with this markings is known for years. It appears simply to be fake/abuse. The RAF had no such marking scheme.
Regards
Th. Koenig
Fixed lug bars!
Th. Koenig
Well, without at least a pic of the movement, even better movement number und case number, information that can be provided is limited.
What I can say from your pic it is so-called dress watch from presumably the 1930ies with a calibre 73 (or maybe 97).
Don't care too much about the word "Chronometre". In these days there existed no legal defiinition and so everybody could print CHRONOMETER on the dial (and so did IWC), who deemed his watches of above average quality.
Regards
Th. Koenig
I'm pretty sure (but have no documentary proof), this was a display shield for AD in the 1950ies, I have an identical piece.
Th. Koenig
Dear Patrick
congratulations for this valuable research tool.
Only one short remark: The so-called "Mk. X" has nothing to do with aviation. It was a watch the British Army = ground troops.
Regards
Th. Koenig
The seventeen jewels version were adjusted to five positions as well. Remenber that IWC had its Cal. 89 not certified as chronometers officially as IWC deemed this certification too easy to pass. So IWC rated its watches to much tighter specs.
Th. Koenig
The 6B/159 (alike the Mk. 11, 6B/346) are navigational wristwatches. When it comes to navigation, time precise to the second is essence. Therefore, WW II navigational timepieces (Navy as well as Air Force, wrist watches as well as pocket/deck watches) had center seconds. With center seconds it is simply easier to read the exact time under problematic conditions (low light, AA fire ....) than with sub seconds. (In the cold war era the German Navy had some IWC pocket watches for submarines with sub seconds, but this only as "iron reserve" in case due to a nuclear war all electronic devices did no longer work. In that situation with most devices no longer working you are no longer in need for precise time).
With the Army = ground troops you regularly have no need for time exact to the second. Therefore, the British Army went for the cheaper sub second and invested instead in watertightness (Air Marshal "Bomber" Harris commented on the wish of the watchmakers for watertight cases "When my boys are in the water, they do no longer neeed a watch"). The second hand than is more less needed only (i) to check whether the watch is working and (ii) how accurate it runs (To run into barrage fire of your own artillery simply because your watch is a minute per day fast is not really, what you want).
Regards
Th. Koenig
In the late 1970ies and 1980ies IWC did not produce any calibre 89 raw movements any longer. So the main bridge with 17 jewels already engraved were taken from the stock though the improved shock protection (the latter the USP of the Yacht Club) resulted in additional jeweils.
To me that is the simple reason for the "jewel gap" between the inscriptions and reality.
Th. Koenig
Well, the additonal jewels are part of the shock protection device. So your observations (additional jewels) and the official description do comply.
Th. Koenig
The Mk. 10 (correct: NOT Mk. 10, but W.W.W. = British Army Watch, Wrist, Waterproof) was never used within the Royal Air Force.
Part of the W.W.W. specification is a sub-second. The 6B/159 (Royal Air Force) has a centre second.
So (i) no British Army recased for Royal Air Force and (ii) no sub-second watch used under a spec requiring a centre second hand.
Regards
Th. Koenig
I recommend to contact IWC for a copy. I'm pretty sure, IWC will be happy to help.
Best regards
Th. Koenig
One platform, where few dealers and many collectors are active, is www.broadarrow.net. Porsche design is a little off topic as this platform, indicated by its name, is for military watches. But toolwatches alike the compass are offered there as well.
Regards
Th. Koenig
Dear Roger
Your watch has been sold in the last days of 1918 (The US Corps of Engineers was not willing to accept further deliveries on the existing contracts after the war was over and the AEF US CoE tried to cancel outstanding deliveries, while the manufacturers tried to ship whatever they could finish and rate for the acceptance tests).
Your watch was part of a batch of several hundred watches. So the records of IWC do not show expressively that your movement and your case belong together. But there is a certain rule behind the numbering. And thus it is quite obvious, that your watch has "matching numbers".
All IWC watches for the AEF Corps of Engineers are signed on the dial Ulysse Nardin as UN had held the contract with the CoE and IWC was only a subcontractor. There exists an elder article in the NAWCC Bulletin dealing a little bit more in detail with the AEF US CoE pocket watches.
Hope this helps
Th. Koenig