# IWC Mark XVII or GS (SBGA085) or Omega Speedmaster



## dberg (Jan 7, 2014)

Need advice and additional perspectives here. I'm posting in IWC, GS and Omega forums. Been studying the forums for too long. Only have an IWC (Portofino) dress watch. So, I've been looking for a sporty all-rounder. Had Rolex. Liked it, but not interested another now. Problem is finding something that ticks all boxes.

Preferences:
Bracelet as option without polished links and leather, Kevlar or rubber straps as options
Date function
Automatic
Decent WR
Not too large (diameter) or thickness as I have a 7 inch wrist

I have considered everything imaginable -- from PAM to Ball to Bremont to Zentih to Tudor to Omega to IWC to Chopard. Beginning to think I may need two new pieces to cover all of my bases. So here is where I am.

IWC Mark XVII
Really like the simple, yet iconic look. It is bold, but easy on the wrist. And, the bracelet is supposed to be great. But, as is often said, it seems awfully over-priced for what it is. And, IWC is scheduled to come out with a new Pilot line next year. BTW, despite the size, love the IWC Portuguese Yacht Club.

Grand Seiko SBGA085 (simple three-hand black dial spring drive) + enough money for second piece, ie. Seiko Astron or other sporty piece
Beautiful, but hardly iconic. So toned-down it is almost a sleeper. No lume, which is a drawback. Really like the brushed bracelet and blingless finishing, but I'm afraid that it lacks character. The price of the GS would allow me to get the GS + a Seiko Astron on a rubber strap for probably $500 less than the price of the IWC on bracelet. So, that is an advantage. I like the idea of complimenting the GS with a sports watch, whether it is automatic or quartz. The idea of a quartz sports watch makes a lot of sense to me. Other compliments to the GS could be the Ball Green Beret or the new Ball EMII Diver (not the Skindiver).

Omega Speedmaster Moonwatch + sporty piece, or 57 or 9300 Auto
Really like the aesthetics of the Moonwatch. It is highly versatile, but perhaps the most impractical piece ever, in that it has no date function, manual wind, and no WR. But, I still like its looks. The Moonwatch is not as expensive as the Mark XVII, and is also a bit more common-place which is a bit of tradeoff anytime you are getting an iconic piece. Whereas I could get the GS + the Astron for less than the price of the Mark XVII on bracelet, I could get the GS + the Astron for the the price of the Moonwatch. Makes you think. And, if I got the Moonwatch I would want a less expensive sporty watch with some WR. Don't know what that would be. The Astron is a possibility, but probably would not want two chronos. I also like the Speedmaster 57 and the 9300 Auto, and would be willing to pay a higher price for these, but both are thick and I'm not a fan of the 57's polished links. (Polished links same problem on the 300 Master Coaxial). The 9300 Auto is great looking. Question is whether I can pull off the 44 mm on a 7 inch wrist.

Other possibilities:
*Ball Magneto S. Like it, but not a huge fan of the coined bezel and not sure about whether the watch a little gimmicky.
*Bremont Boeing 3 hand, but they don't seem to sit right on my wrist. The Bremont Oracle AC1 is also interesting. It is a more formal piece, but is built for water. Like the contrast with that . . . sort of like the IWC Yacht Club.
*Tudor North Flag. Just not sure about the retro-look and the not so conservative yellow accents.
*Cartier Ronde Croisiere. I know that it has not gotten much love on the forums, but I find it an interesting attempt by Cartier to go more casual.


----------



## MFB71 (Jan 31, 2010)

Some photos may help


----------



## flynnyfalcon (Jan 31, 2012)

I have been tossing up between the Speedy and the IWC mk XVI/XVII for roughly 2 years before recently jumping on the mk XVII.

I love the speedy but the daily winding I would find a bit of a pain and would no doubt forget on occasion. This would probably become an endearing aspect to ownership of a speedy over time no doubt.

The IWC is a beautiful looking watch, contemporary and classic at the same time. Your comments regarding its cost I don't agree with. Sure it doesn't have an Inhouse movement but the modified ETA is of exceptional quality. The dial is superb and the case/bracelet is as good as I've seen. Also looks lovely on leather black/brown and and number of Natos. We're all different of course but the IWC is a no brainer for me.


----------



## dhtjr (Feb 7, 2013)

How about the IWC Ingenieur 3239? Seems to tick all your boxes. Expensive, but very cool and sporty case and dial design, plus some antimagnetic protection. As for the watches you listed, I'd probably choose the Mark XVII.


----------



## dberg (Jan 7, 2014)

MFB71 -- hell of a collection there. And, great to see all of those pieces in one photo for purposes of comparison. I love the Explorer, but no date kills it. What gets the most wrist time and why? Also, give me some feedback on the Solo vs. the Mark XVII. I like a lot of the Bremonts, but I sort of feel like the Solo has a lot of negative space on the dial. Just looks overgrown for the design. Thanks again.

flynnfalcon -- I see nothing great about winding a manual every day. I agree. Did you get the IWC on bracelet?

dhtjr -- Love the Ingy 3239 too. I guess I left it off because I felt like it was dressier than the Mark XVII and l like the idea of a more sport casual piece. However, the GS SBGA085 is certainly no less dressy than the Ingy.


----------



## nesal (Aug 19, 2014)

How about the iwc 3777? It seems like you would get the bracelet you want pilot watch and chrono you want

It's about 1k more, is that too much? 

Although I like th variety of various pieces I find myself very happy when I get one piece that I truly love and feel that I wear it and get the most out of it. I would vote for one piece. You can always get an skx007 for something sporty

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk


----------



## Toranaga (Nov 22, 2014)

I've got the Mark XVII and the Speedy Pro, and while I love the Speedy, the Mark XVII gets worn a lot more. It just works for me somehow.


----------



## dhtjr (Feb 7, 2013)

Another brand I suggest you at least take a look at, if you haven't already, is Sinn. The 856 with its hardened case technology is an attractive, sturdy, modestly sized (40x11), and versatile watch. Sinn may not enjoy the reputation of some luxury Swiss brands, but they are highly regarded (I own a 104). And you would save a lot of money :-! Just a thought.


----------



## Alex_TA (May 7, 2013)

Le Petite Prince or Speedmaster '57.


----------



## MFB71 (Jan 31, 2010)

dberg said:


> MFB71 -- hell of a collection there. And, great to see all of those pieces in one photo for purposes of comparison. I love the Explorer, but no date kills it. What gets the most wrist time and why? Also, give me some feedback on the Solo vs. the Mark XVII. I like a lot of the Bremonts, but I sort of feel like the Solo has a lot of negative space on the dial. Just looks overgrown for the design. Thanks again.


Hi, Thanks

The Explorer is only couple of weeks old after trading my Sub.

I wear them all at least a couple of times a week. The Explorer and IWC are now my main office work watches.

The Solo is a fantastic watch and great quality (43mm and reasonably thick) and IMO has a better dial than the XVII due to some nice touches such as the red triangle and applied markers on the chapter ring etc. The XVII is a classic, lovely thickness and the IWC bracelet is a work of art. Also, the alligator strap dresses it up.

Hope this helps


----------



## usfpaul82 (May 7, 2013)

Hate to say it....I have both and so should you.


----------



## dberg (Jan 7, 2014)

dhtjr said:


> Another brand I suggest you at least take a look at, if you haven't already, is Sinn. The 856 with its hardened case technology is an attractive, sturdy, modestly sized (40x11), and versatile watch. Sinn may not enjoy the reputation of some luxury Swiss brands, but they are highly regarded (I own a 104). And you would save a lot of money :-! Just a thought.


Sinn clearly makes some great watches, but I see them as more true field or sport watches. Just have a very spartan toolish look. I want understated, but not overly toolish.


----------



## dberg (Jan 7, 2014)

Alex_TA said:


> Le Petite Prince or Speedmaster '57.


Love the Le Petit Mark XVII. They are long gone now. No way to get one for a reasonable price. The 57 is interesting. You are one of the first ones to mention the 57. Wish Omega would slim the movements and cases down and get rid of those stupid polished links.


----------



## dberg (Jan 7, 2014)

usfpaul82 said:


> Hate to say it....I have both and so should you.


Just shocked by how many people have both.


----------



## flynnyfalcon (Jan 31, 2012)

@dberg No I purchased my Mk XVII on leather & gator. I didn't have the budget for the bracelet, but I'm casually looking around for the bracelet to have as an option. But to be honest, on leather (rivet pilot style) and now the Nato, it just looks brilliant!


----------



## Alex_TA (May 7, 2013)

dberg said:


> Love the Le Petit Mark XVII. They are long gone now. No way to get one for a reasonable price. The 57 is interesting. You are one of the first ones to mention the 57. Wish Omega would slim the movements and cases down and get rid of those stupid polished links.


I own Speedmaster 9300 with the same movement as '57 and this movement is really outstanding in accuracy and reliability.
Regarding bracelet, you can get '57 on leather strap.
In fact, any of the watches you mentioned is a good choice.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Gunnar_917 (Feb 24, 2015)

dberg said:


> Just shocked by how many people have both.


Yes we are a lucky bunch:


----------



## flynnyfalcon (Jan 31, 2012)

Gunnar_917 said:


> Yes we are a lucky bunch:


Their must be something in it. They were the 2 watches I was tossing up between. If and when I get another, it'll be the Speedy to make a great pair.


----------



## Gunnar_917 (Feb 24, 2015)

flynnyfalcon said:


> Their must be something in it. They were the 2 watches I was tossing up between. If and when I get another, it'll be the Speedy to make a great pair.


Oddly enough I bought my MKXVII a then the speedy was next.

Didn't plan it that way, it just happened


----------



## dak_la (Sep 13, 2012)

Going to add one more to the tally.


----------



## rsucesso (Feb 3, 2009)

whu not the pilot chrono? 3717 or 3777



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## p_mcgee (Oct 2, 2010)

Mark XVII slightly over the Speedy Moonwatch. I have had several manual wind watches & unless its a 7-8 day power reserve I don't have the patience to wind them all the time. Also I know I'll scratch that acrylic crystal to hell. Awesome looks & backstory, though. 

I had a Mark XVI and flipped it, now I wish I had it back. I'll wait to see if IWC does anything with the pilot line at SIHH & if not I'll pick up the XVII. I haven't tried it on but the micro-adjustable bracelet is exactly what I am looking for.


----------



## jamwires (Dec 16, 2012)

The Moonwatch by a large margin. Had em both, flipped the Mark, and still have the Speedmaster. 

I'll be real. There's no watch on earth that's better than the Speedmaster Professional for the money. It's literally THE chronograph as far as I'm concerned, and can be had for a relatively decent price for now. There's just too much history, the Moonwatch just has an aura - the warmth of hesalite, the numerous bracelet and strap versatility, etc I could go on for ages.

I love the Mark VXII, and I remember mine with fond memories. But it's gotta be the Speedmaster Professional. 

PS - look for a late 90's model with a tritium dial for extra character. The 1498/1499 bracelets from that period are rather nice also. Great combination of vintage charm/taper with modern build quality.


----------



## Gunnar_917 (Feb 24, 2015)

jamwires said:


> The Moonwatch by a large margin. Had em both, flipped the Mark, and still have the Speedmaster.
> 
> I'll be real. There's no watch on earth that's better than the Speedmaster Professional for the money. It's literally THE chronograph as far as I'm concerned, and can be had for a relatively decent price for now. There's just too much history, the Moonwatch just has an aura - the warmth of hesalite, the numerous bracelet and strap versatility, etc I could go on for ages.
> 
> ...


Even though I did it the other way, I would say the Speedy over the MkVII.


----------



## dberg (Jan 7, 2014)

Moonwatch is out of running. Really narrowing to the Mark XVII and the Grand Seiko SBGA085 spring drive. Nervous about getting the Mark XVII only to see IWC remake the pilot line with a new product launch at SIHH in January.


----------



## NewToAllThis (Nov 30, 2015)

If it helps, I bought the Mark XVII a couple of months ago from Iconic who now have it in stock for £220 less than it was at the time I bought.
C'est la vie.
However, it's a beauty and I'm really happy with it.


----------



## NewToAllThis (Nov 30, 2015)

Apologies - I don't know why I assumed you are in Europe. :roll:


----------



## anonymousmoose (Sep 17, 2007)

I'm going to go against the IWC flow and say 'Speedmaster'. A piece of history there and iconic.


----------



## dberg (Jan 7, 2014)

Leaning towards the Mark XVII, but I'm just worried that I'm going to be disappointed that I did not wait for the new pilots IWC is likely to debut in January. Wish I knew what was coming.


----------



## darrengoh (Mar 31, 2014)

Have to go with Mark XVII. There's something special about the Mark series. It's elegant design and simplicity. Speedmaster is a bit more commonly seen. IWC Mark lineage is just as historical and iconic. Starting from the WWW Mark IX and X.


----------



## dberg (Jan 7, 2014)

Does anybody have or can anybody post a side by side of the IWC 3777 (current pilot chrono) and the Speedmaster 9300 (ie. 44 mm) or the Speedmaster '57? Trying to get a sense of comparative size and wearability.


----------



## MrAlien (Dec 12, 2014)

here is the IWC 3777:


----------



## anonymousmoose (Sep 17, 2007)

dberg said:


> Does anybody have or can anybody post a side by side of the IWC 3777 (current pilot chrono) and the Speedmaster 9300 (ie. 44 mm) or the Speedmaster '57? Trying to get a sense of comparative size and wearability.


This is the best I found on Google Pictures. 3717 not 3777


----------



## Frunkinator (Aug 10, 2013)

Have a thought about any Tudors? Affordable, versatile...


----------



## Frunkinator (Aug 10, 2013)

View attachment 6285514

All photos from my collection, but only the 57 still remains...
Let us know what you decide


----------



## dc_in_sf (Apr 10, 2009)

A few thoughts:

While the mark XVII and the speedmaster have nominally similar water resistances (~60m vs 50m), I personally define "decent WR" as "would I swim with this watch" and I definitely would not do that with the SpeedMaster (no screw down crown and manual wind means the crown seal gets decent wear, plus the pushers are additional weak spots). If you do think you will get your watch wet I would give the edge to the IWC, and even then it would not be my first choice.

I have two speedmasters and absolutely love them both, the manual wind is not a chore at all, and is actually a nice connection to the watch. The lack of date can be a bonus if you like to switch your watches around a lot since it is one less thing to set (and setting the time is much faster when you don't have to worry about getting the 12 hour cycle lined up with the date change). I would love to get one of the 9300 based models, I think the 57 re-issues (especially the blue dial) look awesome.

I have a 6 3/4 wrist and have slowly upsized from 41mm diameter/12mm thick my current 44mm/17mm thick IWC (Little Prince Double Chrono). Good metrics for size limits are:


Do the lugs over hang your wrist (i.e. is the strap or bracelet vertical or past vertical)
Do you wear tight cuffed shirts that the height of the watch would interfere with?

For me my Little Prince piece is my limit, the lugs come near the edges of my wrist (strap isn't quite vertical), with your 7" wrists I can't imagine you'd have problems with any of the watches mentioned

I really like Bremont's, I have my U2 on a Black Zulu and it is my go to general purpose watch now that my 2254.50 is at the bottom of the ocean. They do take a bigger hit than a lot of watches on the secondary market so I would either pick one up second hand or make sure you negotiate a decent discount (the Bremont forum sponsor was pretty good).

In the pilot watch vein, a Stowa Flieger Klassik (43mm, 200m WR) might be an interesting choice. Stowa was one of the 5 manufacturers (along with IWC) of the german pilot watches in WWII. They have nice mesh bracelet + leather straps. Probably even less Brand Recognition than Bremont though if that sort of thing is important.


----------



## dberg (Jan 7, 2014)

Frunkinator said:


> Have a thought about any Tudors? Affordable, versatile...


Like the North Flag, but given the yellow accents, I'm not sure if it is as flexible as the MK.


----------



## dberg (Jan 7, 2014)

Frunkinator said:


> View attachment 6285514
> 
> All photos from my collection, but only the 57 still remains...
> Let us know what you decide


Great pics and great watches. Why did you lose the 3777 and the Speedmaster Pro and only keep the 57? And, how did the 3777 fit in comparison to the 57?


----------



## dberg (Jan 7, 2014)

dc_in_sf said:


> A few thoughts:
> 
> While the mark XVII and the speedmaster have nominally similar water resistances (~60m vs 50m), I personally define "decent WR" as "would I swim with this watch" and I definitely would not do that with the SpeedMaster (no screw down crown and manual wind means the crown seal gets decent wear, plus the pushers are additional weak spots). If you do think you will get your watch wet I would give the edge to the IWC, and even then it would not be my first choice.
> 
> ...


Awesome collection. I thought the Little Prince double Chrono was 43mm? But, in any event, how does that wear in comparison to the Bremont U2? Right now, I'm in a holding pattern, waiting for IWC's announcements at SIHH. Also looking at the Tudor North Flag, the 9300 Speedmasters, some of the Bremonts and the Chopard Mille Miglia.


----------



## dc_in_sf (Apr 10, 2009)

dberg said:


> Awesome collection. I thought the Little Prince double Chrono was 43mm? But, in any event, how does that wear in comparison to the Bremont U2? Right now, I'm in a holding pattern, waiting for IWC's announcements at SIHH. Also looking at the Tudor North Flag, the 9300 Speedmasters, some of the Bremonts and the Chopard Mille Miglia.


The Little Prince definitely wears bigger than the Bremont, It is significantly thicker, and about an 1/8th of an inch longer (lug-lug). I think the black case of the U2 also makes it disappear a little more.

















The Bremont is on a Zulu which bumps up it's effective thickness on the wrist but is still much thinner than the Little Prince. I don't think I could ever put the Little Prince on a Zulu or a NATO strap as it would become a tower (the Speedmaster is on a Omega NATO that bumps it up to almost Little Prince thickness).


----------



## watchcollectio (Mar 30, 2015)

Great collections !
Very good taste buddy !
Wow you got a nice Bremont. A speedy (the piece every one in this forum should have). The IWC Mark XVII for pilot watch. Rolex Explorer nice one, though maybe I would go on the sub green hulk one. The diver watch represented by your Omega Seamaster is nice but I would go on the blue dial to change with all those black dials.

To answer to the question of the topic : I would recommend considering your taste : leather go with IWC, SS bracelet then Speedy or GS.
Best Regards.



MFB71 said:


> Some photos may help


----------



## dberg (Jan 7, 2014)

watchcollectio said:


> Great collections !
> Very good taste buddy !
> Wow you got a nice Bremont. A speedy (the piece every one in this forum should have). The IWC Mark XVII for pilot watch. Rolex Explorer nice one, though maybe I would go on the sub green hulk one. The diver watch represented by your Omega Seamaster is nice but I would go on the blue dial to change with all those black dials.
> 
> ...


Why do you say, if bracelet go with the Speedy or GS? What is wrong with the IWC bracelet. It gets rave reviews. I know that a Pilot is typically worn on leather, but that bracelet by IWC is supposed to be awesome. And, it is adjustable on the fly. Pretty good.


----------



## wagenx (Dec 30, 2010)

I just picked up a bracelet for my XVII, and it is absolutely perfect. I like the idea of having both. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Burma Jones (Dec 28, 2015)

Yacht Club is great. Just landed one for xmas. Only thing I don't like are the words "Yacht Club", but great all around sporty watch that for me will work for just about all occasions.








Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk


----------



## vip1985 (Sep 16, 2015)

Any comparison which involves IWC on one end & Omega/Tag on the other will result in the Omega/Tag losing. I don't think its outrageous to say that IWC is a cut above.. its a perfect brand for those who want recognition amongst the connoisseurs yet to remain hidden and unknown amongst the general population. Fit & finish and appearance is easily better than Omega IMO. Sure one can talk about its ETA base movement usage or its loudmouth CEO but still the movement is heavily modified/improved to suit IWC standards (and I mean heavily), there is a very good thread on it as well, as for the CEO, they come and go but lets not forget IWC as a company has been in existence for 147 years so just one man can hardly define its heritage. I sure was not going to get one and hadn't even remotely considered it until I held one in my hand and wore it.. its dress watches are well worth considering as well. 

-Owner of a Portofino Chrono


----------



## dberg (Jan 7, 2014)

Burma Jones said:


> Yacht Club is great. Just landed one for xmas. Only thing I don't like are the words "Yacht Club", but great all around sporty watch that for me will work for just about all occasions.
> View attachment 6459937
> 
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk


Killing me. Love that watch. Did you get the new 43.5 or the older 45 mm? Great watch. Lotta coin.


----------



## Burma Jones (Dec 28, 2015)

The new 43.5. Good size. Old one likely too big for my taste so I knew I wanted the smaller one.

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk


----------



## balzebub (May 30, 2010)

I have been trying on the MK 17 over the past few weeks. In the flesh it was pretty bland and unimpressive, add on that it is a modified ETA ticking away in there just makes it seriously over priced for me anyways and to buy the bracelet standalone from IWC will cost 2,300 SGD according to the AD i spoke with..so if Mk 17 is your choice, get it on bracelet. 

Personally would pick the GS out of the three choices. Spring Drive would make it the most accurate and special of the three.


----------



## dberg (Jan 7, 2014)

Burma Jones said:


> The new 43.5. Good size. Old one likely too big for my taste so I knew I wanted the smaller one.
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk


What size wrist? Wondering how it would work on a 7 inch wrist. I know it is pretty thick. Do you plan on wearing it as daily wearer, or are there others that are in your stable. I just love the classic design of the watch, mixed with the rubber strap -- which gives it a sporty feel. It is a very expensive piece though.


----------



## Burma Jones (Dec 28, 2015)

dberg said:


> What size wrist? Wondering how it would work on a 7 inch wrist. I know it is pretty thick. Do you plan on wearing it as daily wearer, or are there others that are in your stable. I just love the classic design of the watch, mixed with the rubber strap -- which gives it a sporty feel. It is a very expensive piece though.


Not sure what size my wrist is, but probably more to the thick. I had a 44mm watch prior to this one and this appears much smaller to the eye. Right now it is a daily wearer but will likely rotate a couple of others. Probably won't show it to subcontractors around the construction site.

The strap makes it quite lite to wear which I am really digging. My old hunk of metal was an albatross.

I made sure to try it on and inspect before the purchase and would certainly recommend that. It is thick when you pick it up but wears nicely. I was going to attach a few more pics from different perspectives but apparently my post count is not high enough...


dberg said:


> What size wrist? Wondering how it would work on a 7 inch wrist. I know it is pretty thick. Do you plan on wearing it as daily wearer, or are there others that are in your stable. I just love the classic design of the watch, mixed with the rubber strap -- which gives it a sporty feel. It is a very expensive piece though.


Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk


----------



## Creatives (Jun 3, 2014)

I have a speedmaster pro which is amazing but doesnt sound like it quite meets the criteria re water resistance etc. Also have the speedmaster mark 2 which is a brilliant watch. 100m WR and has a history which started in 1969 as the first to be specifically designed for space!

You should totally take a look as it shares a lot with the speedmaster pro but has the date, co axial and si14 balance spring.. along with good WR (and column wheel chrono).


----------



## dberg (Jan 7, 2014)

I'm intrigued by the MKII. Is that the dial color you got?


----------



## Creatives (Jun 3, 2014)

dberg said:


> I'm intrigued by the MKII. Is that the dial color you got?


Yea i got the racing dial (orange and grey) thats in that picture as i already had a moonwatch so would be too similar if i got the black. Ablogtowatch has done a video review of both dial colours as well actually. Racing dial is beautiful but so is the black.


----------



## dberg (Jan 7, 2014)

Creatives said:


> Yea i got the racing dial (orange and grey) thats in that picture as i already had a moonwatch so would be too similar if i got the black. Ablogtowatch has done a video review of both dial colours as well actually. Racing dial is beautiful but so is the black.


How does it wear in comparison to the 44.5 mm 9300 automatic Speedmaster?


----------



## Creatives (Jun 3, 2014)

dberg said:


> How does it wear in comparison to the 44.5 mm 9300 automatic Speedmaster?


Ive only tried on a dark side of the moon which is 44mm. It wears slightly shorter lug to lug because they are hidden by the tonneau case (i believe the mkII is 46mm lug to lug). It may wear a tiny bit thicker though i cant remember. Looking at your original criteria i would say the only thing that might be an issue for you is the thickness, although i think it might even be thinner by a hair than the DSOTM. I have a 6.3" wrist and it wears great.


----------



## Oysterperpe (Jun 28, 2015)

You have a nice collection.


----------



## CRAWD (Nov 24, 2015)

I was thinking of getting a Speedmaster four years ago and didn't for exactly the reasons you give - no date, manual wind and no WR. I bought a Seamaster instead, but always hankered after a Speedy. I have now bought one. No date - easy: you just click the chrono hand forward one second a day until you get to 30/31, and then reset it and start at one again. Manual wind - I love that now; it gives you a reason to "interact" with your watch every day. No WR - less easy, but just take it off when you go near water. I probably won't take it on holiday with me for that reason, but am completely in love with it. An all-time classic.


----------



## dberg (Jan 7, 2014)

CRAWD said:


> I was thinking of getting a Speedmaster four years ago and didn't for exactly the reasons you give - no date, manual wind and no WR. I bought a Seamaster instead, but always hankered after a Speedy. I have now bought one. No date - easy: you just click the chrono hand forward one second a day until you get to 30/31, and then reset it and start at one again. Manual wind - I love that now; it gives you a reason to "interact" with your watch every day. No WR - less easy, but just take it off when you go near water. I probably won't take it on holiday with me for that reason, but am completely in love with it. An all-time classic.


Not interested in daily winding, and setting the date via the chronograph just seems absurd. Speedmaster = nice design, but absurdly impractical. Looking at getting the Mark XVII.


----------



## franksf (Apr 12, 2012)

dberg said:


> Not interested in daily winding, and setting the date via the chronograph just seems absurd. Speedmaster = nice design, but absurdly impractical. Looking at getting the Mark XVII.


 Go for it until they last! (Mark XVIII is around the corner)


----------



## dc_in_sf (Apr 10, 2009)

dberg said:


> Not interested in daily winding, and setting the date via the chronograph just seems absurd. Speedmaster = nice design, but absurdly impractical. Looking at getting the Mark XVII.


The daily winding thing is really not a pain - since the watch doesn't have a screw down crown it is trivial to give it a couple of turns every now and again, as previously mentioned gives you another way to interact with the watch (I'm actually disappointed when I wind my speedmaster and find it only needs a few turns).

I also actually prefer having some kind of secondary timing function (timing bezel or chrono) to a date on a watch but your use cases may be different


----------



## c.hanninen (Sep 25, 2013)

Hard to go wrong with a Mark anything


----------



## Leandrobgoulart (Jan 14, 2016)

Id say speedy 57 or moonwatch 9300 if you are focusing in the best piece. Somehow, prices reflect that already as they re much more expensive than mark xvii. Between both speedys id go with 57: very classy, iconic dial, less common and smaller. Ive tried the 9300 moonwatch and 57 and believe the latter fits better on my wrist (6.75). I dont feel 9300 are that high, but they would hardly fit under cuffs, as most chronos

Mark xvii seems too ordinary to me in terms of aesthetics and from a technical pov. It seems you are paying a lot for the brand.


----------



## truep287 (Mar 8, 2014)

IWC Mark series. My Mark XVI has gotten more comments than any of my other watches. Also, one of the best watches to dress down with a Nato strap.


----------

