# How good is IWC?



## Charlie Music Fan

I'm in love with the Portofino. I've been to the great Italian town and love the engraving on the back. However, after surfing the web I've read a lot of negative things about the brand and that model in particular. I saw a whole article about the stems coming out. How reliable is IWC? Are they worth the money? This would be my first very high end watch purchase and I don't want to be sorry later. At $11,700.00 its a lot of cash. Also what's the usual time before service is needed and how much is it?

Thank you.


----------



## R3XXY

I've just bought an IWC, it was £4000 afer a £600 discount, I like it but it doesn't feel like a £4000 watch. 

There's no way I'd pay 11k for one, my Grand Seiko cost half as much again but looks and feels ten times better, and that isn't an exaggeration.
I bought it because I think it looks really cool, I've already scratched the "Flawless construction" itch with the seiko so it doesn't bother me too much.

Just my two cents.


----------



## Gasman66

No watch at that price level is "worth the money" in any rational sense. Is the watch "good" enough to justify the price? Again, no. It's not three times as good as an Omega Seamaster. Arguably, in terms of movement quality, it's no better than many mechanical watches worth half as much (or less).

But, if such arguments were what mattered to you, you would not be here; or indeed even considering a watch costing more than $1000. Is IWC a prestigious brand? Undoubtedly. Do they invest in R&D? Yes. Does the brand have "horological" credibility? Again, undoubtedly. Reliability? They are as reliable as any other prestigious brand. Don't believe what you'll read surfing the web. It's possible to find arguments supporting whatever you want to believe about any brand of watch.

In the end though, you've answered your own question. You're "in Love" with the Portofino. Would the watch, over its lifetime give you $11,700 worth of pleasure in its ownership? Again, only you can answer this question, but my guess would be "almost certainly, yes".


----------



## Watchbreath

Service is about 5 - 6 years and runs 4 to 600 USD and will be more in 5 years. At that price, I take it, it's a
chrono?


----------



## Watchbreath

In 1961, Patek Philippe started at $550, was it worth it then? Gives it a new meaning to, "worth the money" 
doesn't it?


----------



## Charlie Music Fan

Watchbreath said:


> Service is about 5 - 6 years and runs 4 to 600 USD and will be more in 5 years. At that price, I take it, it's a
> chrono?


Nope, not a chrono. In fact the picture of the exact watch I like is in the add at the top of this IWC forum.


----------



## hchj

At that price range, IWC is not the most reliable I'm afraid. But its usually the prettiest one

If you r a music man and it sings to u, just grab it

Sent from my GT-I8160 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Hatman14

There's nothing wrong with IWC at that price point, I have a mark xvii it's as accurate or more accurate than any of my other watches, and had no problems in any other sense! A quality watch from a quality watchmaker!


----------



## Albertur

*Agree with Gasman*

If you're into value for money, there are a number of German watch brands that offer watches quite similar to the Portofino for about $1,000 featuring utterly reliable generic ETA movements, more than appropriate finishing levels and excellent after-sales service. Go a bit higher ($1,500-2,000) and you get in-house movements and original or even iconic designs as well from ze Germans. So is any luxury watch worth $10,000 or above? Certainly not. I have a Seiko 5 automatic that runs perfectly, has a movement famous for its longevity and trouble-free operation, water resistant to 100m, a display back and metal bracelet, all of it for $120. Is the Portofino 100 times better? Even the question sounds ridiculous.

But if you have the necessary disposable income, a luxury watch is not the worst way to spend your money. Every time I look at the watch that happens to be on my wrist, I do get a sense of joy and I also value the virtual company of like-minded fellows on this forum and others.

As for quality, I've had six IWCs so far - still have three - and I have no complaints whatsoever. Neither did I have any problems with a similar number of Omegas. Service interval (if it's not the only watch you wear) 4-6 years. IWC will charge you $500, give or take (more likely give) another few hundred, depending on the amount of work and parts that need replacement. If you can find a good independent watchmaker, the labor cost will be lower, but they can have difficulty getting spare parts.

Good luck with your choice


----------



## Watchbreath

:roll: Well, you could have mentioned that it was a Gold case.


Charlie Music Fan said:


> Nope, not a chrono. In fact the picture of the exact watch I like is in the add at the top of this IWC forum.


----------



## srvwus

I think IWC watches are some of the most elegant and classy watches made. The criticism I think comes from some of their ETA movements compared to other watches at their price points. For instance, two of my watches (IWC Portuguese 3714 and a Breitling Navitimer 01 LE) were about $7900 MSRP. The IWC gives a modified ETA 7750 movement without a date and solid caseback compared to the Breitling which gives an in-house movement, sapphire caseback, and a date function. COSC certification is another plus for the Breitling (but the IWC keeps great time). In order to get the extra features I mentioned you have to get an IWC chrono classic which has a MSRP of $13,000.

That being said, I love both of my watches (although I bought both preowned). You may want to wait for a preowned one although they aren't too common.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Trel

Charlie Music Fan said:


> I'm in love with the Portofino.
> How reliable is IWC?
> Are they worth the money?


I've never had a problem with my IWCs (or actually any mechanical watch for that matter that couldn't be fixed cheaply and quickly) I think that problems are overblown because complainers are always louder than satisfied customers. A thousand people buy a piece, strap it on their wrists and off they go to occasionally post wrist shots and check the time. Two people have a problem and every complication on the way produces even more screaming. People naturally want to avoid this, so they'll ask ahead of time "How reliable is an IWC?"

The more people ask, the more people will begin to think it's a legitimate thing to be concerned over.

Now, as for the cost...IWC is a premium brand and is regarded (and priced) as such. Most of their lineup is $10k+ watches. If you're not comfortable spending 10k on a watch, no one can blame you. The Portofino collection, however, has a wide variety of pieces in it in an equally wide range.

If you're worried about buying less watch just to buy into a brand, don't. IWC's not one of those brands with an 'entry-level' piece (not even the basic Pilot) even if some pieces do cost less than others.


----------



## heb

Think I best in world.


----------



## flyingpicasso

The Portofino handwound 8 days in gold is fantastic front and back and likely won't look outdated in a few years. The ardoise dial is so rich and warm. Sure you could save money with a different watch, but you could do a whole lot worse than this Portofino. And at about $12k, it's priced well (unless it's pre-owned). Borrowed pic, because we need a pic:


----------



## Spikemauler

flyingpicasso said:


> The Portofino handwound 8 days in gold is fantastic front and back and likely won't look outdated in a few years. The ardoise dial is so rich and warm. Sure you could save money with a different watch, but you could do a whole lot worse than this Portofino. And at about $12k, it's priced well (unless it's pre-owned). Borrowed pic, because we need a pic:


That's a 20k watch new, no? I have the 510102 and can attest to its beauty.


----------



## coogs08

Usually you only hear see negative reviews, because people feel the need to vent (ever heard the phrase, "The squeaky wheel gets the grease?").

That being said I did have a couple issues with my port chrono but they handled it pretty well and quickly. I love IWC and my port chrono, but when the prices begin going >$10k, I'm not sure I would still be looking at IWC. I'd rather drop the cash on a JLC, if buying new, or a gently owned AP.


----------



## Charlie Music Fan

Well, I decided against buying the Portofino. No matter how much I can afford I just can't justify spending that much on a watch. It is a beautiful peice though. I'll spend considerably less and find something that looks real good too.


----------



## Archer7

All I can say is I love my Mark XVI, which uses the same movement. It has operated flawlessly as a daily wearer for the past 5 years. It was still within COSC specs when I dropped it off for the recc. 5 year overhaul earlier this week. I really couldn't ask for more.

If I were getting a round dress watch, based on my experience with the brand and the look of the watch, it would most certainly be the basic Portofino in white.

Hope this helps.


----------



## ScorpionRS

I really wanted to buy a portuguese auto but wasnt able to justify the price. Recent news of QC issues and the use of ETA parts for in-house prices really puts me off...


----------



## Watchbreath

Something wrong with ETA?


ScorpionRS said:


> I really wanted to buy a portuguese auto but wasnt able to justify the price. Recent news of QC issues and the use of ETA parts for in-house prices really puts me off...


----------



## coogs08

ScorpionRS said:


> I really wanted to buy a portuguese auto but wasnt able to justify the price. Recent news of QC issues and the use of ETA parts for in-house prices really puts me off...


Port auto doesn't use an ETA movement, it uses an in-house IWC cal. 51011 (with 7 day power reserve). Perhaps you're referring to the port chrono?


----------



## ScorpionRS

Nothing wrong with ETA at all. My opinion is that if I'm paying 5-10,000 euros I should get a movement that is in house ( I guess it's snobbery) 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Trel

ScorpionRS said:


> ...if I'm paying any amount of money over 5-10,000 euros, I should get a movement that is not based on an ETA ebauche


Doesn't in-house really just mean "not ETA"? You really never hear about people complaining their Vacheron contains an F.Piguet movement.

Finishing and modifying ebauches is as much a part of Swiss watchmaking tradition as coming up with the movement itself, and allows for more research to go towards interesting complications rather than just building the base tracteur. (Think of the doppelchronograph. You think IWC would have built something like that on its own?)

To that end, is there really any difference between what Swatch Group does with ETA and what Richemont does with Valfleurier anyway?


----------



## srvwus

ScorpionRS said:


> Nothing wrong with ETA at all. My opinion is that if I'm paying 5-10,000 euros I should get a movement that is in house ( I guess it's snobbery)
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I tend to agree so of course I don't think it's snobbery. What you and others (including me) are saying that if you use an ETA movement, then what people pay for is the fit and finish and name on the dial. And while I believe the IWC name and finishing are worth something, there is a limit to how much the premium should be. And of course the market will decide. But, when other companies such as Breitling, Glashutte Original, etc. give you in-house movements and great finishing for the same price, that's what can make it tough to accept an ETA from IWC.


----------



## Watchbreath

Doesn't make tough for me that Thomas Prescher uses a 2824 as a driver.


----------



## ScorpionRS

I was looking at the Portuguese chrono and a pilot chrono both with the eta based movements. It's not that they are bad watches - but I could get better watches for the money 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## cuts33

My problem with IWC's use of ETA and now more so Selita isn't that they use them in the first place, it's the apparent lack of transparency in their use. 

IWC does not disclose what if anything they actually do to these base calibers. There used to be good info on the 7750 mods they did but that was before ETA stopped shipping ebauche kits so it seems outdated. 

Luxury watch brands aren't exactly modest when it comes to bragging about their technical achievements and the advantages of their calibers versus Brand X. 

So since I cannot seem to find any info from IWC directly on their non in house movements, my assumption is they slap an IWC rotor on a top grade base movement, regulate it and call it a day. 

If that is true, then to me the price doesn't justify what's under the hood given other options with the same engine at much lower price points. 

For $6K I'd rather have an Omega 8500 caliber, a Rolex Explorer or a JLC Master. 

Just my 2 cents.


----------



## z3r0

Love my IWC Portuguese IW5001-07, can't seem to get enough wrist time


----------



## Regal2800

from what i gather, IWC only uses ETA movements on their lower end watches. (If you can even call them lower end) Only some of their Portuguese use the modified ETA movements. I think it would be fair to say that their watches in the $10k + category, (like the portuguese yacht club and portuguese Automatic) use in-house movements. Portofino would be an example of a watch which uses the ETA movement. I personally have the yacht club and portofino chrono and love them both.


----------



## Trel

IWC uses ETA movements the same way Chevrolet races a Corvette at Le Mans: they start with a Corvette, but it's not the same car as what's on the showroom floor by the time they're done modifying it.

IWC frequently uses ETAs because they're a great place to start. Once they're done replacing the winding mechanisms, the gear trains, the wheels, the levers, the bearings, the springs and barrels (and completely refinishing the parts from the ETA that they kept) there's more than a few minutes of work involved and the result is not nearly the same as the movement they started with. They are within their right to call it Cal.32524. (It's not like they try and hide that it's from a 2892A2 kit, either.)

By the way, they also do this when they use JLC movements.

It is unfortunate, but where the watch aficionado was once obsessed with "mechanical-not-quartz", the view has shifted to "all-in-house-all-the-time" and a watch that uses an ETA, regardless of the finishing or modification, is seen as little better than a digital Casio.


----------



## cuts33

Trel said:


> IWC frequently uses ETAs because they're a great place to start. Once they're done replacing the winding mechanisms, the gear trains, the wheels, the levers, the bearings, the springs and barrels (and completely refinishing the parts from the ETA that they kept) there's more than a few minutes of work involved and the result is not nearly the same as the movement they started with.


Here's my problem with your statement, I have never actually seen anything about what IWC does to ETA and Selita movements from IWC themselves aside from the outdated article about the 7750 mods. If you have anything from IWC about what they do to their non in-house calibers that makes them better than an off the shelf top grade movement, please post it or point me in the right direction as I genuinely would like to see it and I imagine many others would as well.


----------



## kimnkk

I'm with *cuts33* on this one - please show me why because i've never seen any evidence of this except for peddling of this idea by others on the forum.

Keep in mind ETA haven't delivered ebauches outside Swatch for a while so to do what you've suggested would be a ridiculous amount of work - would probably be cheaper for them to go in-house, would it not?



Trel said:


> IWC frequently uses ETAs because they're a great place to start. Once they're done replacing the winding mechanisms, the gear trains, the wheels, the levers, the bearings, the springs and barrels (and completely refinishing the parts from the ETA that they kept) there's more than a few minutes of work involved and the result is not nearly the same as the movement they started with.


----------



## Spikemauler

Regal2800 said:


> Portofino would be an example of a watch which uses the ETA movement.


I think the Portofino chronos and autos use a Sellita movement. My Portofino HW 8 days is in-house.


----------



## pacchi

Watchbreath said:


> In 1961, Patek Philippe started at $550, was it worth it then? Gives it a new meaning to, "worth the money"
> doesn't it?


...in 1961 you could buy a car for $2000 so $550 was a lot of dough back then....


----------



## Watchbreath

Not really, I was in uniform at the time and I could easily save up for it, but a Gold watch was not practical at the time. A VW Beatle started about 1550 USD them.


pacchi said:


> ...in 1961 you could buy a car for $2000 so $550 was a lot of dough back then....


----------



## Shemski

I own both a port-chrono and a port-7day and the difference is easily noticeable. The quality of the chrono is just nowhere near the 7day. My 7day is also allot more precise. I must admit though that the chrono is a couple years older but all in all the 7day's in house movement just feels more robust and clean.

I personally would not touch an IWC without an in house movement.


----------



## jamwires

For my Mark XVI Spitfire, I was actually happy to get a 2892-A2 engine. Granted, this is a low-priced IWC - but I bought this watch cause I was looking for a great daily wearer that could take some abuse, keep accurate time, and look great as well. The other pieces I was considering were the EXP1 and the Omega AT8500.

Overall, the aesthetics and bracelet quality of the IWC was far superior to the other two, IMO. There's a few quality control issues with the Chinese-Made Omega bracelet and areas where the watch wasn't even fully machine polished. The 39mm Explorer 1 - there's just something not right about aesthetically. The other two house more prestigious movements, you could argue. For what I wanted though, the ETA will do just as good a job - it's just "less sexy" of a choice.

I can live with that. Those were the pros and cons, and I was happy to select the IWC. It just has more personality, not to mention the build quality is outstanding. Now if I was looking for a dress watch, and the Portofino was competing against say, the Zenith Captain Central Seconds - it might be a different story...


----------



## applebook

For pure value, OMEGA and Grand Seiko are arguably equal or better than the entry level IWC models, and they use exclusive movements. There is nothing technically or technologically wrong with ETA movements. In fact, I would trust their timekeeping and reliability over a fancy, delicate, and unproven in-house movement. The problem that I have with paying premium for an ETA based watch is that the same movement is available in watches costing significantly less. If Grand Seiko movements were available in other brands for half the price, I couldn't justify getting the Grand Seiko. Same goes for Rolex, etc. Yes, Rolex movements are mass produced, but the fact is you can't get its movement in watches that sell for substantially less. It isn't just about reliability and timekeeping --these should be expected already at such prices. 

This isn't "snobbery." It's actually quite rational, especially since ETA now no longer supplies incomplete kits to outside companies, and whatever modifications IWC or Ulysse Nardin does is pretty minimal these days. I've always loved the Portuguese Chrono but could never justify it at $5k (street price) when I can get an in-house (essentially), column-wheel, co-axial OMEGA for far less!


----------



## jamwires

applebook said:


> For pure value, OMEGA and Grand Seiko are arguably equal or better than the entry level IWC models, and they use exclusive movements. There is nothing technically or technologically wrong with ETA movements. In fact, I would trust their timekeeping and reliability over a fancy, delicate, and unproven in-house movement. The problem that I have with paying premium for an ETA based watch is that the same movement is available in watches costing significantly less. If Grand Seiko movements were available in other brands for half the price, I couldn't justify getting the Grand Seiko. Same goes for Rolex, etc. Yes, Rolex movements are mass produced, but the fact is you can't get its movement in watches that sell for substantially less. It isn't just about reliability and timekeeping --these should be expected already at such prices.
> 
> This isn't "snobbery." It's actually quite rational, especially since ETA now no longer supplies incomplete kits to outside companies, and whatever modifications IWC or Ulysse Nardin does is pretty minimal these days. I've always loved the Portuguese Chrono but could never justify it at $5k (street price) when I can get an in-house (essentially), column-wheel, co-axial OMEGA for far less!


I would take the Portuguese Chrono over the Omega all day - because that watch speaks to me.


----------



## Watchbreath

Your expectations are going to take a hit.


----------



## applebook

cuts33 said:


> My problem with IWC's use of ETA and now more so Selita isn't that they use them in the first place, it's the apparent lack of transparency in their use.
> 
> IWC does not disclose what if anything they actually do to these base calibers. There used to be good info on the 7750 mods they did but that was before ETA stopped shipping ebauche kits so it seems outdated.
> 
> Luxury watch brands aren't exactly modest when it comes to bragging about their technical achievements and the advantages of their calibers versus Brand X.
> 
> So since I cannot seem to find any info from IWC directly on their non in house movements, my assumption is they slap an IWC rotor on a top grade base movement, regulate it and call it a day.
> 
> If that is true, then to me the price doesn't justify what's under the hood given other options with the same engine at much lower price points.
> 
> For $6K I'd rather have an Omega 8500 caliber, a Rolex Explorer or a JLC Master.
> 
> Just my 2 cents.


My thoughts exactly. It's up to IWC and these other ETA supplied companies to justify their asking prices. Consumers shouldn't have to dig through piles and piles of research just to glean tidbits of information here and there (that might not be entirely reliable either!).


----------



## applebook

jamwires said:


> I would take the Portuguese Chrono over the Omega all day - because that watch speaks to me.


I still want the Portu auto after coveting it since its release. No other watch has lingered so much on my mind for so long. It also holds it value quite well, so it terms of "value for the money," it's better in that respect that OMEGA or Grand Seiko.

At the end of the day, higher end watches are about emotion more than anything else. If a watch doesn't move you, it could have the greatest movement ever conceived, and I still wouldn't want it.


----------



## Regal2800

I have two IWC watches, one with an in house movement and another with an ETA movement. Both run almost exactly +1 second per day. I have looked at many other brands and i rate IWC very high. Albeit below PP, AP, VC. They have such nice design and beautiful fit and finish to go along with it. Their in house movements are also a pleasure to view through the exo back.


----------

