# Review : IWC Aquatimer Automatic 3290



## toolkit21 (Nov 10, 2013)

My current collection is somehow made up of divers only. Its just a preference which I'm still unable to shake off and give others a try; like a pilot or dress or complications watch. So here is my additional divers piece to an already crowded collection. An IWC Aquatimer white dial on rubber, code 329003. Sharing drawer space would be a Tudor Pelagos, Seiko Tuna (Rose Gold), Aquadive GMT (yellow). All equally amazing pieces which I will have a hard time deciding which to dispose of, if it comes to that in the future.

As this is my 1st IWC, I am quite at awe with this brand's product build, finishing, technology, accuracy, design and heritage (the divers range). Reading and having it in the flesh, is very different. Much praise has been said about IWC, and I agree with a whole lot of it. Initially the pilot chronograph (IWC 3777) was my target, however the flat dial just didn't make it for me. And a chance sighting of this Aquatimer sealed the deal for me. Some thoughts about it;

*Rubber strap*
With only 7 buckle holes, my wrist (6.5") found its comfort on the smallest hole. I am, however, concerned that any wrist size less than that can find a snug fit. 
Observing closely at the hole design, they're shaped on 1 side at an angled 45 degrees. What this does is it lets the buckle pin slot in easily and provide a secure hold thereafter.









Though no vanilla scent was present (eg. Isofrane) neither was there any rubber smell. Its just very well made to smell neutral, no small whatsoever. I appreciate this as a very well produced rubber. The width tapers down slightly (22mm to 20mm) but maintains an almost equal thickness throughout.

Best part about the strap design is the IWC's quick change system. Its got a custom steel part made by moulding onto the rubber and pin. Bad news, it limits your choice to either IWC's rubber or bracelet, and Nato style straps to some extent. Good news, its very quick, convenient and an ingenious design. You'll notice the spring pin that is usually removed during strap change cannot be taken out from its place between the lugs. That's the downside. I honestly can't figure out how they made it stuck in there in the first place. Well at least it eliminates the problem of scratching inner lugs during a strap change.





















Every rubber strap has a 4 alphabet serial printed below the IWC logo. On its under side, there's a grooved design ensuring better ventilation and grip with skin, and I suppose better than previous iteration. 
Buckle is made with INOX steel, finished in polished underside and brushed topside. There are 2 keepers.





















*Case & Sapphire glass*
At 14mm height, the case has good heft but not overly bulky on the wrist. While a rubber strap is, to me, the best combination for this for its lightness. Whereas the steel bracelet is a solid chunk of metal, I find it adds way too much weight, so I opted for rubber instead. 
The vertical brushed sides and polished chamfered edges are very nicely done. Lug edges are not made sharp, they're made just nice. 
Underside has a closed cover with engravings; International Watch Co., Aquatimer, Automatic, 30 Bar, serial number. Simple and easy to read font.
I really like the anti-reflective coating that's applied on both sides of the convex sapphire glass because it is so clear. Occasionally it looked like nothing is there. Curvature is just barely, not entirely flat but not bulged up like a tummy. Doesn't show any visual distortion when viewing dial at an angle.















*Dial*
Aquatimer Automatic range comes with dial that's in silver or black. On the display cabinet, I also saw the 2016 blue dial version, however the sunburst effect wasn't as tempting as it looked like in the picture. It is slightly subdued. For an option besides white and black, blue would be a nice match. Just didn't do it for me.
I found the silver plating more unique than the usual black and matches the stainless steel case very nicely. Applied 'U' markers at every 5 minutes give a 3D effect with the rehaut, on the otherwise simple and clean dial. Large hour and minute baton hands fit the divers profile wonderfully, supplied with 2 super luminova colours of green and blue, the glow in the dark is mesmerising. Not sure how long it will last though. 
Date display is white if you choose the silver dial and black if its the black dial. Simple idea made effectively. That should be the way, to blend the design seamlessly.









*Bezel*
SafeDive system, from IWC, is another well made design utilising a ratchet system (hidden in the 9 o'clock enclosure) that moves the inner bezel in 1 minute increments as you rotate the outer bezel. Being a ratchet style, only counter clockwise will move the inner bezel. Without the previous generation's bezel design, a flat steel outer bezel gives the look of a large dress watch. Safely going from boardroom to surf board instantly, and looking the part well. Gets addictive too when playing on the bezel. The turns click into place with just enough resistance.





















*Wearability* 
Despite a long but sharp downward lug, with a flat case back, the watch sits firmly and comfortably on my wrist. The top heavy case with light rubber strap doesn't feel like a chore when moving the arm. I'm assuming the bracelet may be, as its much heavier altogether.















*Movement*
Despite not supplying an in-house movement, I'm quite alright with that actually, the other components that make up this Aquatimer more than matches the value of this timepiece. An ETA2892/A2 is still a durable and easily serviceable movement.
I understand that IWC buys the 2892 in kit form and assembles with modified/new parts of their own design. Accuracy has been decent, about few seconds +/- a day depending on storage position. Will let it run in a while more. But has been quite close to Pelagos in terms of accuracy. 
I like placing timepieces near my ear to hear the seconds or rotor wind. But couldn't eek any sound from this Aquatimer. Love it.

.


----------



## glimmer (Dec 11, 2006)

Nice review! I'm in the market for the 3290 (though I think I prefer the bracelet version) and am still deciding on the black or silver dial.


----------



## walt2810 (Mar 2, 2014)

Great choice & in-depth review. Looks great on the wrist too. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mpalmer (Dec 30, 2011)

Thanks for the comprehensive review of one nice dive watch. Enjoy!


----------



## name is Robert Paulson (Sep 12, 2015)

Great review and gorgeous watch. Its on my "future" wants list for sure!


----------



## ocwatchguy (Oct 9, 2011)

white dial looks great.


----------



## toolkit21 (Nov 10, 2013)

[UPDATE]

Here's a lume shot (from left to right) of Tudor Pelagos, IWC Aquatimer and Seiko RoseGold Tuna. All exposed together to sunlight for 10 seconds.










Its already obvious Aquatimer's lume isn't bright even though the hands have a larger luminova applied area. And having both green and blue superluminova as direct comparison, Aquatimer does fall far behind. Even the coating isn't applied evenly. Markers don't glow well either.

Here's another shot about a few minutes, with the same camera setting.










(Note : Realised that setting the camera on ISO100 the picture gets more accurate representation of all 3 watches' glow. If set to ISO800 where its more receptive to light, they all glow brightly)


----------



## Kiespijn (Jun 5, 2009)

Very elegant


----------



## jbellmd (Apr 19, 2014)

Fantastic review. Looks great on your wrist. All around solid diver
thx
jonathan


----------



## DanIWCBP (Apr 22, 2016)

Wonderful review, this dive watch is on my wishlist 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Formula1980 (Mar 23, 2011)

Congrats! Great review! I seriously love the rubber strap on these models with their vintage style basket weave pattern and wish they would make one like this available as replacements for my previous generation 3568. They really make on incredible tool watch!


----------



## dinexus (Nov 18, 2012)

Very nice job on the review - long admired the Aquatimers but the size and strap-change system turned me off. I only recently discovered that not only are there 42mm options now (which looks perfect on your wrist), I can run a NATO? _Sold_.

Now just need to figure out if the white dial, or the Cousteau version is the one for me...


----------



## toolkit21 (Nov 10, 2013)

Thank you all for the compliments. 

I think the white dial looks great because its more silver-ish than white and black is rather common on most of my collection. Of course Cousteau or bronze will be much better, budget permitting.


----------



## maxi11 (Dec 28, 2015)

nice review with detailed pictures


----------



## michael8238 (Sep 13, 2015)

Nice review! I'm usually not too crazy about IWC divers, but this piece looks great. Excellent finish and machining.


----------



## Martinsc6 (Jun 1, 2014)

Thanks for the review, nice pics


----------



## 3fedor3 (Jan 5, 2011)

Great review!!! I completely agree with you. I used to own the black-dial version and absolutely LOVED it. The feel of the bezel alone, made it worth it for me.


----------



## toolkit21 (Nov 10, 2013)

Thank you for all the kind feedbacks. 

Been noticing recently that the AR coating on sapphire glass is amazingly clear. And reflections are almost non-existent. To the point that I find myself thinking "Where's the glass?". Am truly impressed with this. 

Also time keeping accuracy is superb. I'd say about +2 seconds in 5 days!!! Of course not measured with a machine, just my eyes and a digital watch. But still to me it's as accurate as my Pelagos.


----------



## 3fedor3 (Jan 5, 2011)

toolkit21 said:


> Thank you for all the kind feedbacks.
> 
> Been noticing recently that the AR coating on sapphire glass is amazingly clear. And reflections are almost non-existent. To the point that I find myself thinking "Where's the glass?". Am truly impressed with this.
> 
> Also time keeping accuracy is superb. I'd say about +2 seconds in 5 days!!! Of course not measured with a machine, just my eyes and a digital watch. But still to me it's as accurate as my Pelagos.


The sapphire on all of the aquatimers I have had has been absolutely superb. It makes the watch look so incredible. The previous gen did that with the sapphire bezel and the slightly bluish hue of the crystal. This one just doesn't look like it exists. So cool!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ivanos (Jun 25, 2016)

Isn't this diving watch a bit too... 'delicate'? I am just kidding. Look at those lugs and buckle.. i mean wow.


----------



## K1W1 (Apr 13, 2010)

Great review and thanks for taking the time to write it. I have always worn divers but have been wearing a Pilots Chrono (3777) for the past couple of years. I'm pondering trading this for a 3290 or 3767 and picking up a Big Pilot some time down the road.


----------



## LikeClockWork (Jun 7, 2016)

IMHO the Aquatimer is a solid divers watch for those looking to stray away from the ever so popular Rolex and Omega divers


----------



## toolkit21 (Nov 10, 2013)

I think Aquatimer as part of a divers collection is unique on so many fronts. It's made of many different features that's incomparable to regular Joe divers out there. 
The only pilot I could consider is a spitfire, for its movement and slightly better looking dial. However, it's above budget range now. 
Big Pilot ceramic is a good option


----------



## shwn31 (Jun 14, 2014)

Beautiful dive watch. Better than the previous one. But i like thelume on the previous model. I'm still cant decide either this or pelagos.


----------



## toolkit21 (Nov 10, 2013)

Unfortunately, in my opinion, the lume on this Aquatimer is quite poor. That'd be the only gripe. Everything else is outstanding. 

I have both and would recommend Aquatimer on rubber, Pelagos on bracelet. Hahaha....

Both are equally awesome on their own. Can't say which is entirely better than the other. Sorry can't be of much help here.
I'll sell Pelagos if only to find a GMT Batman


----------



## shwn31 (Jun 14, 2014)

Yeah. Pelagos is kinda perfect dive watch. It meets all the basic requirement. But if want something fancy, i would go for aquatimer. It have more colours


----------



## GregBe (Sep 9, 2011)

shwn31 said:


> Beautiful dive watch. Better than the previous one. But i like thelume on the previous model. I'm still cant decide either this or pelagos.


Tough choice...I just picked up the 3290 silver on rubber last week and have owned the Pelagos a few times. Both are amazing. Although on the surface level, they are vastly different, I really feel the heart of both watches is pretty similar. Both dials have a lot of depth without any metal indices or hands. It is what I love about both watches.

Good luck in your decision, no wrong choice there.

Oh...by the way, great review OP. It helped me pull the trigger on the AT.


----------



## toolkit21 (Nov 10, 2013)

Glad to be of help in your wonderful acquisition. 

You said it right, both Pelagos n AT are vastly different


----------



## dinexus (Nov 18, 2012)

toolkit21 said:


> It's made of many different features that's incomparable to regular Joe divers out there.


Couldn't agree more - the same reasons made it a top pick for me as well. My most recent pickup says "whaddup."


----------

