# New IWC Spitfire 39mm with in-house movement



## ybw89

Tried this one on today, case size and thickness is great but not sure about the long lugs. Wouldn't look out of place with business attire and great with more casual wear too (especially on a nato), looking for a daily, could this be it?


----------



## drhr

Nice, need to see one, what's your wrist size?


----------



## lo_scrivano

Very nice but prefer the regular Mark XVIII over this.


----------



## ybw89

drhr said:


> Nice, need to see one, what's your wrist size?


My wrist is 6.25"


----------



## ybw89

lo_scrivano said:


> Very nice but prefer the regular Mark XVIII over this.


If they revamped the mark 18 with the in-house movement i'll be all over it. and maybe trim down case size a little too


----------



## drhr

ybw89 said:


> My wrist is 6.25"


Thank you sir . . .


----------



## lo_scrivano

ybw89 said:


> If they revamped the mark 18 with the in-house movement i'll be all over it. and maybe trim down case size a little too


I don't get the in house obsession. The ETA in the Mark XVIII is pretty solid. But I'm an amateur. So I may be speaking out of turn.


----------



## ybw89

I dont have a problem with ETA, easy to service workhorse but then i think when im paying that much money in house would be nice, plus the 72hour power reserve helps too


----------



## enycelilc

looks good, go for it


----------



## Wally71

Beautiful and sporty, it fits you well. I would not care about lugs. Just my opinion.


----------



## ybw89

Oh geez its hard, this or the aqua terra in 38..


----------



## ILuvSubs

I think it looks fine on you. I actually prefer the new Spitfire over the Mark XVIII. The aesthetics are better and the in-house movement makes it a no-brainer.


----------



## 1165dvd

ybw89 said:


> Oh geez its hard, this or the aqua terra in 38..


Are you a bracelet/rubber strap enthusiast, or a leather strap/nato enthusiast? That, more than anything, might help you decide. Both cases and dials are beautiful, if not completely different aesthetically. Having owned the newest 41mm AT, i can say that 38.5 is the way to go, but i prefer the older model without the conical shaped crown. The look of it really bothered me. Outstanding movement though.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## ybw89

I actually like all bracelet rubber nato leather haha. I thought the AT would work well, would buy it on the bracelet and rubber oem and i've got leather straps and nato's which would work on it? Looking for that GADA, wife said get one watch and be content with it....



1165dvd said:


> Are you a bracelet/rubber strap enthusiast, or a leather strap/nato enthusiast? That, more than anything, might help you decide. Both cases and dials are beautiful, if not completely different aesthetically. Having owned the newest 41mm AT, i can say that 38.5 is the way to go, but i prefer the older model without the conical shaped crown. The look of it really bothered me. Outstanding movement though.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## chriskb

I got it and really like it. I can wear another watch for a few days, and then come back to this one without having to reset it.. in house motor and 72 hr power reserve. It's the IWC Pilot I've been waiting for. If they decided to make the old ingenieur again with the iron inner and they put this motor in it then I'd be gunning for that as well. I got the nato strap and didn't get on too well with it but the olive canvas job from the fleiger chrono is on it's way. 
Really happy with it. 10/10

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LINVS

That fake yellow patina on the hands is a deal breaker.


----------



## Crolyx

Black dial, ecru lume, red accent, strainless steel case. IWC really nailed the combo with this one. It looks good on you and it'll look great with any outfit.


----------



## Knisse

I would avoid at all costs, you mention it yourself the lug to lug length is just plain embarrassing.. I love the petit prince edition but i cannot wear it because they completely messed up the lug to lug length.


----------



## lo_scrivano

Knisse said:


> I would avoid at all costs, you mention it yourself the lug to lug length is just plain embarrassing.. I love the petit prince edition but i cannot wear it because they completely messed up the lug to lug length.


The lug to lug is less than than the LPP Chrono. I believe it is 51mm same as the MK18. So that shouldn't be an issue. It is very thick though. Here is a good review.


----------



## lo_scrivano

LINVS said:


> That fake yellow patina on the hands is a deal breaker.


It's a matter of opinion. You hate it. The poster after you loves it.


----------



## LodeRunner

lo_scrivano said:


> It's a matter of opinion. You hate it. The poster after you loves it.


The faux-tina debate is entirely subjective, there is no such thing as a wrong opinion. I think a big problem is perception; if it's pitched as faux patina, many people would hate it simply because of the perception that it's trying to be something that it's not, which is something you don't want associated with an expensive luxury watch like an IWC. I bet if you asked the same people the same question, but the color was pitched as a cream or off-white, instead of a faux patina or "vintage inspired," people wouldn't respond so negatively. They still might not like it visually but they wouldn't be all religious about it.

The IWC Spitfire 39 really isn't a good example of faux-patina, in the real sense that it's trying to look old. It's just a color they use on some of the markers, and it's clear they're not "trying" for a fake vintage look because most of the other markers on the dial use a crisp bright white. If you're using a crisp white on other parts of the dial, it seems obvious you're not going for a faux-patina look. It's also clearly not faux-patina because they're using the modern IWC Mark XVIII-like typefaces for the numerals, logos, and hands. This is clearly a modern pilot-style watch, not a throwback, but giving proper respect to the historical IWC Mark series.

The best modern example of real faux-tina is the Longines Military watch, where they literally inserted fake spots to make the dial look aged. I actually like the watch, but that's one that really stirs up religious debates.


----------



## Knisse

lo_scrivano said:


> The lug to lug is less than than the LPP Chrono. I believe it is 51mm same as the MK18. So that shouldn't be an issue. It is very thick though. Here is a good review.


Yes and 51mm is unfortunately unwearable - for me at least. That the Chrono is even larger doesnt make it better, that just makes the chrono unwearable as well. 
Quite unfortunately as i really like the Petit prince.


----------



## TAG Fan

Simply the best


----------



## Mondo Shizmo

love the dial and size but kind of don't like that it's only 6 bar WR, this is kind of scary. I like to swim with my watches so this kind of kills it for me, I don't like to risk swimming with a watch that is below 10 bar of WR. I know people will say to take it off but what is the point if I have to track the time and want to wear that specific watch.


----------



## Roma753BCE

I hope they update the Mark XVIII case to this size and movement, and ditch the faux patina.


----------



## mos78

It definitely thicks all the boxes for me, it's beautiful, sporty and it fits you well.


----------



## flame2000

lo_scrivano said:


> I don't get the in house obsession. The ETA in the Mark XVIII is pretty solid. But I'm an amateur. So I may be speaking out of turn.


Nothing wrong with ETA version, just that IWC over-priced it for a movement that can be found in $2k watches.


----------



## darwin11

TAG Fan said:


> Simply the best
> View attachment 14296603


this is my dream


----------



## lo_scrivano

flame2000 said:


> Nothing wrong with ETA version, just that IWC over-priced it for a movement that can be found in $2k watches.


There is a thread somewhere on everything they do to it to ensure it isn't what you get with a standard ETA. Besides I paid $3k so doesn't seem so overpriced.


----------



## WhiskeyTengu

lo_scrivano said:


> flame2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing wrong with ETA version, just that IWC over-priced it for a movement that can be found in $2k watches.
> 
> 
> 
> There is a thread somewhere on everything they do to it to ensure it isn't what you get with a standard ETA. Besides I paid $3k so doesn't seem so overpriced.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The idea that their "modified" ETA movement is somehow equivalent to what's in a $2K watch is an impulsive reaction that is just objectively wrong but still triggers people emotionally.

ETA produces movements that are used in OMEGA watches, but that they are exclusively making movements for the SWATCH group as a whole now could also be what has prompted more in-house movements being made.

While there are certainly examples to be found, just because a movement is in-house does not mean it is actually a good movement. For the sake of Argument, let's use cars as an example:

The Pagani Huayra and Aston Martin Vantage are each supercars that use a Mercedes-AMG engine. It is not uncommon to share technologies in that field and if either manufacturer has something that could improve the work of that engine I'm sure they would and likely do.

I wouldn't expect either of those cars to be cheaper or the same price as a Mercedes Benz with that same engine.

AP and Patek Phillipe were using JLC movements at one point. I don't see people complaining about that despite the fact that JLC movements can be found for much cheaper.

ETA movements are used as a base movement by many for a reason: they are reliable, well made movements. They can also be modified to be better.


----------



## TAG Fan

From what I have heard, IWC are now using the Selitta SW200 instead of ETA in the Mark XVIII. I used to have the tribute to Mark XI and it was solid. However, I do see the point that IWCs with ETAs and Selittas are overpriced to a certain extent.


----------



## jagwap

I tried this on recently, in bronze.

Lovely size, and great colour combination. The green with gold makes a the fake patina less prominent, which is a plus for me (although the bronze ageing with Real patina I am for). It comes across as smaller than the Mark XVIII, by more than 1mm, and really nicely proportioned. The Chrono is equally nice, perhaps better, but sits a bit tall on me.


----------



## Killenay

Nice and Classic


----------



## drhr

jagwap said:


> I tried this on recently, in bronze.
> 
> Lovely size, and great colour combination. The green with gold makes a the fake patina less prominent, which is a plus for me (although the bronze ageing with Real patina I am for). It comes across as smaller than the Mark XVIII, by more than 1mm, and really nicely proportioned. The Chrono is equally nice, perhaps better, but sits a bit tall on me.


The 3 hander in bronze? Where was this? Are they available at retailers now?


----------



## Nicocamp353

Nice watch!!

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk


----------



## carlosimery

Love this


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## chriscmerritt

darwin11 said:


> this is my dream


This might be my next watch. Stunning!


----------



## yuji

Agreed that this will be much better than the Aqua Terra. Go for it!


----------



## panzerr

LINVS said:


> That fake yellow patina on the hands is a deal breaker.


So is anything that is off white or yellow a fake patina? Or can it just be....off white or yellow?


----------



## Cappyab

I'm a bit concerned about the lug to lug length for me, as well. What size wrist are you?


----------



## Cappyab

Edit - Is the lug to lug really 51mm? The Mark XVIII is 50 and may be a close call for me. I am really hoping the Spitfire works for me as I've been debating it, the Mark VIII Le Petit Prince and a Bell & Ross vintage BR V1 which is tiny comparatively.


----------



## JLVox

Beauty!!


----------



## Pun

Cappyab said:


> Edit - Is the lug to lug really 51mm? The Mark XVIII is 50 and may be a close call for me. I am really hoping the Spitfire works for me as I've been debating it, the Mark VIII Le Petit Prince and a Bell & Ross vintage BR V1 which is tiny comparatively.


What's the size from lug to lug in this Spitfire Bronze Watch is? Is it in-house movement? Please help.


----------



## trebor2

Pun said:


> What's the size from lug to lug in this Spitfire Bronze Watch is? Is it in-house movement? Please help.


It's 50mm. I have the stainless steel version which is the same. Yes, in house movement which is very accurate, just +1 sec per day on mine.


----------



## DanielSzeto

Is this movement really 100% inhouse ?


----------



## trebor2

DanielSzeto said:


> Is this movement really 100% inhouse ?


Do you know something I don't?


----------



## rtdavid1613

Looks great on you! I think that one is a great all-occasion piece


----------



## WhiskeyTengu

trebor2 said:


> DanielSzeto said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is this movement really 100% inhouse
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ?
> 
> 
> 
> Do you know something I don't?
Click to expand...

You should watch this. I own a IWC Big Pilot, sobim certainly not a detractor of the brand by any means, but some of the newer spitfire stuff, definitely doesn't appear to be 100% In house.


----------



## WhiskeyTengu

*so I'm...


----------



## TAG Fan

I don't know how much in-house or non in-house is the IWC Spitfire movement is but the watch looks absolutely fantastic and is currently the most accurate in my collection


----------



## wow445

TAG Fan said:


> I don't know how much in-house or non in-house is the IWC Spitfire movement is but the watch looks absolutely fantastic and is currently the most accurate in my collection
> 
> View attachment 14450617


love that Spitfire red text


----------



## ybw89

6.25 inch / 16cm, its around 50mm lug to lug so its the upper end for me. I decided against buying it for that reason.


----------



## phaphaphooey

TAG Fan said:


> I don't know how much in-house or non in-house is the IWC Spitfire movement is but the watch looks absolutely fantastic and is currently the most accurate in my collection
> 
> View attachment 14450617


Looks amazing.


----------



## Lucien369

TAG Fan said:


> I don't know how much in-house or non in-house is the IWC Spitfire movement is but the watch looks absolutely fantastic and is currently the most accurate in my collection


What do you mean by accurate ?

German Luftwaffe dial and hands on a Spitfire named watch ?


----------



## drhr

Been waiting for the bronze 3 hander, anybody know if they're out yet?


----------



## ybw89

Tim Mosso's review in the link above has got me re-considering.

For those interested i ended up settling for the Omega Trilogy railmaster but have found it rather boring with unimpressive finishing (especially the dial work) given how much it costs. Hoping to move that along and make way for this IWC


----------



## lo_scrivano

drhr said:


> Been waiting for the bronze 3 hander, anybody know if they're out yet?


Hi there I just tried one at the IWC boutique at Frankfurt airport so yes they are out! Or it may have been Schipol. The jet lag makes the memory murky.


----------



## drhr

lo_scrivano said:


> Hi there I just tried one at the IWC boutique at Frankfurt airport so yes they are out! Or it may have been Schipol. The jet lag makes the memory murky.


Oh great, thank you sir!!!!


----------



## chriskb

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## chriskb

Had the strap from the flieger chrono for a while now and I gotta say I recommend it.. 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## chriskb

Here's a lug shot on my 6.5 inch wrist









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## chriskb

Sure if you look at it for the time then it does look like the lugs are wide but to everyone else it's pretty good... see pic 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## chriskb

Couldn’t get on with the nato so well but this strap is better for me.. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mbc622

I've got a 6.25" wrist (and boxy at that) as well and these lugs were just too long; compared it to my 39 mm Flieger 3706 (which I wear with ease) in store and the lug to lug length was demonstrably longer!


----------



## mcnuggets1543

Looks amazing, but still like the Mark 18 LPP a lot 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## neons

IMO the blue is still unbeatable


----------



## Kirkawall

chriskb said:


> Here's a lug shot on my 6.5 inch wrist
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Very nice. Deciding between this and the outgoing LPP. Prefer the movement and date placement on the Spitfire, love the blue on the LPP. Decisions...


----------



## mikekchc

I think I like this one more than the LPP!


----------



## jordan05

This looks great. I have a feeling IWC is going to be my next fascination. But yeah, I don’t understand the appeal of long lugs.


----------



## Kvam

Put me down as another one wondering about the lugs...


----------



## Chrono9

I wondering will future MK use the same IWC in house movement instead of the current Sellita? I'm thinking MK and Spitfire will share the same movement in the future.


----------



## lo_scrivano

Lug size is a very personal thing. I don't find the lugs to be bothersome despite my 6.5 wrist. Somehow the watch comes together much better then a typical 50mm L2L piece.


----------



## Coloneltom

I agree that the lugs look a bit long, not necessarily in scale to the case but for your wrist. Otherwise, looks like a very versatile piece that would go well with business or casual wear. Love the pop of red text and the cream accents on the dial and handset.


----------



## mcnuggets1543

I don’t think the lugs are too long on the Mark XVIII. They look perfect to me because the case is thin and the lugs are curved alot. Maybe I’m wrong? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Kirkawall

mcnuggets1543 said:


> I don't think the lugs are too long on the Mark XVIII. They look perfect to me because the case is thin and the lugs are curved alot. Maybe I'm wrong?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Is there a difference in lug-to-lug between the Mark XVIII and the Spitfire? Most reviews I've seen place the Mk at 50.2, but missed the chance to measure more exactly when I tried them on.


----------



## mcnuggets1543

Kirkawall said:


> Is there a difference in lug-to-lug between the Mark XVIII and the Spitfire? Most reviews I've seen place the Mk at 50.2, but missed the chance to measure more exactly when I tried them on.


I believe so! The Mark XVIII is 51 lug to lug and the Spitfire is 50 I believe? The Spitfire case is also 1mm smaller, but something about the Spitfire design didn't pop to me. It's still a great watch though!

I found out that the long lug to lug doesn't matter because it hugs the wrist so well, and it is so thin. If it was 2mm thicker, it would be a different story I think.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mcnuggets1543

I also have a very round 7 inch wrist, and the lugs fit perfect. 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## omgitsspooky

ybw89 said:


> My wrist is 6.25"


I have the same wrist size, and thanks for the pic as I was looking into this after B&J's YouTube review. I liked the Mark XVIII over this but prefer the better movement in the spitfire. The long lugs do make it funky on smaller wrists... What is it, like 50mm lug to lug?


----------



## R3Dprius

omgitsspooky said:


> I have the same wrist size, and thanks for the pic as I was looking into this after B&J's YouTube review. I liked the Mark XVIII over this but prefer the better movement in the spitfire. The long lugs do make it funky on smaller wrists... What is it, like 50mm lug to lug?


Take a look at the 36mm pilots watch. Same size as the Mark XV and the lug to lug is 47mm and doesn't have the floating date window. I picked up one in February and it has been the only watch I've worn since then.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Kirkawall

omgitsspooky said:


> I have the same wrist size, and thanks for the pic as I was looking into this after B&J's YouTube review. I liked the Mark XVIII over this but prefer the better movement in the spitfire. The long lugs do make it funky on smaller wrists... What is it, like 50mm lug to lug?


50.2, apparently, but it really doesn't wear like it. My wrists are a shade under 7", and it wears a bit smaller than the Pelagos/BB, and around the same as the PO for me. It did seem a better fit than the only slightly larger XVII I triedI, and its thinness and case mean that it sits very flat. It is a surprisingly beautiful watch in the metal, more integrated and striking than I'd expected, and closer to the IWC pilots of their glory years. I much preferred it to the Heritage I originally went in for, which I wasn't expecting.


----------



## omgitsspooky

R3Dprius said:


> Take a look at the 36mm pilots watch. Same size as the Mark XV and the lug to lug is 47mm and doesn't have the floating date window. I picked up one in February and it has been the only watch I've worn since then.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Is this what you're referring to?

https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/new-iwc-pilots-watch-automatic-36mm

You're right, it is a beautiful watch.


----------



## R3Dprius

omgitsspooky said:


> Is this what you're referring to?
> 
> https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/new-iwc-pilots-watch-automatic-36mm
> 
> You're right, it is a beautiful watch.


Yes they're great, but they actually have a matte black dialed version that doesn't have a raised minute track (the one I own). Weirdly, if you look at it on IWC's site it has the date window as white but mine is black. Essentially a smaller version of the Mark XVIII. I would link it but I don't have enough posts to drop links.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## trebor2

I have a 7" wrist and the Spitfire sits well without any overhang. I think the long lugs contribute to the watch sitting comfortably.


----------



## Overwound

omgitsspooky said:


> Is this what you're referring to?
> 
> https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/new-iwc-pilots-watch-automatic-36mm
> 
> You're right, it is a beautiful watch.


That's a nice one too but it's this one R3Dprius is talking about.

https://www.iwc.com/us/en/watch-collections/pilot-watches/iw324010-pilot_s-watch-automatic-36.html









The 40mm Mark XVIII (left) and 36mm (right).


----------



## Dunnej

LOVE the pop of red on that dial – like a red Sub but 1/10th the price, cant go wrong.


----------



## Dunnej

LOVE the pop of red on that dial – like a red Sub but 1/10th the price, cant go wrong.


----------



## Kirkawall

Picked my Spitfire Auto up, finally, and absolutely love it. Great wearability, case and dial detailing, and a surprising degree of depth and texture on the dial, with has a black-brown, speckled, almost tropical vibe up close, and a more interesting vintage-inspired font than on my older Pilot, while the mix of bone-white, cream, polished metal and red on the numbers, indices and handset is both striking and logical in the metal. Also, it has been incredibly accurate thus far. Just a terrific piece from a collection that IMO combines modern and vintage better than anything this side of a Longines.


----------



## tna23

Kirkawall said:


> Picked my Spitfire Auto up, finally, and absolutely love it. Great wearability, case and dial detailing, and a surprising degree of depth and texture on the dial, with has a black-brown, speckled, almost tropical vibe up close, and a more interesting vintage-inspired font than on my older Pilot, while the mix of bone-white, cream, polished metal and red on the numbers, indices and handset is both striking and logical in the metal. Also, it has been incredibly accurate thus far. Just a terrific piece from a collection that IMO combines modern and vintage better than anything this side of a Longines.
> 
> View attachment 15093787


Congrats, I absolutely love that watch but feel the lugs are a bit long for my wrist. How do you find it wears?


----------



## TAG Fan

Lucien369 said:


> What do you mean by accurate ?
> 
> German Luftwaffe dial and hands on a Spitfire named watch ?


Accurate from a timing perspective. 
Its just a cool watch mate. I am not going to speculate over the dial and hands because it does nothing for me from a discussion perspective.


----------



## Kirkawall

tna23 said:


> Congrats, I absolutely love that watch but feel the lugs are a bit long for my wrist. How do you find it wears?


My wrists are a shade under 7", and it wears brilliantly, easily among the most comfortable watches I own, alongside my vintage Doxa and Cartier. There's a lot of curve and shape to those longer lugs, and the very flat back means it sits very comfortably with zero overhang or wobble, pretty much regardless of strap.

It's also a very dynamic dial, changing from deep, deep black to a green-gold brown depending on the light, and the cream handset and quarter-hour plots give it a less stark appearance than some of its stablemates. And the case, with its razor-sharp transitions between steps and movement between finishes, is very tactile and really rewards careful examination. It really is a stunning watch, simple and fascinating all at once.


----------



## opinian

I've had the steel Spitfire Auto for the past 6 months and it's been comfortable and accurate. The brown leather strap that came with it has developed a nice patina that gets compliments all round.
The finishing on the case and the crispness of the dial are also excellent, clearly appropriate for the price of the watch.

Regarding the lume color, it was clearly inspired by the aged tritium on an original Mark XI but it's just a color that looks great and I don't see why it is any less valid than the chalk white of stock superluminova.


----------



## swissra

TAG Fan said:


> I don't know how much in-house or non in-house is the IWC Spitfire movement is but the watch looks absolutely fantastic and is currently the most accurate in my collection
> 
> View attachment 14450617


Nice picture.


----------



## riceknight




----------



## Mr.Sawyer

Nice watch. I don't get the whole "in house" craze. My Spitfire has an ETA and I really like it.


----------



## riceknight

The eta 2824 or 2892 for example are designed for robustness and accuracy on a budget. When you have brands like Tudor and IWC releasing inhouse movements, the hope would be that brands at this level are using less stamped parts, better quality parts even if in the case of the Spitfire new movement its largely based on a 2892.

When cheaper brands like Yema, Eterna ect make their own inhouse movements, I doubt they can even match eta for quality.


----------



## Kirkawall

opinian said:


> I've had the steel Spitfire Auto for the past 6 months and it's been comfortable and accurate. The brown leather strap that came with it has developed a nice patina that gets compliments all round.
> The finishing on the case and the crispness of the dial are also excellent, clearly appropriate for the price of the watch.
> 
> Regarding the lume color, it was clearly inspired by the aged tritium on an original Mark XI but it's just a color that looks great and I don't see why it is any less valid than the chalk white of stock superluminova.


Great pix and agree about the colour scheme. It's a lovely mix of warm and sharp that matches the case, dial and font of the Spitfire beautifully, while adding some real dimension to an otherwise pretty flat surface. I feel like the "OMG Fauxtina!" criticism is misplaced with this watch.

It's a terrific all-rounder. I love mine.


----------



## Broham84

I love this watch, would 100% get this over that Railmaster or AT for that matter.


----------



## desk jockey

It is lovely, although I gravitate towards Mark XVIII LPP - if it had the 32110 movement and, hence, date window poshed out closer to the edge of the dial.

This has been probably done to death, so apologies, but is there a specific reason why numbers on IWC pilot watches lack lume? Full lume on this type of dial seems like a no-brainer to me (and Stowa, Laco et al all agree) so I am not sure why IWC would omit such a detail, unless there are specific reasons for it (heritage etc.) Thanks!


----------



## Kakemonster

I believe the reason behind the lume pattern can be traced back to the historic mark xi/11. If you google iwc mark xi, you'll see pretty much the same lume pattern as on the spitfire. I.e only the hour and minute hand, the triangle at 12 and markers (at 3,6,9) were applied with lume (initally radium, and later revisions tritium).

One of the few iwc models that feature lume on all numbers would be the IWC mark xviii heritage. Not sure why exactly, but perhaps that model is tapping more into the history of german fliegers.


----------



## desk jockey

Thanks, this is what I suspected. Having said that - I think it might be another missed opportunity. I think for reading minutes in low-light, quarterly markers are not enough.


----------



## othertbone

This is a great watch, just buy it at a discount or on the grey market. I ordered the green textile strap from the spitfire chrono and it is perfect. Mine came on the leather and I wanted a more vintage military look but I don;t like natos. This combo is awesome. Love it


----------



## YODAHAWK

I just ordered one from Moyer’s Jewelers in Carmel, IN. They gave me a $500 discount. This will be my first IWC. Really excited.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## YODAHAWK

Well boys after receiving my SF yesterday I can say the legibility of this watch is off the charts! The fit, finish and feel is the best I have ever seen in any watch and I've owned 100s over the years. This watch is absolutely gorgeous in low light settings and after 14 hours the accuracy is spot on. I highly recommend this watch if you are looking for a nicely sized, legible, fantastic fit and finished field/pilot watch.









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## dchang81

I've had the bronze for a few months. Sold a mark xviii. I like that the sizing of the numerals is smaller, seems more proportional. The movement bit is overrated, mine runs very well but if it's towards the bottom half of the power reserve, accuracy falls off a cliff. My only concern is that my bronze version is a fad, but it doesn't really scratch.


----------



## Retumbo

Like the watch, but my biggest issue with IWC is that they only use sapphire casebacks on their 42mm+ offerings. Hopefully sales from the new Portuguese will convince them to put a displayback on these new pilots.


----------



## jagwap

Retumbo said:


> Like the watch, but my biggest issue with IWC is that they only use sapphire casebacks on their 42mm+ offerings. Hopefully sales from the new Portuguese will convince them to put a displayback on these new pilots.


The pilot watches tend not to get the sapphire casebacks, as they have a soft iron internal casing to protect against magnetic fields. There are other ways to protect against them, but watch companies like "traditional" methods, if someone else owns the patent.


----------



## Retumbo

jagwap said:


> The pilot watches tend not to get the sapphire casebacks, as they have a soft iron internal casing to protect against magnetic fields. There are other ways to protect against them, but watch companies like "traditional" methods, if someone else owns the patent.


I was unaware that display casebacks were patented. With respect to magnetization, I would argue that the ingenieur line would be a much better option if that was a legitimate concern.

Although I have never inspected the movement in any of the newer pilot watches, my guess is that IWC's general lack of exhibition casebacks in mainstream models has more to do with hitting a price point as well as maintaining strict differentiation among Richemont brands. I personally think this is a strategic error, as this lack of "movement pronz" is the only thing holding me back from purchasing a modern IWC (and I doubt I'm the only one).


----------



## jagwap

Retumbo said:


> I was unaware that display casebacks were patented. With respect to magnetization, I would argue that the ingenieur line would be a much better option if that was a legitimate concern.
> 
> Although I have never inspected the movement in any of the newer pilot watches, my guess is that IWC's general lack of exhibition casebacks in mainstream models has more to do with hitting a price point as well as maintaining strict differentiation among Richemont brands. I personally think this is a strategic error, as this lack of "movement pronz" is the only thing holding me back from purchasing a modern IWC (and I doubt I'm the only one).


Sorry if I wasn't clear. The casebacks are not patented. The techniques to resist magnetic fields without a soft iron core are often patented.

Nobody buys a high end watch as a tool watch anymore: drivers, pilots, motorsport all have better tools than a clockwork mechanism to measure their industrial activities. However if IWC want to keep the pilot watch ethic, a sapphire caseback is not in keeping with the mode, and as you say will increase the cost.

I work around reasonably high magnetic fields, so I welcome the resistance to magnetic fields. I should buy an Omega as they are the most resistant, but I prefer IWC.


----------



## hrant

I like it. Wear it in good health!


----------



## theotse

A great watch. looks especially great with the green nato and bronze case.


----------



## YODAHAWK

I like this combo...









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Rkowatch52

ybw89 said:


> View attachment 14189713
> 
> 
> Tried this one on today, case size and thickness is great but not sure about the long lugs. Wouldn't look out of place with business attire and great with more casual wear too (especially on a nato), looking for a daily, could this be it?


These are such nice watches, if I ever sold my Ranger this would be what replaces it. I've seen a few reviews on them saying that the price point doesn't match the watch though so it'd have to be a good deal.


----------



## Rkowatch52

YODAHAWK said:


> I like this combo...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That's a match made in heaven.


----------



## Cappyab

YODAHAWK said:


> I like this combo...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


We have similar tastes! I also purchased mine from Moyer's, but with the leather strap. In similar fashion, however, I swapped if for something green-a sailcloth strap from Barton's. And just last week, I ordered a solid green strap from Erika's Originals after vacillating between it and the red stripe you have.










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Kirkawall

Rkowatch52 said:


> These are such nice watches, if I ever sold my Ranger this would be what replaces it. *I've seen a few reviews on them saying that the price point doesn't match the watch though so it'd have to be a good deal.*


IDK about that -- the Hodinkee review, along with a few others, specifically notes that the Spitfire series represents an excellent value for the money:









Hands-On: The IWC Pilot's Watch Automatic Spitfire


Thirty-nine millimeters of pure steel pilot's watch.




www.hodinkee.com





_As configured here, the Pilot's Watch Automatic Spitfire costs just $4,450, and for that you get a whole heck of a lot...For less than $5,000, you get a new in-house automatic movement, the cal. 32110, and it comes with a power reserve of 72 hours, a meaningful length of time that respects the watch enthusiast. The movement also has a silicon escape wheel and lever. I like to think that by giving you a reserve of 3 days, the watchmaker understands that you probably own other watches, and you may want to switch them out from time to time without resetting the time and date. (Having said that, this is a watch that I think I would want to wear a lot.) _

I own a few watches that cost more than the Spitfire, and I'm moving all but one of them on. It's a beautifully-worked case and dial that offers supreme legibility and greater dial depth over some other Marks, a movement that surpasses 75 hours regularly for me, while averaging around +8s per week with basically zero positional variation. The lume is very good and the lugs and case are extremely comfortable and slim enough to wear under cuffs and not to have worry overmuch about dinging it. If it had a more robust WR of 100m it would be pretty close to the perfect watch, IMO. Even at 60m it's a killer.


----------



## Kirkawall

Cappyab said:


> We have similar tastes! I also purchased mine from Moyer's, but with the leather strap. In similar fashion, however, I swapped if for something green-a sailcloth strap from Barton's. And just last week, I ordered a solid green strap from Erika's Originals after vacillating between it and the red stripe you have.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That's a very nice combo. Is that the Barton?


----------



## Cappyab

Yes—it is the Barton. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Cappyab

Cappyab said:


> We have similar tastes! I also purchased mine from Moyer's, but with the leather strap. In similar fashion, however, I swapped if for something green-a sailcloth strap from Barton's. And just last week, I ordered a solid green strap from Erika's Originals after vacillating between it and the red stripe you have.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Received the Erika's Originals strap. It's fantastic. 









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## kritameth

Cappyab said:


> Received the Erika's Originals strap. It's fantastic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Something about that looks different from my Erika's on wrist. Just curious, why did you go with that setup? Not my picture, but this is how I have mine.


----------



## Cappyab

I initially found it easier to manipulate the hook/clasp when it draped from the 6 o'clock/bottom side of the case. And I also liked see the red stitching! I re-oriented the strap the other way (i.e., clasp draping from the 12 o'clock/ top side) a few minutes ago. I fully expect some frustration and profanity as I find a way to slip the hook into the keeper.


----------



## Hands90

Never liked this model at all. 
Saw it in person and it completely blew me away. Photos just do not do it justice.


----------



## Kirkawall

Hands90 said:


> Never liked this model at all.
> Saw it in person and it completely blew me away. Photos just do not do it justice.


True. It's such a striking watch in the metal. Great combo of warmth, austerity and polish.

Mine also runs like a high-end quartz. It is neatly as accurate since April as my GS 9f86 and seems to run forever on the briefest activity, with the legibility of a flieger and dimensions approaching a dress watch.


----------



## trebor2

chriskb said:


> Here's a lug shot on my 6.5 inch wrist
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Did you order this from IWC? Nice strap.


----------



## carlhaluss

Just the thread I was looking for! I recently sold my new BP43. Although it is a beautiful watch by most standards, it just didn't work for me. I won't go into details about that, as this is about the Spitfire. This Spitfire is likely the Pilot watch I should have got instead. No worries. Sometimes you have to try many to get to the perfect one. So, I will be going to the local boutique today and try it on! Much to my chagrin, I never tried this one, or the Mark XVIII in the first place.


----------



## mchou8

Looks great on you.


----------



## Kakemonster

carlhaluss said:


> Just the thread I was looking for! I recently sold my new BP43. Although it is a beautiful watch by most standards, it just didn't work for me. I won't go into details about that, as this is about the Spitfire. This Spitfire is likely the Pilot watch I should have got instead. No worries. Sometimes you have to try many to get to the perfect one. So, I will be going to the local boutique today and try it on! Much to my chagrin, I never tried this one, or the Mark XVIII in the first place.


I would be interested in hearing your reasons for selling on the bg43, as I have considered selling my spitfire recently. Although I love several aspects about the spitfire, I ultimately do hope they bring that movement into the mark series. 

But it seems now that everything is about the bg43 and I even heard rumors on YouTube that IWC are thinking of discontinuing the mark series. I seriously hope not.


----------



## carlhaluss

Kakemonster said:


> I would be interested in hearing your reasons for selling on the bg43, as I have considered selling my spitfire recently. Although I love several aspects about the spitfire, I ultimately do hope they bring that movement into the mark series.
> 
> But it seems now that everything is about the bg43 and I even heard rumors on YouTube that IWC are thinking of discontinuing the mark series. I seriously hope not.


I actually found the stark white numbers and markers against the black dial a bit overwhelming. To me, the watch had more of a wrist presence than even the 46.2mm BP. The 46.2mm BP has the Power Reserve Indicator and Date going on, and it tends to make the dial look almost smaller IMO. Also, I could never get the watch to sit comfortably on my wrist. In part due to the relatively narrow strap/lug width. The lug width is 21mm, not even half the case diameter. But I think that is because they are trying to keep the proportions same as the original. Anyway, just because it didn't work for me doesn't mean it's not a beautiful watch.

I tried the Spitfire and really liked it. But the Mark XVIII Heritage is really the one that worked so well when I tried it on. 
The smaller Mark XVIII works much better for me than the BP43, and I love the aesthetics as well as the comfort. Weight of a watch is never an issue with me, so that didn't have anything to do with it. Must say I do prefer the greyish/brown hue of the titanium, and it really works well with the colored/faux patina handset and markers.

I can't imagine them discontinuing the Mark series!? I don't have any issues with the Sellita movement, which they modify so well anyway. It would be nice to see an inhouse, though. Although that would drive up the price quite a bit.


----------



## Kakemonster

carlhaluss said:


> I actually found the stark white numbers and markers against the black dial a bit overwhelming. To me, the watch had more of a wrist presence than even the 46.2mm BP. The 46.2mm BP has the Power Reserve Indicator and Date going on, and it tends to make the dial look almost smaller IMO. Also, I could never get the watch to sit comfortably on my wrist. In part due to the relatively narrow strap/lug width. The lug width is 21mm, not even half the case diameter. But I think that is because they are trying to keep the proportions same as the original. Anyway, just because it didn't work for me doesn't mean it's not a beautiful watch.
> 
> I tried the Spitfire and really liked it. But the Mark XVIII Heritage is really the one that worked so well when I tried it on.
> The smaller Mark XVIII works much better for me than the BP43, and I love the aesthetics as well as the comfort. Weight of a watch is never an issue with me, so that didn't have anything to do with it. Must say I do prefer the greyish/brown hue of the titanium, and it really works well with the colored/faux patina handset and markers.
> 
> I can't imagine them discontinuing the Mark series!? I don't have any issues with the Sellita movement, which they modify so well anyway. It would be nice to see an inhouse, though. Although that would drive up the price quite a bit.


Interesting take on the bg43. I haven't really considered it as I am sure it will wear too big for my taste. But then again it is supposed to, hence the name big pilot

The mark xviii heritage is a really nice piece. Love the blued hands and the lume is superior compared to regular mark xviii.

I can't really imagine it either, but I saw Tokkante's youtube review of the bg43 and he mentioned that the IWC boutique salesperson stated that there may not be a mark 19. I suppose IWC have a challenge in the sense that at this point the mark xviii is basically a smaller version of the bg43 without the big crown.

Perhaps they feel that the timepieces overlap too much? My hopes is that they bring the spitfire movement into the mark series. It may increase the price somewhat, but the spitfire isen't that much more expensive than the regular mark xviii.


----------



## carlhaluss

Kakemonster said:


> Interesting take on the bg43. I haven't really considered it as I am sure it will wear too big for my taste. But then again it is supposed to, hence the name big pilot
> 
> The mark xviii heritage is a really nice piece. Love the blued hands and the lume is superior compared to regular mark xviii.
> 
> I can't really imagine it either, but I saw Tokkante's youtube review of the bg43 and he mentioned that the IWC boutique salesperson stated that there may not be a mark 19. I suppose IWC have a challenge in the sense that at this point the mark xviii is basically a smaller version of the bg43 without the big crown.
> 
> Perhaps they feel that the timepieces overlap too much? My hopes is that they bring the spitfire movement into the mark series. It may increase the price somewhat, but the spitfire isen't that much more expensive than the regular mark xviii.


Interesting about the Mark series. A friend of mine works at the Boutique, but he never mentioned anything to me. Funny what a difference 3mm can make, though. I find the Mark XVIII wears considerably smaller. Will be interesting to see what comes up next.


----------



## Jonathan T

I must have completely missed this - i didn't realize IWC made one of the spitfires with an in-house movement and with a 72 hour PR. nice! i assumed at this dial size range, they were all the iwc branded sellita movements!


----------



## Kakemonster

Jonathan T said:


> I must have completely missed this - i didn't realize IWC made one of the spitfires with an in-house movement and with a 72 hour PR. nice! i assumed at this dial size range, they were all the iwc branded sellita movements!


Well, to be fair it is a point of contention if the spitfire movement is actually "in-house" or it is simply a modified ETA. I don't really care personally, as the main draw for me is the increased power reserve and I really hope it makes it to the next mark (if there ever is one).


----------



## Jonathan T

Kakemonster said:


> Well, to be fair it is a point of contention if the spitfire movement is actually "in-house" or it is simply a modified ETA. I don't really care personally, as the main draw for me is the in increased power reserve and I really hope it makes it to the next mark (if there ever is one).


agree. Having just gotten my first 72 hour PR watch (actually almost 96 hour after testing it - it’s a hand winder) I have had enough of these 38-40+ hour PR movements!


----------



## Kirkawall

Kakemonster said:


> Well, to be fair it is a point of contention if the spitfire movement is actually "in-house" or it is simply a modified ETA. I don't really care personally, as the main draw for me is the increased power reserve and I really hope it makes it to the next mark (if there ever is one).


Is it a bone of contention? The gear train, winding system, balance, ratchet and crown wheel and plate are not the same and they share no common ETA parts. The question is more whether a movement that is shared between brands under a corporate umbrella can be claimed by more than one brand as "in-house," but of course that term has no legal or even agreed-upon meaning.

The 32000 is in no way equivalent to a 2892, in design or performance. Whether or not it's a true manufacture movement in ways that will satisfy an individual buyer is another debate, of course.

This from an IWC watchmaker following a Hodinkee article:










Steal Vs. Splurge: Heritage Pilot's Watches from Hamilton and IWC


Both pack a ton of value. Does one pack more?




www.hodinkee.com





EvanDaviesPetePete_·_4 months ago
No. It isn’t. I am a watchmaker who works with both. Aesthetically they have a similar structure, that is all. The 32110 is not based on the 2892.


EvanDaviesPetePete_·_4 months ago
They are wrong. The proof? Take a look at pictures of the movement. Specifically the position of the balance in relation to the winding stem. It is almost 180 degrees different. The 32110 is also larger, meaning the main plate is larger, and it is also slightly thicker. All the bridges are different. What other sources say is irrelevant, look at pictures of it and you'll see my point. Stop taking everything watch blogs say at face value.


EvanDaviesPetePete_·_4 months ago
But it isn't based on the 2892? The architecture is entirely different, I don't get where you are getting this from. At this very moment I have both of them on my desk, and aside from a vague aesthetic (Being slim, relatively small automatic movements.) there isn't much similar. I've posted all the differences but you seem to be adamant about it being ETA based, when it isn't. It has ZERO ETA compatible parts, none whatsoever. It has no parts produced by ETA or Sellita, no parts in common, nothing. The solutions in the movements are different, the setting system, the gear train, the winding system for the automatic, the ratchet and crown wheel (A notorious problematic area for the 2892) is also entirely different. So with all this, please show me how the 32110 is based on the 2892? Aside from you getting your info from watch blogs what usually all get their info from somewhere else, and is not checked factually at all.


----------



## loqv75

L😍 VE mine!


----------



## AnonPi

Kirkawall said:


> So with all this, please show me how the 32110 is based on the 2892?


I like how PetePete's reply to this question from EvanDavies was basically, "show me how the 32110 isn't based on the 2892," as though EvanDavies hadn't actually done that several times over. Good stuff.


----------



## Kakemonster

Kirkawall said:


> Is it a bone of contention? The gear train, winding system, balance, ratchet and crown wheel and plate are not the same and they share no common ETA parts. The question is more whether a movement that is shared between brands under a corporate umbrella can be claimed by more than one brand as "in-house," but of course that term has no legal or even agreed-upon meaning.
> 
> The 32000 is in no way equivalent to a 2892, in design or performance. Whether or not it's a true manufacture movement in ways that will satisfy an individual buyer is another debate, of course.
> 
> This from an IWC watchmaker following a Hodinkee article:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Steal Vs. Splurge: Heritage Pilot's Watches from Hamilton and IWC
> 
> 
> Both pack a ton of value. Does one pack more?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hodinkee.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EvanDaviesPetePete_·_4 months ago
> No. It isn’t. I am a watchmaker who works with both. Aesthetically they have a similar structure, that is all. The 32110 is not based on the 2892.
> 
> 
> EvanDaviesPetePete_·_4 months ago
> They are wrong. The proof? Take a look at pictures of the movement. Specifically the position of the balance in relation to the winding stem. It is almost 180 degrees different. The 32110 is also larger, meaning the main plate is larger, and it is also slightly thicker. All the bridges are different. What other sources say is irrelevant, look at pictures of it and you'll see my point. Stop taking everything watch blogs say at face value.
> 
> 
> EvanDaviesPetePete_·_4 months ago
> But it isn't based on the 2892? The architecture is entirely different, I don't get where you are getting this from. At this very moment I have both of them on my desk, and aside from a vague aesthetic (Being slim, relatively small automatic movements.) there isn't much similar. I've posted all the differences but you seem to be adamant about it being ETA based, when it isn't. It has ZERO ETA compatible parts, none whatsoever. It has no parts produced by ETA or Sellita, no parts in common, nothing. The solutions in the movements are different, the setting system, the gear train, the winding system for the automatic, the ratchet and crown wheel (A notorious problematic area for the 2892) is also entirely different. So with all this, please show me how the 32110 is based on the 2892? Aside from you getting your info from watch blogs what usually all get their info from somewhere else, and is not checked factually at all.
> 
> View attachment 16300219


Yeah, I remember this comment thread from the hondikee article. I think that rather using the word contention, I should have said misconception Because its seems that outsiders who are not fan of IWC, often make these kind of statements. 

My personal experience with the spitfire movement has been outstanding thus far. The feel of the winding mechanism is probably the best I've encountered, even for watches 2x the price. The power reserve is actually longer than the advertised 72 hours, and the accuracy is spot on.


----------



## Cappyab

Kakemonster said:


> My personal experience with the spitfire movement has been outstanding thus far. The feel of the winding mechanism is probably the best I've encountered, even for watches 2x the price. The power reserve is actually longer than the advertised 72 hours, and the accuracy is spot on.


Ditto with mine. Winding it is blissful. In part, the crown is the right size to feel between your fingers and allows you to wind it without your fingertips brushing against the case. Far more enjoyable than all other autos and mechanicals I own. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## djy74

Great thread. This has been on my radar recently for a possible daily wear. I might have missed it here, but does any OEM IWC bracelets fit this? It looks right at home on a strap, but I've always been a fan of the IWC bracelets.

Thanks,
Dan


----------



## Jonathan T

Kakemonster said:


> Yeah, I remember this comment thread from the hondikee article. I think that rather using the word contention, I should have said misconception Because its seems that outsiders who are not fan of IWC, often make these kind of statements.
> 
> My personal experience with the spitfire movement has been outstanding thus far. The feel of the winding mechanism is probably the best I've encountered, even for watches 2x the price. The power reserve is actually longer than the advertised 72 hours, and the accuracy is spot on.


Good that it is more than 3 days. If you’re getting an in house movement I almost expect and want a longer PR if possible.


----------



## mjrchabot

Jonathan T said:


> Good that it is more than 3 days. If you’re getting an in house movement I almost expect and want a longer PR if possible.


What kind of PR do you expect though? The going rate these days is say 60-80hrs on most luxury watches. Beyond that you’re jumping into 8+ day PRs. I think getting an 8 day PR at this price point is unrealistic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jonathan T

mjrchabot said:


> What kind of PR do you expect though? The going rate these days is say 60-80hrs on most luxury watches. Beyond that you’re jumping into 8+ day PRs. I think getting an 8 day PR at this price point is unrealistic.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yeah, i would expect something in the 60-80 hrs as opposed to the the 30-40 hour range which is very common in the base ETA and sellita movements. For sure, 7 day plus ones are the domain of higher end in house movements (IWC, Breguet, etc...)


----------



## scottomatic

Price aside, spitfire 39mm or Big Pilot 43? I went into the AD wanting to try on the spitfire, and it was great. Then I haaaad to try on the BP and it felt like something special.
Pros/cons/opinions? Pretty sure my mind is made up, but just for fun 😎


----------



## Cappyab

Oh wow. Hmm. Is this something for regular or daily wear or something for special occasions/settings or outfits. The Spitfire is a lovely, lower key tool watch for daily wear. It’s versatile on NATOs, and others (Erika’s originals for me). The Big Pilot, however, makes a bolder statement on the wrist. But is it something you plan to wear regularly? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## scottomatic

Cappyab said:


> Oh wow. Hmm. Is this something for regular or daily wear or something for special occasions/settings or outfits. The Spitfire is a lovely, lower key tool watch for daily wear. It’s versatile on NATOs, and others (Erika’s originals for me). The Big Pilot, however, makes a bolder statement on the wrist. But is it something you plan to wear regularly?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I’m a rotator for sure, but I’m specifically looking for a plain dial type watch for frequent wear. I wear a SMP diver 300m and the BP isn’t really much bigger. Hoping it is comfortable for daily. Maybe I’m deluding myself though.


----------



## jerseytime

scottomatic said:


> I’m a rotator for sure, but I’m specifically looking for a plain dial type watch for frequent wear. I wear a SMP diver 300m and the BP isn’t really much bigger. Hoping it is comfortable for daily. Maybe I’m deluding myself though.


I feel like this is exactly my dilemma! (new to the thread). I'm pretty real with my watches, in a ordinary, do-the-dishes-walk-the-dog kind of way, so I worry about the BP43 getting in the way, especially with that crown. I really like the bronze spitfire 39 and I think it's a good size for daily life. But the BP43 is gorgeous, and if I could swing it, I'd probably go there.


----------



## scottomatic

ignoring the strap hanging out this is me w the BP43 on at the AD. Seems okay I think?


----------



## jerseytime

scottomatic said:


> View attachment 16316731
> 
> ignoring the strap hanging out this is me w the BP43 on at the AD. Seems okay I think?


I mean it's incredible! Looks great. Looks like you're wrist is 7.25'', something like that?


----------



## scottomatic

jerseytime said:


> I mean it's incredible! Looks great. Looks like you're wrist is 7.25'', something like that?


Damnit this comment might be the nail in a very expensive coffin 😂. It’s actually only 7”, maybe it’s a good angle.


----------



## jerseytime

scottomatic said:


> Damnit this comment might be the nail in a very expensive coffin 😂. It’s actually only 7”, maybe it’s a good angle.


I think that watch is just meant to look like it does! Do it...


----------



## scottomatic

jerseytime said:


> I think that watch is just meant to look like it does! Do it...


----------



## jerseytime

scottomatic said:


> View attachment 16317599


Huzzah! Another wallet bites the dust. Totally worth it. Looks great.


----------



## Kakemonster

scottomatic said:


> View attachment 16317599


Looks great! Looks like it wears well for its size! I have to try this out at the AD.


----------



## mjrchabot

scottomatic said:


> View attachment 16316731
> 
> ignoring the strap hanging out this is me w the BP43 on at the AD. Seems okay I think?


Fits you like a glove… after all, it’s not called the “petite pilot”. 

I’m considering this for my first IWC as well. Lovely piece, has all of the IWC DNA traits, plus other goodies like a higher beat rate, higher water resistance, exhibition case back showing off that beautiful movement. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## carlhaluss

Well. Back to this great thread yet again. My search for the perfect IWC Pilot watch is going to be an expensive one! But not without lots of fun and learning along the way. I sold my BP43, and a few short weeks ago went into the Boutique to take a look at the Spitfire 39mm. I really loved the looks of it, but found it looked too small on my wrist. In retrospect, I think I felt that way because my previous watch was the BP43. Before I left the shop, I decided to try the Mark XVIII Heritage. It was perfect. Not only the 40mm size. The lugs are also wider than the Spitfire, so the wrist presence is even greater than the extra 1mm size would indicate. I really like the titanium case, not for the weight, but the color. I also like(d) the colored/faux patina markers and hands. One of the things that turned me off about the Spitfire is that only 3, 6, 9, 12 positions have lume. I realized that there must be a solid explanation. There is. The lume positions match the positions of the original Mark XI from the late 40s. Now I actually applaud IWC for keeping that detail. Even at risk of losing sales to guys like me who prefer a totally lumed dial. Anyway, just deciding what to do next: sell the Mark XVIII Heritage and get the Spitfire, or keep the Mark XVIII. What a great dilemma to have!









Photo courtesy of Hodinkee: (note the colored lume bits are less obtrusive than the Mark XVIII)


----------



## Kirkawall

carlhaluss said:


> Well. Back to this great thread yet again. My search for the perfect IWC Pilot watch is going to be an expensive one! But not without lots of fun and learning along the way. I sold my BP43, and a few short weeks ago went into the Boutique to take a look at the Spitfire 39mm. I really loved the looks of it, but found it looked too small on my wrist. In retrospect, I think I felt that way because my previous watch was the BP43. Before I left the shop, I decided to try the Mark XVIII Heritage. It was perfect. Not only the 40mm size. The lugs are also wider than the Spitfire, so the wrist presence is even greater than the extra 1mm size would indicate. I really like the titanium case, not for the weight, but the color. I also like(d) the colored/faux patina markers and hands. One of the things that turned me off about the Spitfire is that only 3, 6, 9, 12 positions have lume. I realized that there must be a solid explanation. There is. The lume positions match the positions of the original Mark XI from the late 40s. Now I actually applaud IWC for keeping that detail. Even at risk of losing sales to guys like me who prefer a totally lumed dial. Anyway, just deciding what to do next: sell the Mark XVIII Heritage and get the Spitfire, or keep the Mark XVIII. What a great dilemma to have!
> View attachment 16349011
> 
> 
> Photo courtesy of Hodinkee: (note the colored lume bits are less obtrusive than the Mark XVIII)
> View attachment 16349029


Great watches both -- thanks as always for the elegant writeup and pix. 

Oddly enough, 2 years back I was in the same position. I was able to "audition" the Mark XVIII silver, the Heritage Ti while I waited on the Spitfire. Though I really enjoyed the Silver Mk, I ended up buying the Heritage -- only to return it shortly after for the Spitfire Auto in steel. 

Today it's still one of my most-worn and most-loved watches, and still looks pretty much as it did then, while keeping superb time and running well past 75 hours on a wind. An absolute beauty of a watch. Bon chance!


----------



## Cappyab

A tough decision indeed. The Ti Heritage model is a stunner as far as conservative pilot watches are concerned. I would have considered it for myself, but its lug-to-lug was just too long for my comfort. Heck, I’m now finding that I prefer watches with a lug-to-lug measuring 48mm or smaller (which does not include the Spitfire).


----------



## carlhaluss

Kirkawall said:


> Great watches both -- thanks as always for the elegant writeup and pix.
> 
> Oddly enough, 2 years back I was in the same position. I was able to "audition" the Mark XVIII silver, the Heritage Ti while I waited on the Spitfire. Though I really enjoyed the Silver Mk, I ended up buying the Heritage -- only to return it shortly after for the Spitfire Auto in steel.
> 
> Today it's still one of my most-worn and most-loved watches, and still looks pretty much as it did then, while keeping superb time and running well past 75 hours on a wind. An absolute beauty of a watch. Bon chance!
> 
> View attachment 16351892




Wow! How very interesting. I should not have been so hasty in choosing the Heritage. Mind you, it is out for service now, as there is an issue with the crown. Nevertheless, I am confident it will be serviced well and to my satisfaction. I am hoping when I get it back, that I will learn to love it more. If not, I will sell it at a loss then likely go for the Spitfire. Either that or, if I don't feel like it deserves spending another 3k to get it, possibly back to basics with a Hamilton Khaki. I have to be damn sure that the Spitfire will be a keeper! Thanks for taking the time to read my post and give me your feedback. Very much appreciated!


----------



## Kirkawall

carlhaluss said:


> Wow! How very interesting. I should not have been so hasty in choosing the Heritage. Mind you, it is out for service now, as there is an issue with the crown. Nevertheless, I am confident it will be serviced well and to my satisfaction. I am hoping when I get it back, that I will learn to love it more. If not, I will sell it at a loss then likely go for the Spitfire. Either that or, if I don't feel like it deserves spending another 3k to get it, possibly back to basics with a Hamilton Khaki. I have to be damn sure that the Spitfire will be a keeper! Thanks for taking the time to read my post and give me your feedback. Very much appreciated!


Always a pleasure. And yes it's important to be sure. I will say that of all the watches I've owned that have come and gone from Breguet to Rolex, the Spitfire has stuck around. It's a calm, understated and immensely versatile design with surprisingly elegant casework, a dial that shifts from deep, deep black to a warm chocolate depending on the light, and a handset that is both supremely legible and often beautiful when it catches the light.

I've tried at times to "downsize" to other pilots -- because who needs a 5k pilot watch? - from Stowa, Sinn, Damasko etc., all of which are excellent watches, but have never quite been satisfied. I also have an older Mk but that is not a daily wearer anymore. And still the Spitfire ticks quietly on...


----------



## Nate11

God that looks sharp…even with the lugs overhanging a bit IMO.


----------



## Nate11

Nate11 said:


> God that looks sharp…even with the lugs overhanging a bit IMO.


Sorry…,this was intended to be a reply to the post with the BP43 and Lexus steering wheel


----------



## Alimamy

I have only been with he Spitfire for a little over a month, but still quite happy and excited about it.

If I were buying watches decades ago when the models were new, I definitely would have gone with an IWC 3706 and/or a Mark XII. I think those are great watches with a lot of emotional appeal and nostalgia for me. IWC was doing good things in the 90s early 2000s. 

As it is, buying new, I am excited where IWC is going, and happy with the Spitfire Auto. IWC seems to be making very nice bracelets, so hoping something with that option catches my eye on the future.


----------



## ericchan1211978

Hi fellow spitfire owners! May i ask what accuracy are you getting after months pr years of use ? I bought mine 1 month ago and had .5 sec per day at the start but now its at -2.5. Should i be concerned? Has anyone had this experience ? Thanks


----------



## ericchan1211978

Kirkawall said:


> Great watches both -- thanks as always for the elegant writeup and pix. Oddly enough, 2 years back I was in the same position. I was able to "audition" the Mark XVIII silver, the Heritage Ti while I waited on the Spitfire. Though I really enjoyed the Silver Mk, I ended up buying the Heritage -- only to return it shortly after for the Spitfire Auto in steel. Today it's still one of my most-worn and most-loved watches, and still looks pretty much as it did then, while keeping superb time and running well past 75 hours on a wind. An absolute beauty of a watch. Bon chance!
> View attachment 16351892


 What accuracy are you getting on your Spitfire 39mm after 2 years of use ? Ive only had mine for 2 months and im worried because it has gone from losing .5 to 2.5 per day ? Thanks so much


----------



## BigPilot5002

ericchan1211978 said:


> Hi fellow spitfire owners! May i ask what accuracy are you getting after months pr years of use ? I bought mine 1 month ago and had .5 sec per day at the start but now its at -2.5. Should i be concerned? Has anyone had this experience ? Thanks



This is 100% normal. After 6 months it may be that you get +0 seconds a day. It varies. It's normal. When it's -20 or +20 seconds a day, then it's different case.


----------



## ericchan1211978

BigPilot5002 said:


> This is 100% normal. After 6 months it may be that you get +0 seconds a day. It varies. It's normal. When it's -20 or +20 seconds a day, then it's different case.


 Thanks so much! I did not know that. im ok with 2-5 sec per day accuracy, my only concern is that it just keeps getting slower as time goes by? But if as you say it may get faster and then slower, then that’s acceptable. Oh and I absolutely love my spitfire. A bit obsessed with it actually. Even after iwc released the mk 20


----------



## BigPilot5002

Yes. It varies. My IWC aquatimer is sometimes spot on, like +5 seconds a month, sometimes +4 seconds a day, then again after two weeks -2 seconds a day etc. No problems at all, that's how mechanical watches work.


----------



## ericchan1211978

BigPilot5002 said:


> Yes. It varies. My IWC aquatimer is sometimes spot on, like +5 seconds a month, sometimes +4 seconds a day, then again after two weeks -2 seconds a day etc. No problems at all, that's how mechanical watches work.


Thanks a lot! Needed the assurance lol. Cheers


----------



## Kirkawall

ericchan1211978 said:


> What accuracy are you getting on your Spitfire 39mm after 2 years of use ? Ive only had mine for 2 months and im worried because it has gone from losing .5 to 2.5 per day ? Thanks so much


Sorry -- totally missed this. Mine is around +1.9 spd and essentially immune to positional variance. These are excellent movements and highly efficient run winding, IME.


----------



## Roli

How's the thickness on these? I just can't get over how thick IWC, unnecessarily I feel, make their watches.


----------



## trebor2

Roli said:


> How's the thickness on these? I just can't get over how thick IWC, unnecessarily I feel, make their watches.


No longer have this but I didn't find it too thick at all.


----------



## Kirkawall

Roli said:


> How's the thickness on these? I just can't get over how thick IWC, unnecessarily I feel, make their watches.


Not particularly thick at sub-11mm.

Overall proportions are excellent, IMO, and make for a very comfortable and stable west.


----------



## Roli

Kirkawall said:


> Not particularly thick at sub-11mm.
> 
> Overall proportions are excellent, IMO, and make for a very comfortable and stable west.
> 
> View attachment 17028476
> 
> View attachment 17028477


Thanks for sharing! Those are great proportions actually, might be time to start saving up for one!


----------



## Kirkawall

Roli said:


> Thanks for sharing! Those are great proportions actually, might be time to start saving up for one!


Happy to help. It's a remarkably capable watch, very comfortable and legible with superb casework and a notably beautiful handset, but most of all it just... works. 

I've also been impressed with the accuracy and efficiency of the movement, which seems to charge its PR with minimal movement and is very consistent across positions. A very easy watch to own and wear pretty much everywhere, IMO.


----------



## Cappyab

After having the Spitfire for a little more than three years, I recently sold it to fund something else. But I will miss this great piece: Very accurate (within COSC); perfectly sized crown that drove the most satisfying winding action I’ve experienced; and fantastic antiglare coatings on the sapphire.

The Spitfire also easily fits under a cuff. But I will say that the new Mark XX has a caseback that sits flatter against the wrist. Ymmv however. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## dberg

ericchan1211978 said:


> What accuracy are you getting on your Spitfire 39mm after 2 years of use ? Ive only had mine for 2 months and im worried because it has gone from losing .5 to 2.5 per day ? Thanks so much


Interesting. I’ve been debating a heritage or spitfire. Love to hear what you have to say about them. I like the dial layout of the heritage, but am scared the colored lume may not age well. And I prefer the longer PR of the spitfire. Thoughts?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Kirkawall

dberg said:


> Interesting. I’ve been debating a heritage or spitfire. Love to hear what you have to say about them. I like the dial layout of the heritage, but am scared the colored lume may not age well. And I prefer the longer PR of the spitfire. Thoughts?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I liked the Heritage, great build and feel, and you see similar lume in the MK VII.

Went with the Spitfire though, and still one of my faves 3 years on. Just a great, great all-rounder, that's fully capable of catching your eye in the right light with the quality of its casework or handset.


----------



## heb

I have an older model with a Selita movement. It continuously slows because I can't keep it fully wound. IWC watches are iconic, but they are not paragons of precision and rate stability.


----------



## SunDevil03

heb said:


> I have an older model with a Selita movement. It continuously slows because I can't keep it fully wound. IWC watches are iconic, but they are not paragons of precision and rate stability.


I have one originally sold in Nov 19. Is there away to determine which movement is in it?


----------



## SunDevil03

SunDevil03 said:


> I have one originally sold in Nov 19. Is there away to determine which movement is in it?


Answered my own question. 70 hour power reserve. No running great -8. appears to be under warranty. Might send it in.


----------



## Kirkawall

SunDevil03 said:


> Answered my own question. 70 hour power reserve. No running great -8. appears to be under warranty. Might send it in.


-8 isn't good for this movement. Mine has run between +.05 / +2.8 spd since new, and is seemingly immune to positional variation. I can't recall offhand when IWC extended their warranty period to 8 years, but I think the new Spitfires should be covered under it. 

I'd definitely consider sending it in if you've tried various positions and kept it fully wound and are still seeing this degree of timing error.


----------



## SunDevil03

I have them sending me a kit to ship it back. Will be under warranty.


----------

