# Mark XV vs Mark XVI



## exxondus

Comtemplating between these 2.

I saw quite a bit of debate between the face lift to the Mark series in 2006 by IWC.I now have the option to purchase either a preowned Mark XV with bracelet (5 years old), or a Brand new Mark XVI in strap for around the same price.

May I know what you IWC experts feel is a better deal and which should I go for as well as your thoughts? 

Thanks in advance


----------



## Denizen

*Mark XV*

the prefer the dial and hands of the XV. the fact that you can one on the bracelet is a big plus as well.


----------



## huntershooter

I'd much prefer the Mk XV with bracelet.


----------



## ulackfocus

Another XV vote. The bracelet is one of the best ever made, and the XV is 1 mm smaller (38 vs 39) than the XVI which is a good thing IMO.

Oops, almost forgot a picture:


----------



## exxondus

ulackfocus said:


> Another XV vote. The bracelet is one of the best ever made, and the XV is 1 mm smaller (38 vs 39) than the XVI which is a good thing IMO.
> 
> Oops, almost forgot a picture:


thats a split fire MArk XV right? lovely!.

but doesnt the older Mark XV (non Splitfire series) look different? I mean, if I am comparing similarities, I find the newer Mark XVI looks closer to the Split fire version with its Sword hands + 12 hour marker.


----------



## redsrover

Yes the non-Spitfire Mark XV has stick hands, not the sword hands shown above. I watched the Harrison Ford movie Firewall last night and the perfect IWC Mark XV non-Spitfire was on his wrist and got some good screen time.


----------



## NightScar

The non-spitfire Mark XV also has a flat, printed numerals w/ lume while the spitfire version has a slightly raised numerals w/o lume I believe.

I chose the Mark XVI because I just prefer the newer version with 39mm case instead of 38mm and 20mm lug instead of 18mm. I like it that it has a wider strap and there might be a lot more option when it comes to aftermarket straps with a 20mm lug.

That is one reason why I haven't quite pulled the trigger on the Pilot Chrono, the 21mm makes it difficult to change the straps and I love changing the look of my watches with different straps.


----------



## huntershooter

Unless I miss my guess, my mk XV has 19mm lugs, not 18mm (currently in the gun safe).
That does complicate strap selection a bit.


----------



## NightScar

Does it have a 19mm lug? I think that makes it more difficult to find an alternative strap for it. That is one thing I do not get with IWC, the lug zies on their watches ranges from 18mm, 19mm, 20mm, 21mm and 22mm. I can understand going with even numbers but a 19mm and 21mm? That means that they have to produce 3 different sized bracelet for these pilots, I guess just two now since the 19mm is discontinued but they do promise every part of the watch is available so it is still available. I can't help but think that this might be the reason the bracelet cost an additional $1,400 compared to the strap version. I think cost production would have been much smaller if they made a simple 20mm bracelet for all pilots (excluding BPs) and the savings would have been passed to us consumers. Just my .02 cents.


----------



## exxondus

seems like more prefer the XVI.

I have been searching online for lug size of the Mark XV and have not been able to find anything . Can someone confirm on this?

gosh, dilenma. The fact that the XVI has 20mm lug sizes is def a plus as lots of aftermarket straps are with that kinda lug sizes


----------



## Denizen

the irregular lug width is largely immaterial and virtually unoticeable...you can fit a 20mm strap on the 19 and a 22mm for the 21 without much difficulty.



exxondus said:


> seems like more prefer the XVI.
> 
> I have been searching online for lug size of the Mark XV and have not been able to find anything . Can someone confirm on this?
> 
> gosh, dilenma. The fact that the XVI has 20mm lug sizes is def a plus as lots of aftermarket straps are with that kinda lug sizes


----------



## exxondus

Denizen said:


> the irregular lug width is largely immaterial and virtually unoticeable...you can fit a 20mm strap on the 19 and a 22mm for the 21 without much difficulty.


thanks for the info. Nver really tht about it that way. 1mm really is a small measure if we give it some tht


----------



## exxondus

just handed the Mk XV in bracelet. I can confirm that the lug size is 19mm and not 20mm.

at first I tht the Mk XVI wasnt that well accepted by the masses due to the dial change. However, seems like it is the more popular one instead based on this poll.

so its the XVI for me?


----------



## Carrera 3

I picked the XVI due to the 39mm case and the leather belt because the watch looked better to me with a slightly larger face and with the black leather belt. I'm about to purchase a spare belt just in case.

Having said that, if they have not discontinued and just made the XV larger to a 39mm I may have stayed with the previous XV face design.


----------



## redsrover

Mark XV is 19mm, yes. I loved mine, wish now that I hadn't sold it last year.


----------



## NightScar

I'll be honest, looking at it side by side, I like the Mark XVI more. I like that the date wheel has white numerals and black background, it blends in with the black dial better. It also looks cleaner to me.


----------



## skoochy

I like the Mark XV look better than the Mark XVI. I also like the XV bracelet more. I wish both of them were larger (maybe 1-2mm, that's all). What's weird is that I tend to prefer black background date wheels on black dials when there is no white square around the date, but in this case I like the white date dial on the XV more.

That being said... I have a XVI. I also voted for the XVI. The clincher was that for me, "new from AD" is a big deal compared to 5 years old. If it was "used v. used" then I would go for the XV, but for me it's hard to pass up something brand new with full warranty from an AD at a good price.

-s-


----------



## katmando

Tough choice. The XV includes a bracelet, which is one of the best you can get. the XVI, IMO, is nicer looking. I like the hands better and the date is more subtle. Which to get? Hmmmmmmmmmmm.....I voted the Mark XVI.b-)


----------



## exxondus

NightScar said:


> I'll be honest, looking at it side by side, I like the Mark XVI more. I like that the date wheel has white numerals and black background, it blends in with the black dial better. It also looks cleaner to me.


Thanks for posting this side by side pic!!

hmm kinda agree with what you mentioned, as well as what katmando mentioned about the hands.

But for some reason when I saw the actual Mark XV, the dial looked balanced and not bz, whereas the XVI seem to buldge a bit by the sides. Its a weird feeling that I cant really describe.

Frankly speaking, my rational mind tells me to get XVI. Reason due to the following:
1) AD warranty covers for 2 years
2) Brand New
3) 20mm lugs opens a lot more options in terms of straps
4) 39mm looks suitable for me whereas 38mm is less common among guy watches.

However, I just cant seem to firm up the decision for fear that I would end up prefering something more vintage haha..

oh, btw, have to admit, that bracelet feels really really great on the wrist!!! More comfy then my Omega and Rolex bracelets!! -> This is also a bit weird as I always pictured myself wearing the Mark with a Strap :-s

oh, one more thing, is it normal for IWC watch boxes to kinda disintegrate like older Omega boxes? The Mark XV that I saw, the box was in real bad shape!!! It comes with a warranty card, an instruction booklet, the 'disintegrated box' and a really well conditioned Mark XV in bracelet.


----------



## Xkalifornian

Judging from the side by side, the MXV dial appears to be glossy and the XVI seems more of a matte. Is this so?

Thanks


----------



## exxondus

i think it could be due to the XVI having AR?


----------



## Denizen

*aesthetics...*

the white date window is a conscious design decision. when you have arabics on the markers, the white date wheel visually balances out the dial due to the missing '3'. the black date wheel on the XVI is paired that way because they used stick markers at the '9' and '3'.

a similar concept is evident on their gst alarm:











NightScar said:


> I'll be honest, looking at it side by side, I like the Mark XVI more. I like that the date wheel has white numerals and black background, it blends in with the black dial better. It also looks cleaner to me.


----------



## exxondus

*Re: aesthetics...*



Denizen said:


> the white date window is a conscious design decision. when you have arabics on the markers, the white date wheel visually balances out the dial due to the missing '3'. the black date wheel on the XVI is paired that way because they used stick markers at the '9' and '3'.
> 
> a similar concept is evident on their gst alarm:


ooh now i get why when I looked at the Mark XV, it seem balance!!! if the date wheel was white numerals on black, then it would look like something was missing from the 3 o'clock position!!!

thanks for highlighting this!! never really could understand why the white datewheel dint really bother me that much when I looked at the Mark XV


----------



## exxondus

guys, I just went to try out the XVI just now at the AD.

For some reason, I find that the white of the numerals arent as bright as that of the Mark XV. I attribute this to the plastic that is on the crystal. is it true?

in addition, when I placed it on my scrunny wrist, I noticed that the straps are at a 90 degree angle!! absolutely vertical!!!! Does this mean that its really too big for me? This is a bit weird cos I am wearing a 40mm GMTIIc and it looks fine on my wrist.


----------



## NightScar

You tried it on with the plastic wrap? As for the strap being completely vertical, I'm not sure what to say, that seems a bit odd. Maybe the straps is just a bit stiff as it is new? Overall, the GMT IIC has a bigger case so it should fit simlar if not better if your wrist is smaller. 

Denizen, good point but I don't know, it makes sense but I still prefer the look of the Mark XVI and the black date window. Maybe it's the overall cleaner look with the cleaner numerals (smaller and thinner) and smaller and higher position of the 12 o'clock triangle? Maybe it is the minute and hour hands or smaller "IWC" and "MARK XVI AUTOMATIC" print? Again, the look of a what is subjective so it really depends on the person.


----------



## exxondus

NightScar said:


> You tried it on with the plastic wrap? As for the strap being completely vertical, I'm not sure what to say, that seems a bit odd. Maybe the straps is just a bit stiff as it is new? Overall, the GMT IIC has a bigger case so it should fit simlar if not better if your wrist is smaller.
> 
> Denizen, good point but I don't know, it makes sense but I still prefer the look of the Mark XVI and the black date window. Maybe it's the overall cleaner look with the cleaner numerals (smaller and thinner) and smaller and higher position of the 12 o'clock triangle? Maybe it is the minute and hour hands or smaller "IWC" and "MARK XVI AUTOMATIC" print? Again, the look of a what is subjective so it really depends on the person.


not plastic wrap as in the whole watch.

mainly the crystal had a kinda transucent sticker on it.

Do you happen to know the difference in lug to lug of the Mk XV vs the Mk XVI? From a pic that you posted in "*Mark XVI Lug to Lug Size "*, I think the XVI is about 1.9".


----------



## NightScar

Yeah, brand new IWC's has that somewhat thick plastic wrap around the case. Why didn't you try the watch on with it off? It's the only way to get the true feeling of the watch.

Sorry, I do not know the lug t lug size of the MK XV.


----------



## exxondus

so i went to a few more places, tried on a few more times for the Mk XVI and the lugs were all protruding (I was hoping beyond hope that I would be able to find a smaller one haha..forcing the impossible).

So its fated. The Mk XVI was way too large for me in terms of lug to lug. I placed it side by side with my GMTIIc and despite the GMTIIc being a 40mm, its lug to lug was at least 1-2 mm shorter.

Anyway, turned out I wasnt really too sad when I found that I could not wear the XVI. My mind was gg back to the XV during all that time. 

Hence, I am now officialy a owner of Mk XV. btw, managed to find a brand new piece from an AD. Got it at a good price too. Of cos, as I did not buy the 5 yr old bracelet Mk XV, I now only have that puny strap. But rest assured that I wont rest till I get a nice 19mm strap for my XV.

Thanks everyone for the input!


----------



## fumikane

Great! Wear it and enjoy!


----------



## exxondus

fumikane said:


> Great! Wear it and enjoy!


thanks!

having issue finding astrap for it tho due to its 19mm lugs.

will only get to wear it when I find a strap haha...wish me luck!


----------



## NightScar

What is your price point and kind of strap you are looking for? I may be able to help you find or at least lead you to the right direction.


----------



## exxondus

NightScar said:


> What is your price point and kind of strap you are looking for? I may be able to help you find or at least lead you to the right direction.


I'm looking for something that is vintage, maybe like the PAM heroic/ammo kinda straps. I am also fine with aligator ones. Price point can be anyway within USD$120 or so.

I am actually using one of my old watch aligator straps at the moment. its 20mm but I trimmed it to become 19mm at the lugs. Looks fine actually. But either wat, am still on the look out for something nice. currently also comtemplating some straps from The watch boys.

Thanks!


----------



## NightScar

For croc strap, Hadley Roma makes these in 19mm and sold by fredawatchstraps, a forum affiliate. MSRP is $152 but if you e-mail him (his e-mail is in the bottom page of the link) he will give you the forum price.
https://www.watchuseek.com/showthread.php?t=298515









This strap is calfskin with alligator grain also made in 19mm and only $25 also sold by FredaWatchStraps through the first link. Not a bad option. I think the contrast stitching will match well with the black dial and white numerals.









Hirsch Modena and Duke are also good options that provide 19mm. Price is $39 and $34 respectively from fredawatchstraps.
https://www.watchuseek.com/showthread.php?t=298518

















For a PAM strap style, the Hirsch Trapper is the best I could find. $54.









The Hirsch Venetia is also a good choice for simplicty and class, available in 19mm. $71. Available in black and brown.









The same with the Hirsch Zurich, also available in 19mm and $71. Available in black, brown and golden brown.









I hope that helps and good luck with your choice.


----------



## exxondus

Wow Thank you so much NightScar!!

From your post, it seems that i can turn my Mark XV to a mini Pam like watch with lots of straps!!

And I was really worried that I cant find a variety of straps due to the 19mm lug size.

Thanks again!!


----------



## roseskunk

both are nice watches! congrats on your purchase! i bought a strap from vintager straps. really, really nice, and custom too, so 19mm is no problem.


----------



## exxondus

roseskunk said:


> both are nice watches! congrats on your purchase! i bought a strap from vintager straps. really, really nice, and custom too, so 19mm is no problem.


thanks for the reassurance!! :-!


----------



## larsy

I prefer the Mk XV.
It has the right British military designation (Mk) and
the right British dial and hands.

Unlike the Mk XVI which is called Mk but has a German dial and hands.

But that's just WIS nitpicking of course, the watch is still cool


----------



## exxondus

larsy said:


> I prefer the Mk XV.
> It has the right British military designation (Mk) and
> the right British dial and hands.
> 
> Unlike the Mk XVI which is called Mk but has a German dial and hands.
> 
> But that's just WIS nitpicking of course, the watch is still cool


uh oh, I never knew there was british vs German for the original military designted marks.

but i tht most of the 5 chosen brands like stowa, IWC, GO were more inclined towards German style?


----------



## hwilsdorf

Mark XVI for me. The fat hands looks much better!


----------



## larsy

From IWC for some background on the "Mark" line of watches:
http://www.iwc.ch/lecture/library/_pdf/mark11a-en.pdf

A short overview of German B(eobachtungs)-Uhren (Observer Watches):
http://brown-snout.com/horology/collection/archive/archimede_flieger_original/b-uhr_article.pdf

The German dial is very similar to the British one but the hands are quite different.

Hence my nag about having German hands on a watch with a British Mark designation.
Both Germans and British air forces seemed to use very similar dials,
so my post above is not correct regarding the dial.

Although I much prefer the Mk XV, they're both very good watches.
No matter which you choose, you'll surely be happy with it for a long time.


----------



## exxondus

larsy said:


> From IWC for some background on the "Mark" line of watches:
> http://www.iwc.ch/lecture/library/_pdf/mark11a-en.pdf
> 
> A short overview of German B(eobachtungs)-Uhren (Observer Watches):
> http://brown-snout.com/horology/collection/archive/archimede_flieger_original/b-uhr_article.pdf
> 
> The German dial is very similar to the British one but the hands are quite different.
> 
> Hence my nag about having German hands on a watch with a British Mark designation.
> Both Germans and British air forces seemed to use very similar dials,
> so my post above is not correct regarding the dial.
> 
> Although I much prefer the Mk XV, they're both very good watches.
> No matter which you choose, you'll surely be happy with it for a long time.


Thanks for the links and info above. Learnt something today from you!

I got the Mark XV cos the lug-to-lug size of the XVI was a bit too long for me and for some reason, I prefer the older dial. anyway, I bought a brand new piece from one of the Local ADs at a great discounted price. Apparently, its been sitting there for quite a while and they seem quite happy to be rid of it :roll:.

The 2 year warranty for the brand new piece was well worth it as compared to getting the 5-7 year old XV in bracelet as per my first post.


----------



## NightScar

Congrats... but you know whats next, we need PICS!!! :-d


----------



## larsy

Congratulations from me too!

I also considered getting a Mk XV but ended up with an Explorer instead ;-)


----------



## exxondus

larsy said:


> Congratulations from me too!
> 
> I also considered getting a Mk XV but ended up with an Explorer instead ;-)


congrates on your explorer!

but any reason why the sudden change of heart? I mean, they are totally 2 different watches IMO and have minimal similarities


----------



## larsy

Thanks 

I agreee they are quite different.

I was looking for a practical, classical and understated watch.
The one watch to be with me until I die.

It should accompany me wherever I am, so all dress watches
like JLC Master Control, Reverso etc. were out, too frail.
It also meant the watch would need a steel bracelet and have as
few complications as possible to reduce probability of failure.
So no chronos, no date, if possible, no moon-phase etc.

It should be classical in the sense that it had as few complications
as possible, not be the last representative of multiple limited editions
(e.g. Omega Speedmaster) or have a carbon-fibre dial or other such things.

It should be understated in the sense that it shouldn't be instantly
recognisable as expensive or worse, to look blingy and ostentatious.
The less markings and text on the dial the better (most Rolex out here).

So I ended up deciding between the Mk XV and the Explorer.

The Mk XV wasn't available from an AD here in Basel, only second-hand
and I didn't want that.
So I went to the AD Bucherer and tried on the Mk XVI and the Explorer.
The Mk XVI was just too wide for my taste, I prefer smaller watches.

(But the strap of Mk XVI is of far better design and quality than the Explorer's.
And the level of finishing of the Mk XVI is probably higher than the Explorer's.
Winding the watch is also a much smoother feeling.)

However, since they were both more or less in the same price range
(IWC Mk XVI, CHF 5700.-; Rolex Explorer, CHF 5200.-) and I could afford
either of them, two things apart from the size made me choose the Explorer.
1. It has no date, which makes the dial even more balanced.
2. It has an in-house movement, which doesn't necessarily mean it's
better than the ETA 2824-2 of the Mk XV, but it adds to the magic.

The fake Mt. Everest legend of the Explorer and the bomber pilot lineage
of the Mk XVI both didn't influence my desicion at all.
Both watches are far too expensive for their value, if you ask me.
But both watches are beauties and sometimes you just have to bite
the bullet if you want to treat yourself with some of that


----------



## jb44

I have a mark xv on leather strap, have just had a couple of complimentary replacement straps sent from IWC they sent the regular rather than small first time. The strap I had on wore away after about 18months, they said due to water damage, but replaced anyway - why have a waterproof watch when strap not waterproof? was really dissapointed with quality of it when I brought it from IWC dealer at the time think it was about £70, have read with interset all postings, I prefer the Mark XV to the XVI, felt the date looked too small on the XVI when I tried one on, not sure if it was due to being on black background...also found this site in paris via article in FT weekend that does some really cool custom straps toying with the idea of getting one
http://www.abp-paris.com/


----------



## Denizen

i've yet to find a 100% waterproof leather strap, much less a nice croc one that would be appropriate for that style watch.

water & leather just don't mix.

there are various creams/waxes that you can put on the straps to make them more water resistant, but those can bring their own share of complications.

generally the less water & sweat you expose the strap to, then the better they'll hold up.

ABP are well-known for their excellent straps.



jb44 said:


> why have a waterproof watch when strap not waterproof? was really dissapointed with quality of it when I brought it from IWC dealer at the time think it was about £70, have read with interset all postings, I prefer the Mark XV to the XVI, felt the date looked too small on the XVI when I tried one on, not sure if it was due to being on black background...also found this site in paris via article in FT weekend that does some really cool custom straps toying with the idea of getting one
> http://www.abp-paris.com/


----------



## exxondus

Denizen said:


> i've yet to find a 100% waterproof leather strap, much less a nice croc one that would be appropriate for that style watch.
> 
> water & leather just don't mix.
> 
> there are various creams/waxes that you can put on the straps to make them more water resistant, but those can bring their own share of complications.
> 
> generally the less water & sweat you expose the strap to, then the better they'll hold up.
> 
> ABP are well-known for their excellent straps.


The chonomissinos (Can't rem how it spells tho) look quite waterproof to me. I used to have a Sinn857 on that strap.

I was able to wash the strap daily and the water kinda slides off the strap. Hence I believe its possible to have a waterproof strap.


----------



## GradyPhilpott

larsy said:


> The fake Mt. Everest legend of the Explorer....


This is an interesting post, as I own an Explorer and have a hankering for a MK XVI.

I don't however understand the above statement.

What do you mean?


----------



## Salmosalar

*Neither!!!!!*

My experiences with IWC have not been good. :-(

A Mark XIV was junk, I had it back to IWC 2 times before I dumped it. o|

The other, a Portofino, unrelated to your choices did not sing to me at all. <|
Dumped that for a GP.

Try SINN, ROLEX Explorer I, OMEGA AQUA TERRA with the 8500 mvmt. SEIKO ALPINIST SARB059, DAMASKO etc. IWC just does not do anything for me. Almost everything in their line can be found at other brands for a better price and higher quality.


----------



## skyrider007

*Re: Neither!!!!!*



Salmosalar said:


> My experiences with IWC have not been good. :-(
> 
> A Mark XIV was junk, I had it back to IWC 2 times before I dumped it. o|
> 
> The other, a Portofino, unrelated to your choices did not sing to me at all. <|
> Dumped that for a GP.
> 
> Try SINN, ROLEX Explorer I, OMEGA AQUA TERRA with the 8500 mvmt. SEIKO ALPINIST SARB059, DAMASKO etc. IWC just does not do anything for me. Almost everything in their line can be found at other brands for a better price and higher quality.


What happened?


----------



## exxondus

*Re: Neither!!!!!*



skyrider007 said:


> What happened?


not too sure. but how did he get his hands on a Mark *XIV *in the first place?? Is it really an IWC he was refering to or did he get it from some reps and tht it was IWC?

anyway, let's not feed the troll. there will def be haters for every brand.


----------



## skyrider007

*Re: Neither!!!!!*



exxondus said:


> not too sure. but how did he get his hands on a Mark *XIV *in the first place?? Is it really an IWC he was refering to or did he get it from some reps and tht it was IWC?
> 
> anyway, let's not feed the troll. there will def be haters for every brand.


True, I love my Mark XVI to bits. It's running a little too fast though (+4sec/day) but I'll get that re-adjusted at the AD soon. :-!


----------



## exxondus

*Re: Neither!!!!!*



skyrider007 said:


> True, I love my Mark XVI to bits. It's running a little too fast though (+4sec/day) but I'll get that re-adjusted at the AD soon. :-!


+4s/day isnt really that bad actually 

btw, I just re-read *Salmosalar's *post and found that I missed something again.

he managed to buy a Mark XIV which was never released by IWC (IIRC) and then he bought a portofino which did not sing to him and blamed IWC when he dumped the watch which he dint like in the first place? :-s

I hope the GP sang to him ;-), else he will blame the brand when he dump it for another (that hopefully sings to him else thw cycle continues)


----------



## Carrera 3

*Re: Neither!!!!!*

I always felt that brand haters have alot of arrogance in them...Almost as if they are the most knowlegeble.

I always think that watches are like art...it's very subjective to one's perception..

You could have at least tone it down to...."my preference is......"

Just amazing how someone can rubbish a brand (obviously an established one) with a strong statement to a degree advise to go for another without any credibility and substance.

I don't think IWC is going to quible with a statement like that. As far as I am concerned, it's still one of the best brands in the world and I will continue to follow it with great interest.

My next IWC purchase is the "Portuguese Choronograph - White face/Gold hands" or the "Pilot Choronograph - Black Face". Thought about the gold..but I am also aiming for the Rolex GMT II TTC hence the wifey may be not too happy if I spend too much too soon. : )


----------



## larsy

GradyPhilpott said:


> This is an interesting post, as I own an Explorer and have a hankering for a MK XVI.
> 
> I don't however understand the above statement.
> 
> What do you mean?


I think these pages explain it best:
http://www.xs4all.nl/~rkeulen/watch/explorer.html
http://rolexblog.blogspot.com/2008/11/sir-edmund-hillary.html

Either Hillary's watch was a Rolex or a Smiths, in either case it was not an Explorer.
I _believe_ it's true, but I can't confirm it of course, since I wasn't there.

Of course it's very difficult to separate fact from fiction, WIS and watch companies
both like to spread myths, or mix fact with fiction, about the watches they like or make.

In any case, I still like my Explorer.

Not because it may or may not have an Everest "heritage" but because
I like it's looks and it's made well, just like IWC's Mk XV ;-)


----------



## thesaint2009

*I for one prefer the XVI*

I for one prefer the XVI


----------



## sammers

A vote for the XV! A fine watch with the "classic" RAF style dial and hands. A purer heritage in my opinion... Here's mine.


----------



## ilovewatches

NightScar said:


> Does it have a 19mm lug? I think that makes it more difficult to find an alternative strap for it. That is one thing I do not get with IWC, the lug zies on their watches ranges from 18mm, 19mm, 20mm, 21mm and 22mm. I can understand going with even numbers but a 19mm and 21mm? That means that they have to produce 3 different sized bracelet for these pilots, I guess just two now since the 19mm is discontinued but they do promise every part of the watch is available so it is still available. I can't help but think that this might be the reason the bracelet cost an additional $1,400 compared to the strap version. I think cost production would have been much smaller if they made a simple 20mm bracelet for all pilots (excluding BPs) and the savings would have been passed to us consumers. Just my .02 cents.[/QUOTE
> 
> 19mm is a bit of pain, i have mine on a brown 19mm Jurgens tropic pilot strap


----------



## WatchFan56

i recently tried on a MarkXVI and was impressed by it...it wasn't on my radar before but now is...its retail price (at this AD) ain't that bad too


----------



## akit110

*Re: Neither!!!!!*



exxondus said:


> not too sure. but how did he get his hands on a Mark *XIV *in the first place?? Is it really an IWC he was refering to or did he get it from some reps and tht it was IWC?
> 
> anyway, let's not feed the troll. there will def be haters for every brand.


The curious thing is that these haters always seem to frequent the brand forum representing the brand that they purport to hate. Isn't there a better way to spend your time?? Like on a brand forum for a watch you hate.

The funny thing is if IWC was really as bad overall statistically as he's suggesting from his alleged experience with one watch than I am telling you IWC would be out of business very quickly given the way that information like that spreads on internet fora.


----------



## Brenwatch

*Re: Neither!!!!!*



akit110 said:


> The curious thing is that these haters always seem to frequent the brand forum representing the brand that they purport to hate. Isn't there a better way to spend your time?? Like on a brand forum for a watch you hate.
> 
> The funny thing is if IWC was really as bad overall statistically as he's suggesting from his alleged experience with one watch than I am telling you IWC would be out of business very quickly given the way that information like that spreads on internet fora.


Mark XV has a much much better dial and is a classic !


----------



## Lucien369

The 3 correct reiteration of the Mark 11.

Mark XII, Mark XV and Mark XVIII Tribute to Mark XI.









You can guess which one has AR coatings.


----------

