# Where does IWC rank in term of fine watch group?



## knugen

Does IWC rank in the same group as the mas production Omega, Rolex or JLC,PP, Frank Muller, Daniel Roth?


----------



## watchmanee

IMHO, definitely higher than Omega and Rolex (I am sure it's debatable to Rolex purists), but I won't put it in the same class as JLC, PP, and Frank Muller in terms of movements and complications, all three JLC, PP, and FM are master of innovations when it comes to movements.


----------



## verse214

watchmanee said:


> IMHO, definitely higher than Omega and Rolex (I am sure it's debatable to Rolex purists), but I won't put it in the same class as JLC, PP, and Frank Muller in terms of movements and complications, all three JLC, PP, and FM are master of innovations when it comes to movements.


+1

In my opinion, IWC is definitely a step above Rolex and Omega when it comes to quality and how solid the watch "feels".


----------



## knugen

verse214 said:


> +1
> 
> In my opinion, IWC is definitely a step above Rolex and Omega when it comes to quality and how solid the watch "feels".


Does IWC still being categorize as mass production watches?

Does most of the part i.e movement and the finishing of the bracelet is handcraft(not machine assembled)?


----------



## watchmanee

knugen said:


> Does IWC still being categorize as mass production watches?
> 
> Does most of the part i.e movement and the finishing of the bracelet is handcraft(not machine assembled)?


Definitely not as mass produced as Rolex and Omega that's for sure. The line is understated, highly appreciated by those who know quality watches. The finishing in IWC watches are above and beyond in a class above the other two mainstream watches. Superb finish as always, IWC watches are the kind that look mesmerizing in person than when looking at them in photos.

In terms of movements, I am no expert for IWC, but I believe they used the ETA based movements and modified them for the lower end models and for the more expensive models they're completely in-house.


----------



## Sgian Dubh

I think it depends on the price level. At the lower end, I'd put IWC on par with Omega. Though Omega is moving towards using it's in-house 8500 movement, in the past, at, say, around the $4000 to $5000 mark, both mostly used the ETA 2892. Overall, while fans will tell you one brand is better than the other, it's really a wash.

At the same price, you are getting an in-house movement in the Rolex, albeit mass produced. Depending on what's important to you, that might be a factor in making the Rolex a better buy.

As you move up in price, I definitely think IWC moves ahead of Omega and Rolex, with better finishing and nicer movements. In some cases, the higher-end IWCs can hold their own with watches from Jaeger and Patek. Though, on the whole, Jaeger and Patek do build more refined pieces.


----------



## NightScar

^^^
Although I like the new Omega "in-house" 8500 movement, I still feel the huge price increase that goes a long with it might not be worth it. I mean I've always seen the Aqua Terra as an entry level Omega and one of their more accessible classic offering but now it is out of reach for most with the $1,500 increase. Sure it is arguable that that is a bracelet price to IWC but I would have still liked it if Omega did not discontinue the older model as it did have a more classic dial as well.


----------



## knugen

So as long as it has Pellaton based winding system, it's consider a higher ranking range is it?

Thus a Portuegese and Ingenieur is a higher level than the Omega coaxial range and the rolex and on par with JLC?

While the Aquatimer which is base on ETA is on par with Omega and Rolex?

But would it be more reliable and robust than the other brand?


----------



## sunster

This might help
http://forums.timezone.com/index.php...=4400594&rid=0


----------



## MrOmega

pilot, aquatimer, portofino range = 1 level above omega & breitling, but not rolex level.

ingy, portuguese & da vinci = JLC, and a slight edge over zenith & rolex.

period.


----------



## Handel

Sgian Dubh said:


> I think it depends on the price level. At the lower end, I'd put IWC on par with Omega. Though Omega is moving towards using it's in-house 8500 movement, in the past, at, say, around the $4000 to $5000 mark, both mostly used the ETA 2892. Overall, while fans will tell you one brand is better than the other, it's really a wash.
> 
> At the same price, you are getting an in-house movement in the Rolex, albeit mass produced. Depending on what's important to you, that might be a factor in making the Rolex a better buy.
> 
> As you move up in price, I definitely think IWC moves ahead of Omega and Rolex, with better finishing and nicer movements. In some cases, the higher-end IWCs can hold their own with watches from Jaeger and Patek. Though, on the whole, Jaeger and Patek do build more refined pieces.


That's a summary I would pretty largely agree with.


----------



## knugen

sunster said:


> This might help
> http://forums.timezone.com/index.php...=4400594&rid=0


 sunster, I can't access the link.Can you correct it?


----------



## sunster

knugen said:


> sunster, I can't access the link.Can you correct it?


Sorry
http://forums.timezone.com/index.php?t=tree&goto=4400594&rid=0


----------



## knugen

sunster said:


> Sorry
> http://forums.timezone.com/index.php?t=tree&goto=4400594&rid=0


 Thanks for the link. Why in Chronocentric (http://www.chronocentric.com/watches/brands.shtml), they didn't put IWC in any of the ranking?

Is the ranking was obsolete or not being updated?


----------



## watchmanee

Well.. it's just a survey

Personally in general, I would rank IWC as follows ...

[But this is just a fun exercise as any attempt to rank these watches are foolish since each brand has its own strength and weakness, different expertise and contribution into the history of watchmaking, however, it's clear though that PP > Omega and IWC > Tag Heuer, etc ... ] :-d

PP, AP, VC, Breguet, A Lange & Sohne 
JLC, Blancpain 
GO 
GP, *IWC*
Ulysse Nardin 
Rolex
Cartier, Chopard 
Omega
Tag Heuer


----------



## craniotes

I find that rankings of these sorts tend to be exercises in futility more often than not. With the exception of houses like PP, VC, GO, JLC, and yes, even Rolex, where the entire line pretty much hews to the same level, it's too hard to accurately rank a watch brand. To wit, Chopard's manufacture line (L.U.C) is widely acknowledged by WIS-in-the-know to be up there with the best of the best, yet watchmanee above ranked them below a couple of brands who don't have a single watch in their portfolio that can match a L.U.C. caliber. Why? Easy, because Chopard also makes silly watches like "Happy Diamonds" for women, that feature cheesy floating diamonds and quartz movements.

It's far easier to do apples-to-apples comparisons in this game, IMO (i.e. model-to-model, and not brand-to-brand).

That said, IWC as a whole definitely ranks above brands like TAG-Heuer, Breitling, Omega, Rolex, and Cartier. After that, things start to get hazy...

Regards,
Adam


----------



## GeorgeD

watchmanee said:


> Well.. it's just a survey
> 
> Personally in general, I would rank IWC as follows ...
> 
> [But this is just a fun exercise as any attempt to rank these watches are foolish since each brand has its own strength and weakness, different expertise and contribution into the history of watchmaking, however, it's clear though that PP > Omega and IWC > Tag Heuer, etc ... ] :-d
> 
> PP, AP, VC, Breguet, A Lange & Sohne
> JLC, Blancpain
> GO
> GP, *IWC*
> Ulysse Nardin
> Rolex
> Cartier, Chopard
> Omega
> Tag Heuer


I would definitely place JLC at the top level, GP as a full in house manufacture in the second rank and I would also add zenith in the 3rd rank...


----------



## Sgian Dubh

watchmanee said:


> Well.. it's just a survey
> 
> Personally in general, I would rank IWC as follows ...
> 
> [But this is just a fun exercise as any attempt to rank these watches are foolish since each brand has its own strength and weakness, different expertise and contribution into the history of watchmaking, however, it's clear though that PP > Omega and IWC > Tag Heuer, etc ... ] :-d
> 
> PP, AP, VC, Breguet, A Lange & Sohne
> JLC, Blancpain
> GO
> GP, *IWC*
> Ulysse Nardin
> Rolex
> Cartier, Chopard
> Omega
> Tag Heuer





GeorgeD said:


> I would definitely place JLC at the top level, GP as a full in house manufacture in the second rank and I would also add zenith in the 3rd rank...


This is all in good fun, but these rankings really do end up an exercise in futility. Just for the sake of being an ass: I'm not sure why JLC and GP deserve a bump when GO doesn't. GO makes everything in-house, and are pretty damn sweet. They belong beside the likes of JLC.

Zenith, too, is a true manufacture, so, I'm not following why they'd fit into the third rank. Shouldn't they, too, belong alongside the likes of GO? If nothing else, they deserve some cred for the El Primero.

As I said, just having fun, but as you get near the top, it's quite difficult to rank these brands. They're all very good.


----------



## hankr37

i personally rank them up there with my favorite brands like ap, jlc, panerai and zenith. i would put them right behind patek. perception is reality is most cases, but i'm not so sure about it, when it comes to watches. everyone perceives certain brands different i guess. i would definitely say iwc is waaaaaaaay above brands like tag, breitling and omega, which are all at the same level for me.
 


knugen said:


> Does IWC rank in the same group as the mas production Omega, Rolex or JLC,PP, Frank Muller, Daniel Roth?


----------



## watchmanee

craniotes said:


> I find that rankings of these sorts tend to be exercises in futility more often than not. With the exception of houses like PP, VC, GO, JLC, and yes, even Rolex, where the entire line pretty much hews to the same level, it's too hard to accurately rank a watch brand. To wit, Chopard's manufacture line (L.U.C) is widely acknowledged by WIS-in-the-know to be up there with the best of the best, yet watchmanee above ranked them below a couple of brands who don't have a single watch in their portfolio that can match a L.U.C. caliber. Why? Easy, because Chopard also makes silly watches like "Happy Diamonds" for women, that feature cheesy floating diamonds and quartz movements.


I agree, Chopard makes some of the best quality watches with their finishing, among the best I guess this is because of their strength as a jewelry powerhouse. I have the Mille Miglia watches and the finish quality is impeccable but their movement left a lot to be desired ( the same could be said for Cartier and Bvlgari ) unless you go to their upper tier models which utilize the L.U.C movements.

On the top of line level, Chopard is up there among the very best although not as overly innovative as say, Franck Muller, who constantly crave for inventing new ways to create new movements such as the Jumping hour line., or not as historically breaking barriers such as Breguet, Patek or VC, they're just not at that level yet, or JLC with history behind their movements.



> That said, IWC as a whole definitely ranks above brands like TAG-Heuer, Breitling, Omega, Rolex, and Cartier. After that, things start to get hazy...
> Regards,
> Adam


Back to our IWC conversation, they're "overall" definitely better than those guys. I'd be careful when comparing IWC with Rolex, as Rolex fanatic fans would disagree, in term of how robust the little engine inside the watch and the achievement made by the Sea Dweller at 2,000 feet underwater and the Deep Sea (12,000 feet underwater) then Rolex is stil arguable among the very best if not the best. But when taking into accounts elements of beauty, achievement, novelty, movements, designs, history, quality than IWC is a notch or two above Rolex. It really depends on what's more important to you (the one who's wearing the watch) really. 

IMHO IWC in their entry level models are considerably better than most of other brands in their finishing quality, but once you go upmarket, anything more than 10-20K then they can't compete with manufacturers like PP, AP, VC, JLC ... they're just at a different level. In fact, there's still another layer like G.O. which in my opinion is very close to the very best like Lange although they're not quite there yet.


----------



## fxwill

So the Grande Complication does not put IWC at least at the same level as Frank Muller? I'm agog.
I know we are talking about a wildly expensive piece here but, like the Bugatti Veyron, its point is to show what is possible. Only the top of the pyramid can execute pieces like this.
I tried to find a better article than the one linked below but could not. It is worth reading some more about what is involved in the construction of this piece.
https://www.iwc.com/lecture/library/lib_grande_complication-en.asp


----------



## Watchbreath

:think: Franck Muller, once or maybe still is, The Master of Deception. Brings
to mind, "you'll never see a Franck Muller with an expo back".


watchmanee said:


> I agree, Chopard makes some of the best quality watches with their finishing, among the best I guess this is because of their strength as a jewelry powerhouse. I have the Mille Miglia watches and the finish quality is impeccable but their movement left a lot to be desired ( the same could be said for Cartier and Bvlgari ) unless you go to their upper tier models which utilize the L.U.C movements.
> 
> On the top of line level, Chopard is up there among the very best although not as overly innovative as say, Franck Muller, who constantly crave for inventing new ways to create new movements such as the Jumping hour line., or not as historically breaking barriers such as Breguet, Patek or VC, they're just not at that level yet, or JLC with history behind their movements.
> 
> Back to our IWC conversation, they're "overall" definitely better than those guys. I'd be careful when comparing IWC with Rolex, as Rolex fanatic fans would disagree, in term of how robust the little engine inside the watch and the achievement made by the Sea Dweller at 2,000 feet underwater and the Deep Sea (12,000 feet underwater) then Rolex is stil arguable among the very best if not the best. But when taking into accounts elements of beauty, achievement, novelty, movements, designs, history, quality than IWC is a notch or two above Rolex. It really depends on what's more important to you (the one who's wearing the watch) really.
> 
> IMHO IWC in their entry level models are considerably better than most of other brands in their finishing quality, but once you go upmarket, anything more than 10-20K then they can't compete with manufacturers like PP, AP, VC, JLC ... they're just at a different level. In fact, there's still another layer like G.O. which in my opinion is very close to the very best like Lange although they're not quite there yet.


----------



## fxwill

For what it's worth, the "Master" left the Company years ago anyway.
I actually like the style of Muller's watches but suspected he is probably Madonna-like, in his ability to market and promote.
There is definitely some substance to what the company produces but I would be hesitant to group FM in with the established watchmaking houses.
I cannot substantiate this but I believe several of the complications, and especially the tourbillon, is not made in house. I suspect most of the Swiss tourbillons are coming from the one workshop.


----------



## GeorgeD

I think its wrong to compare brands with over a centure history with a brand that exists for a just a few years. I am sure IWC will continue prospering in the future but I am not sure whether Franck Muller will continue to do so

for me its two different stories here, watch brands and watchmasters.
Muller is a great master but if you compare his watches with these great watch brands why dont you add people like dubois, FP Journe and dufour??


----------



## Watchbreath

:-d Dang, forgot that old Franck Muller joke. Why does Franck Muller use
the tonneau case design so much? ..............Because it's the shape of
his head.


fxwill said:


> For what it's worth, the "Master" left the Company years ago anyway.
> I actually like the style of Muller's watches but suspected he is probably Madonna-like, in his ability to market and promote.
> There is definitely some substance to what the company produces but I would be hesitant to group FM in with the established watchmaking houses.
> I cannot substantiate this but I believe several of the complications, and especially the tourbillon, is not made in house. I suspect most of the Swiss tourbillons are coming from the one workshop.


----------



## Dimer

fxwill said:


> So the Grande Complication does not put IWC at least at the same level as Frank Muller? I'm agog.
> I know we are talking about a wildly expensive piece here but, like the Bugatti Veyron, its point is to show what is possible. Only the top of the pyramid can execute pieces like this.
> I tried to find a better article than the one linked below but could not. It is worth reading some more about what is involved in the construction of this piece.
> https://www.iwc.com/lecture/library/lib_grande_complication-en.asp


I agree 

If you can build this, you are one of the best:


----------



## exxondus

goodness, this is an IWC section in the forum!!

IMO, its blasphemy to say that IWC is NOT in the top ranks with Rolex, JLC, AP, VC. Damn I love the MARK XV!

PS: please reframe from asking this same qn in other forums to avoid conflict. the fact that this was asked in the IWC section shows that the TS wants to hear nothing but the best of IWC


----------



## Tristan17

watchmanee said:


> Well.. it's just a survey
> 
> Personally in general, I would rank IWC as follows ...
> 
> [But this is just a fun exercise as any attempt to rank these watches are foolish since each brand has its own strength and weakness, different expertise and contribution into the history of watchmaking, however, it's clear though that PP > Omega and IWC > Tag Heuer, etc ... ] :-d
> 
> PP, AP, VC, Breguet, A Lange & Sohne, *JLC *
> Blancpain, *GP *
> GO, *IWC*
> Ulysse Nardin
> Rolex
> Cartier, Chopard
> Omega
> Tag Heuer


JLC makes fantastic in house movements and i believe they should be on the top.
IMO, i would not place IWC together with GP. GP uses in house movements for all their watches but IWC still uses ETA for some of their watches.


----------



## watchmanee

exxondus said:


> goodness, this is an IWC section in the forum!!
> 
> IMO, its blasphemy to say that IWC is NOT in the top ranks with Rolex, JLC, AP, VC. Damn I love the MARK XV!
> 
> PS: please reframe from asking this same qn in other forums to avoid conflict. the fact that this was asked in the IWC section shows that the TS wants to hear nothing but the best of IWC


I love my IWC and most IWC models out there, but to say they're in the same rank as JLC, AP and VC is a little pushing it too much. Not yet ... not yet.

Rolex yes, I agree, better than Rolex overall.


----------



## exxondus

watchmanee said:


> I love my IWC and most IWC models out there, but to say they're in the same rank as JLC, AP and VC is a little pushing it too much. *Not yet ... not yet.*
> 
> Rolex yes, I agree, better than Rolex overall.


Soon...Soon...Soon...

btw, anyone know where a Mark XV can still be bought brand new at a reasonable price? (Not the splitfire or Mark XVI versions)


----------



## fxwill

Tristan17 said:


> IMO, i would not place IWC together with GP. GP uses in house movements for all their watches but IWC still uses ETA for some of their watches.


Yeah, this is a bit of an old chestnut isn't it. I guess the McLaren F1 isn't one of the greatest road cars ever built because the engine they started with is by BMW.
There is not much left of an ETA once IWC has finished with it and I'd prefer they went this route. If they hadn't I'd have no chance of owning a 3706 or much else.
And what if the modified ETA is actually a lot better than other in house movements. Does a manufacturer lose points for being sensible and deciding that re-inventing the wheel is not necessary. 
No offense or anything but I think the old "IWC uses an ETA movement", is very simplistic for a site that is meant to concern itself with an appreciation of watchmaking and mechanics. (no matter how often it is repeated here.)


----------



## 2manywatchez

Umm, clearly I'm having a brain fade, but which brand is GO -- Glashutte Original?? :think:


----------



## fxwill

GO is, presumably, Glashutte Original.

On the IWC uses ETA thing, this is worth a (careful) read.
It is from Uhrenjournal, which hopefully suffices as a worthy source.

http://www.pmwf.com/Watches/Series/IWCGSTChronoBeachHuaHin/UhrenjournalIWCUseOfBaseMovements.html


----------



## L4rry_B1rd

Its funny because TAG is clearly at the bottom of everyones list... and I agree. But like all things in life, you start at the bottom and work your way up. I hope to own a nice IWC before I hit 35... this leaves me a decade to work my way up.


----------



## pent37

watchmanee said:


> Well.. it's just a survey
> 
> Personally in general, I would rank IWC as follows ...
> 
> [But this is just a fun exercise as any attempt to rank these watches are foolish since each brand has its own strength and weakness, different expertise and contribution into the history of watchmaking, however, it's clear though that PP > Omega and IWC > Tag Heuer, etc ... ] :-d
> 
> PP, AP, VC, Breguet, A Lange & Sohne
> JLC, Blancpain
> GO
> GP, *IWC*
> Ulysse Nardin
> Rolex
> Cartier, Chopard
> Omega
> Tag Heuer


Not to take anything away from them but I definitely wouldn't put JLC nor IWC above Ulysse. :rodekaart Ulysse Nardin have amazing finishing and attention to detail, many master complications, use in house movements, as well as they are all hand assembled.

I would also throw into that list the likes of Piaget, Gerald Genta,Jacquet Droz, and a few others.


----------



## 2manywatchez

It's interesting that, with exception of perhaps Tag, the list pretty much follows the price curve. $1-2K range, 3-4K range, $5-9K range, $10K+. Is price the result of the concensus perception of value, or is this concensus list the result of the prices? :think:

Interesting question for a business prof somewhere...


----------



## watchmanee

pent37 said:


> Not to take anything away from them but I definitely wouldn't put JLC nor IWC above Ulysse. :rodekaart Ulysse Nardin have amazing finishing and attention to detail, many master complications, use in house movements, as well as they are all hand assembled.


I've given it some thoughts afterwards, UN is definitely above IWC. When you take into consideration the Genghis Khan, the Circus, the Freak and just about all the amazing pieces they've managed to accomplished in their amazing history, yes, they're up there just below the best of best.

I am not sure about UN > JLC, JLC's history goes back , they've been supplying movements to AP and VC since God knows when. UN watches are great, I have one myself, but in the standard affordable range watches < $20K, I just think the uppper 5-6 other brands generally have better finishing quality.

Just my 2 cents.


----------



## mxzylptlk

There is a link that gives the top 10 most expensive watches in the world:

Top 10 Most Expensive Watches in the World 2010 - World's Most Expensive Watches

but if you are a watch collector or an afficionado (and definitely with exceedingly unlimited funds to buy these watches) you will precisely buy yourself the above watches.

there is no argument as to rank of price because that link is a fact, and the prices are indubitably grand and not a made up!

If we are talking of style and taste, we cannot argue, because somebody's taste is totally different from the others. Or you want it with diamond? then the chopard 201 diamond will be unbeatable - but does it look good or its like a frog embellished with warts as big as 15Carat diamond. (dont tell me that Angelina Jolie is more beautiful than Catherine Heigle or Anne Hathaway. Or Hugh Jackman is more handsome than Brad Pitt, or Bentley is far better than Lambo Murcielago! Nor should we compare different division - like comparing is Mike Tyson better than 3 Rounder Butter bean or Manny Pacquiao? We will never come into an agreement. Let us compare apples to apples.

There should be a classification and standard on what we should compare, Chrono vs Chrono ( and of which league? class 1 or 2 or 3 or 4?) tourbillon vs tourbillon. but in my own opinion, being a watch collector as well of acquiring watch in the same category, below will be my choices, but not necessarily the top 10 in the world.

Patek Phillippe
Vacheron Constantine
Hublot, Blancpain and Breguet
AP, Hublot, UN, PF and GP, Louis Monet, IWC, JLC, GO


----------



## akit110

fxwill said:


> Yeah, this is a bit of an old chestnut isn't it. I guess the McLaren F1 isn't one of the greatest road cars ever built because the engine they started with is by BMW.
> There is not much left of an ETA once IWC has finished with it and I'd prefer they went this route. If they hadn't I'd have no chance of owning a 3706 or much else.
> And what if the modified ETA is actually a lot better than other in house movements. Does a manufacturer lose points for being sensible and deciding that re-inventing the wheel is not necessary.
> No offense or anything but I think the old "IWC uses an ETA movement", is very simplistic for a site that is meant to concern itself with an appreciation of watchmaking and mechanics. (no matter how often it is repeated here.)


:-! Thank you for adding some sense to this. Rolex always ranks relatively high in these rankings largely on the strength that they use their3135/3130/3186 in-house movement as it knee-jerks suggests prestige and integrity to many by that virtue alone. However, the fact, that Rolex puts virtually the same movement in a million watches a year - from the cheapest Air King to the most expensive platinum President never seems to temper enthusiasts' appreciation of its 'exclusivity'.

On the other hand, if IWC - esp. until a few years ago - uses the 2892 movement,rebuilds most of the critical components, and then puts it in their Aquatimers and Mark series, does it much smaller numbers, uses more human interaction when doing it (compare the recent Watchtime Rolex factory article with TZ pics of the IWC factory tour) and then IWC gets criticized for selling "$500 watches for $5000" on internet forums. This seems to be a very simplistic interpretation of the virtues of in-house over using ETA.

Look - my 3 best watches are Rolex and IWC so I like both brands equally (I just prefer IWC servicing to dealing with Rolex USA esp with vintage watches). But I still think IWC takes too big a hit for using 2892 in their entry-level watches and I think Rolex gets too big a pass for using the in-house movement in their millions of watches.

IWC has a very broad range of watches in terms of design, price etc. I think this is why it's hard to categorize compared to brands that produce more homogeneous lines like Rolex or brands that start at a higher price point like Patek, AP etc. By the standards of many forum posters, if IWC just dropped all the ETA based watches from their line-up, they would automatically be amuch higher ranked company. So in a sense IWC is penalized, IMHO, for their their breadth of their offerings rather than lauded. This is a bit specious since their top end capacity - see the Grande Complication is still very, very high.


----------



## FlyPenFly

Rolex makes a great sports watch but by are they no means up there as a brand except for recognition by the public as a "good" watch in the same way that Lexus is recognized as a good car brand.

IWC competes with Rolex but also competes seriously with the likes of AP and GO. IMO, they should have splintered the brand as it hurts them a bit on the very high end to have pieces that cost relatively little which hurts exclusivity. They are however, almost universally recognized by most people in the know to have serious real horological expertise.


----------

