# IWC Mark XVII durability?



## SsgtJeepJK

Hi all,
Seriously considering buying one of the Mark XVI/II watch and I wanted to know:
1. How does the ETA movement perform for daily wear (long-term keeper)
2. Without a bezel how prone is the watch to damage (from personal experience)
3. Any other input would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## Watchbreath

Give us a well documented report in 10 years.


----------



## sidestreaker

I think its perfect for daily wear, I'm considering the Spitfire version for myself. From other satisfied owner, It's a keeper for sure. Based on the upper end of ETA 2892 so no question on reliability there. I have a portuguese chrono with almost no bezel, looks more delicate and survived a few knocks here and there. So far still looks good and I'm sure that XVII can take normal daily abuse much better.


----------



## box handler

I chose a Mark XVI precisely because I believe it is THE perfect daily wearer. This thing is a damned chameleon with a simple change of a strap. On glossy black alligator, it is as dressy as I'd ever need it (and I'm not a casual guy). On tan calfskin, it is elegant with a rakish edge. On olive drab canvas, it is a low-key mil-type watch that the uninitiated assume is a J. Crew Timex (this is a good thing when you want to be stealthy). With enough strap options, you can literally wear it with anything.

The watch is durable enough for most purposes. Sure, the Sinn I had (well, I'm selling it to pay off the IWC) was more rugged, but it also looked the part. The IWC may not have superlative shock protection and temperature tolerance, but it does have the inner soft iron case protecting against magnetism (and, I assume, it makes things a bit snugger and more secure inside). The ETA movement is not your typical off the shelf 2824. It is the chronometer-grade 2892. Mine is running an average of +3 sec/day--well within COSC specs, of course, but also better than most in-house movements. In short, it's the most practical, beautiful, and accurate watch I've ever owned. I plan to do a thorough hands-on review once I've had the watch for a month. Until then, here are some pics I snapped with my iPhone (not great quality but you get the idea):


----------



## SsgtJeepJK

Thanks for the detailed reply! That is the most convincing post I have had! I am not a complicated watch type and love the minimalist design of IWC. I just wondered about the non-bezel as being an issue but the more I read about it there does not seem to be issues with the crystal being damaged easily. I got to get one of these but @ $3,800 new online I want it to be tough all around, yet I cant seem to stop wanting one regardless!


----------



## dak_la

Hi SsgtJeepJK,

I have owned a Mark XVI for almost 2 years now, and had no issue with it so far. The ETA 2892 is a great workhorse movement, and based on my experience with it and comments from many members in WUS, I have no doubt that it is a very reliable movement for long term use. The size of the watch (relatively small by today's standard, and its thin profile) has made it very comfortable to wear. I also don't find the thin bezel would make the watch any more prone to damage than any other watch. In fact, it has become my go-to watch when I have to take care of my 6-month old.

Aesthetically, I think it is as good as it gets for a modern pilot watch. The only issue I have with it is the AR coating applied on the outside of the crystal, that makes easy to leave smear marks on the surface. Not a big deal, and IWC provides a great micro-fiber cloth for easy cleaning.

To add to Box Handler's point of how versatile the watch is, I currently have a distressed vintage style strap with rivets on my Mark XVI:

















Daniel


----------



## Kid_A

great timepiece



box handler said:


> I chose a Mark XVI precisely because I believe it is THE perfect daily wearer. This thing is a damned chameleon with a simple change of a strap. On glossy black alligator, it is as dressy as I'd ever need it (and I'm not a casual guy). On tan calfskin, it is elegant with a rakish edge. On olive drab canvas, it is a low-key mil-type watch that the uninitiated assume is a J. Crew Timex (this is a good thing when you want to be stealthy). With enough strap options, you can literally wear it with anything.
> 
> The watch is durable enough for most purposes. Sure, the Sinn I had (well, I'm selling it to pay off the IWC) was more rugged, but it also looked the part. The IWC may not have superlative shock protection and temperature tolerance, but it does have the inner soft iron case protecting against magnetism (and, I assume, it makes things a bit snugger and more secure inside). The ETA movement is not your typical off the shelf 2824. It is the chronometer-grade 2892. Mine is running an average of +3 sec/day--well within COSC specs, of course, but also better than most in-house movements. In short, it's the most practical, beautiful, and accurate watch I've ever owned. I plan to do a thorough hands-on review once I've had the watch for a month. Until then, here are some pics I snapped with my iPhone (not great quality but you get the idea):


----------

