1,908 Discussions and CommentsMember since Aug. 4, 2001
According to Tölke/King the two batches of cal 89s manufactured in 1947 with numbers between 1,148,801 and 1,150,000, and in 1948 with numbers between 1,162,001 and 1,162,200, a total of 2,400 movements, are designated c.89-12lig. S.C. Angl. All other cal.89s manufactured from 1946 to 1974 are designated as: c.89-12lign. INCA S.C. / c.89-12lig. S.C. INCA / c.89-12lig. INCA / c.89, between 1965 and 1974.
The questions are:
1) Does Angl. mean Angleterre? 2) Does it make sense to conclude that, because of the dates of manufacture coincide with the first Mark 11s, the absence of the suffix INCA means that those movements may have been installed in the Mark 11s? From what I understood, the MoD opted for accuracy over shock protection, since it could not have both at the time? BTW, the number of the movement in my Mark 11 from 1948, falls into that years production. 3) Is there any reason why all c.89s manufactured between 1965 and 1974 are designated only c.89? Are they not INCA? Or it just an omission? I am sure they are all 12lig, and have center seconds (I never heard of a c89 with seconds at 6.)
The latter movements really only needed to be labled Cal 89, the addition of INCABLOC shock protection was well established, so no reason to differentiate.
The latter movements really only needed to be labled Cal 89, the addition of INCABLOC shock protection was well established, so no reason to differentiate.
Cheers from the cellar
Thanks cellar. The archives to the rescue. It always pays to search the archives first, which did not do this time.
All other cal.89s manufactured from 1946 to 1974 are designated as:
c.89-12lign. INCA S.C. / c.89-12lig. S.C. INCA / c.89-12lig. INCA / c.89, between 1965 and 1974.
The questions are:
1) Does Angl. mean Angleterre?
2) Does it make sense to conclude that, because of the dates of manufacture coincide with the first Mark 11s, the absence of the suffix INCA means that those movements may have been installed in the Mark 11s? From what I understood, the MoD opted for accuracy over shock protection, since it could not have both at the time? BTW, the number of the movement in my Mark 11 from 1948, falls into that years production.
3) Is there any reason why all c.89s manufactured between 1965 and 1974 are designated only c.89? Are they not INCA? Or it just an omission? I am sure they are all 12lig, and have center seconds (I never heard of a c89 with seconds at 6.)
Thanks in advance for your input.
clepsydra
ad fontes...
Last edited: 30 October, 2011 - 22:05
You might find the following archived posts useful:
http://www.iwc.com/forum-en/message/14662.html
http://www.iwc.com/forum-en/message/148497.html
The latter movements really only needed to be labled Cal 89, the addition of INCABLOC shock protection was well established, so no reason to differentiate.
Cheers from the cellar
cellar@gregsteer.net
Last edited: 4 January, 2013 - 22:35
Thanks cellar. The archives to the rescue. It always pays to search the archives first, which did not do this time.
clepsydra
ad fontes...
Last edited: 30 October, 2011 - 22:05