2 Discussions and CommentsMember since Feb. 4, 2013
Hi,
I'm new to this forum, but have been researching the watch my grandfather left me for awhile now, out of curiosity. I can't quite pin down what model it is.
The watch case claims that it is a model #1810. The receipt claims it to be a #1910.
The watch is from either 1976 or 1977. It has a c.854B movement, without the date (which adds to the confusion, since images of this watch only ever show it with the date.)
One final bit of info: this watch was given to my grandfather after retiring from A&P as a manager, for 40 years (it is inscribed 1937-1977.) Did IWC have some sort of exclusive deal with A&P to produce non-date 1810-1910s? There are some photos of the watch linked below.
Any more info on the watch would be greatly appreciated. Thanks a million!
670 Discussions and CommentsMember since Sept. 13, 2002
YC,the model is essentially 1810, the 9 was interjected when gold was used, no drama if it's not stamped exactly so. The non date variant of the model is relatively uncommon ..with the model arriving in a datejust era non dates are fewer. A somewhat confusing model for new IWC people with the ref being doubled-up when shaffhausen decided to house some manaual c.89 stock in the same case-middle (from memory i think the manuals were screw-back)and stick with the same model ref. Nice watch.
ps...a few different styles of crown were also officially used on this model, especially between steel and gold cases...but also between like for like, i would'nt worry too greatly if yours is unlike any that your googling....the end of the '60's and start of the '70's were topsy-turvy times.
2 Discussions and CommentsMember since Feb. 4, 2013
Well, that was quick! Thanks for the answer. The crown had been a bit of a puzzler for me. It appears to be plated or filled rather than solid 18K like the rest of the watch; there are signs of wear on it, exposing the base metal. If you say not to worry about it, I won't :)
It could also be, like you say, from the early '70s rather than late. The receipt shows that it was purchased in '77, but that doesn't mean it was brand new at the time of purchase.
670 Discussions and CommentsMember since Sept. 13, 2002
'It could also be, like you say, from the early '70s rather than late. The receipt shows that it was purchased in '77, but that doesn't mean it was brand new at the time of purchase'.
129 Discussions and CommentsMember since Aug. 20, 2010
Hi YC,
Congratulations to a very nice watch. The ref 810 one of the best examples of a timeless piece from those days, simply a classic dress watch - I like it a lot.
Calibre 854(1)B is my absolute favourite vintage IWC movement, very accurate and reliable and is also providing a true Pellaton winding mechanism.
Regarding the crown I think you are right, I'm quite sure it is a non-original replacement. No reason to chase an original one just for the sake, it's better to replace it next time it goes to Schaffhausen for an overhaul.
670 Discussions and CommentsMember since Sept. 13, 2002
The case-middle and case-back relationship is pure Schaffhausen, the model is beautifully proportioned when handled, sat on a wrist with no strap attached and it's noticably got that 'thing' about it. Thanks for showing.
oneredtrim Wrote:The case-middle and case-back relationship is pure Schaffhausen, the model is beautifully proportioned when handled, sat on a wrist with no strap attached and it's noticably got that 'thing' about it. Thanks for showing.
A very nice watch, but to clarify --the case wasn't made in Schaffhausen.
670 Discussions and CommentsMember since Sept. 13, 2002
' A very nice watch, but to clarify --the case wasn't made in Schaffhausen'.
Someone picked a very canny outsource MF (case-back closes like a nautilus/Mk 10) is the case-maker documented anywhere? and is the same true for the manual (much more generic looking).
I'm new to this forum, but have been researching the watch my grandfather left me for awhile now, out of curiosity. I can't quite pin down what model it is.
The watch case claims that it is a model #1810. The receipt claims it to be a #1910.
The watch is from either 1976 or 1977. It has a c.854B movement, without the date (which adds to the confusion, since images of this watch only ever show it with the date.)
One final bit of info: this watch was given to my grandfather after retiring from A&P as a manager, for 40 years (it is inscribed 1937-1977.) Did IWC have some sort of exclusive deal with A&P to produce non-date 1810-1910s? There are some photos of the watch linked below.
Any more info on the watch would be greatly appreciated. Thanks a million!
ps...a few different styles of crown were also officially used on this model, especially between steel and gold cases...but also between like for like, i would'nt worry too greatly if yours is unlike any that your googling....the end of the '60's and start of the '70's were topsy-turvy times.
Last edited: 4 February, 2013 - 19:16
It could also be, like you say, from the early '70s rather than late. The receipt shows that it was purchased in '77, but that doesn't mean it was brand new at the time of purchase.
Or sold the year it was manafactured.
Congratulations to a very nice watch. The ref 810 one of the best examples of a timeless piece from those days, simply a classic dress watch - I like it a lot.
Calibre 854(1)B is my absolute favourite vintage IWC movement, very accurate and reliable and is also providing a true Pellaton winding mechanism.
Regarding the crown I think you are right, I'm quite sure it is a non-original replacement. No reason to chase an original one just for the sake, it's better to replace it next time it goes to Schaffhausen for an overhaul.
Wear it in good health!
/Anders
watch the time...
Last edited: 9 April, 2013 - 19:22
A very nice watch, but to clarify --the case wasn't made in Schaffhausen.
Regards, Michael
mfriedberg@iwcforum.com
Someone picked a very canny outsource MF (case-back closes like a nautilus/Mk 10) is the case-maker documented anywhere? and is the same true for the manual (much more generic looking).
Last edited: 6 February, 2013 - 19:10