IWC Schaffhausen

The following is Tom Mulraney's (founder and editor of a watch blog, posting comments and experiences, on the Internet) comment on the Ingenieur Constant Force Tourbillion. Even though I don't agree completely with this, I share his views on aesthetics and the price/aesthetical quality part of his presentation.

It would be interesting to see what the Community thinks on the following arguments and maybe this could be the basis of a wider discussion on the aesthetics and purpose of a haute horlogerie watch.

(I must point out that I have no connection whatsoever with mr. Mulraney, I just discovered this commentary while researching the web.)

The commentary:

"At the SIHH earlier this year luxury Maison IWC unveiled the spectacularly complicated Ingenieur Constant-Force Tourbillon and if I’m honest, I don’t much care for it.

Now, there is no doubt that this is an exceptional example of technical excellence, a mastery of the mechanical if you will, after all just about everything from the brand is. However for me it just feels a little contrived and inelegant. This is not surprisingly really given that the Ingenieur collection is just about as far from elegant as you can get and rightfully so but at US$290,000 I don’t think I want to be making compromises.

Technically Brilliant, Aesthetically…

Admittedly I have not seen the piece in person and so I can only base my thoughts on what I have seen and read elsewhere and also from the few discussions I’ve had with those who have seen it. For those not familiar with the model it is, as I alluded to before, a superb example of technical watchmaking at its best.

Powered by the in-house IWC caliber 94800, the main draw-card is undoubtedly the patented constant-force mechanism which has been incorporated into the tourbillon. According to the brand this ensures extremely accurate timekeeping over the first 48 hours, after which time the movement switches from constant-force mode to normal mode, with the second-hand now advancing at intervals of one-fifth of a second. The double-barrel movement offers a 96-hour reserve when fully wound, which you can keep track of via the power reserve indicator between 4 and 5 o’clock. As a last touch there is a rather detailed double moon-phase complication (one for each hemisphere) between 1 and 3 o’clock, complete with a 3-day countdown display till the next full moon

So far, so good. Where things start to come unstuck for me however is with the aesthetics. The oversized 46mm case is made from an unusual mix of platinum and ceramic (mixing materials was a theme for the brand this year) and the layered dial feels very much like it has been cut from a stencil. It’s hard to explain but it just feels like the piece is lacking any sort of emotion or personality. Things don’t get much better on the reverse side, where a rather unimpressive view of the movement is visible through the exhibition sapphire case-back. It just all feels a little CAD/CNC heavy to me and at this price range I want something far more personal, like ..............................that was unveiled around the same time, also with constant-force tourbillon.

Perhaps I am being a little too harsh but for US$290,000 I think it’s fair to expect a full package of the highest possible quality.

The Final Word

I completely understand why IWC had to create this piece. This was the year of the Ingenieur after all and so there was always the expectation that an extremely complicated variant would be unveiled. There is no doubt that the brand has succeeded once again in showcasing their technical brilliance but unfortunately for me this piece falls just short of the mark due to its lackluster aesthetics.

Now I could be completely out of line here, so please don’t hesitate to let me know if you think I am. As I said from the outset I have not had the chance to see the piece in person for myself as yet and so I am leaving the door open to the possibility of my opinion being changed but for now I remain unconvinced."

Regards,
Roman
"A watch is not for telling time; that is just a bonus

Last edited: 13 March, 2013 - 14:08

The writer seems to admire the techical aspects of the watch, but feels the aesthetics do not measure up to the price.

There is one real problem when it comes to aesthetics - if you ask 10 people about the aesthetics of a piece, you'll get 12 opinions. Have you ever counted the number of flavors Ben and Jerry's makes?

Dick L.

whichwatch at roadrunner dot com

The constant force is one of the most significant technical achievements conceived by IWC in the last period, I'm very happy to see IWC being part of the Renaissance of watchmaking we witnessed in the last decade.

Sure, the creation of new movements and technical improvements are eased by new technologies but still is something we weren't used to see since long time.

Aesthetic is subjective, I honestly think IWC has great and valuable designers, just think of the miracle they made with the new fliegerchrono (bigger case, bigger dial - same movement - but still perfect balance between each part).

Generally speaking, the late Inge line suffers to me of a matter of identity. Its design is unique and unmistakable; sometimes I see the temptation to look like - in a sort of floating course - once Panerai, once Audemars.

My hope and humble suggestion to these fabolous and talented team of designers is to take inspiration from the older but never forgotten lines of Gerald Genta and bring them back to life.

The inge is made of soft curves, it's not angular, is balanced and well proportioned, not uselessly big, finally and most important, it has its own style, it doesn't need to copy from others.

That said, the Inge constant force doesn't look like anything else and I like its design also. I don't like its dimensions.

We should talk more of this watch, especially of its movement, innovative, for both, tecnhique and style.

Regards,

Roberto

Last edited: 12 June, 2013 - 11:03

I'm on Mr. Mulraney's email list, so I had the opportunity to read his from-a-distance review during my morning commute.

No, I do not agree with him.

That said, I can see exactly where he's coming from, though, truth be told, I think he's a bit misguided in his aesthetic critique. The Ingenieur in its post-Genta incarnation is an exceedingly technical design that is a lot of things, but conventionally beautiful is not one of them, nor should it be.

For my part, I love the Constant-Force -- it's my new grail, in fact -- and if I had the means, I'd have already ordered it. Is it for everyone? Of course, not, which is exactly how it should be.

Regards,
Adam

I agree with Adam. This piece to me is more desirable than a Siderale. It is a technical achievement and I think it looks terrific. The price is another story.

Last edited: 18 June, 2013 - 19:31

Alan Ross Wrote:I agree with Adam. This piece to me is more desirable than a Siderale. It is a technical achievement and I think it looks terrific. The price is another story.

+1

Bill

There are few absolutes in watch collecting. One of those few, in my experience, is that you can't evaluate a watch until you see it in the metal, hold it, wear it, drool on it. So it seems silly for someone to write a review of a watch when they haven't yet been in the same Zip code with it. Yes, I realize that he admitted he hadn't seen it - but he wrote the review anyway.

Best regards,
David

Last edited: 13 June, 2013 - 05:31

Different strokes for different Blokes" - we are all entitled to our opinion but I for one do not place much value on an opinion regarding aesthetics from a person who has not seen something in the flesh, is kind of like a blind person telling me they think Elle Macpherson is not beautiful.

Time is something invented by the Swiss to help sell more watches

bendy Wrote:Different strokes for different Blokes" - we are all entitled to our opinion but I for one do not place much value on an opinion regarding aesthetics from a person who has not seen something in the flesh, is kind of like a blind person telling me they think Elle Macpherson is not beautiful.

+1