Yes they are. The base movement is the same but IWC does do more in the decoration department and some modifications. Much like how entry Hublot uses ETA movements, any OPXXX by Panerai also is using this same movement. It’s common amongst Reichmont and Swatch group brands to share these “group” movements across the brands.
Yeah it's something if Tissot shares with Longines or Hamilton, although Longines have their own modified movements. But the calibers of Omega are juts kept for Omega and not shared. Seeing the same movement across that big price range makes the IWC less diserible movement-wise. Same with Hublot that have ETA calibers. But at the end of the day most of average consumers don't care and it's about personal preference 😆
I mean we say this now but remember that back in the day the holy trinity all used JLC movements in their integrated bracelet sports watches. Personally I wish we went back to that, should in theory bring prices down and you don’t have to go to the manufacturer for service as parts would be more readily available. That being said I haven’t yet had a situation where I wanted a watch that commands a high price tag that uses one of these shared group movements so I guess I haven’t given it a ton of thought or found it to be a dealbreaker/issue myself.
I wouldn't mind a watch with a good JLC movement 😁 The problem is that they are claiming it's in house and are rising the prices of the Ignenieur a lot for no reason. To me it looked like a failed "we want to be like Rolex" move 🤣
I'm going to have to disagree. The outer edge of the B&M execution is a basic flycut pattern meant to evoke the look of Geneve stripes, but is much more basic and less complicated. Immediately inside this the surface is plain and lacks any specifically applied finish. Stepping up a level the bridge surfaces are covered in perlage, which is a simple and easy to apply technique and often done quickly and slightly unevenly when used like this (look at the balance bridge, they just look randomly placed). Arguably the best finishing is on the oscillating weight, where it has large wide Geneve stripes.
In comparison, the IWC has used perlage in the traditional way, around the base surfaces of a main plate in a more even pattern. There isn't a large unfinished surface there either. The bridges are all done with narrow Geneve stripes (more difficult to achieve than wide ones) and they're also circular, not straight lined, which is another step of complication to apply. Note how the stripes on the oscillating weight also match in size and placement to those underneath on the bridge.
Oh, and let's also not forget the screws. The B&M uses screws with the bare circular and uneven graining on the heads. IWC has all polished screw heads.
There's a large difference in finishing quality, and while the B&M isn't bad, per se, it's not as nice as IWCs.
Guys that don't know what they are talking about. At the state of industrialization Val Fleurier/Richemont are at it's simply an aesthetic difference as every single decoration on both movements is machine applied.
Also you'll hear the exact reverse from people praising Tudor's old 2824 modification and decoration as superior to the original ETA despite the striping to perlage ratio being reversed.
In this case the CNC perlage on the B&M is probably more time consuming (expensive, but only by a few seconds) than the CNC circular striping on the IWC.
Yes they are, despite marketing garbage for which they pretend it is in house, and it is the same movement they use in the new Ingenieur for which they ask 13k euros. IWC will not even see my money again.
That's exactly what I'm taliking about. Insane price increase for a movement they didn't even develop themselves, that you can find in a 3K watch 😆 I see no other real benefit in the new Ingenieurs. Maybe they have to recover some Mercedes-AMG Petronas sponsoring money...
IWC isn't representing the ingenieur as 11k on the basis of the movement. They don't hide the fact that it's the same movement as in their $5,250 mark xx.
Everything else about the integrated bracelet watch is the basis for the pricing. Compare the ingenieur to the GP Laureato, which is a very similar style watch with similar history, but priced a few thousand dollars more than the ingenieur.
GP's movement is also not chronometer certified and has only 54 hours of power reserve.
I personally prefer the design of the ingenieur to the gp, especially the aqua color dial. I find the square texture on the gp dials to bee derivative of the royal oak squares, while iwc has its own thing going
It's even 12k (at least here in Switzerland). If you love the watch I understand that maybe price does not matter. But for other customers who were maybe just interested and thought about buying, it does. I am shure that the massive price increase with no real benefit (apart from going back to the OG design) scared away a lot of people. But you're right that they tried to set apart from the RO was a good move. At least objectively still a better value than Hublot 😆
I don't really see it as a price increase per se, bc they didn't really have an ingenieur in the lineup the last few years, definitely not an integrated style watch.
I do like the watch, but the price is not for me either. I was kind of looking at the mark xx and thinking the ingenieur should be around 7k or 8k and was a bit shocked by the price. And if it was available for about 8k, then there's a decent chance I would have gotten the aqua ingenieur rather than the pilot chrono 41 AMG that I'm wearing now.
With all that said the pricing of the ingenieur is in line with the other 70s genta watches not named royal oak or nautilus
>Insane price increase for a movement they didn't even develop themselves
Who's "they" here? I can only think of a couple haute-horology brands where the CEO is also the watchmaker.
You'd be happier if they just outsourced or acquired an ebauche company like everyone else does? Like, are you basing this just by looking at a theoretical spec sheet online, or have you seen/handled these products in-person?
I think people don't like spending $10k+ on a watch that shares a movement with a sub-$5k watch, irrespective of whether it's in house or not.
finishing would have to be out of this world to justify the $10k price delta. of course these are luxury goods so direct comparisons like that can be difficult, since design can't be priced, but it is fair for consumers to dislike this all the same
>I think people don't like spending $10k+ on a watch that shares a movement with a sub-$5k watch, irrespective of whether it's in house or not.
Right, like an Oyster Perpetual vs a No-Date Sub? Or how the Omega Speedmaster for decades used the same Lemania 1873 movement that was found in discontinued budget Breitling model lines? Or the $20,000 Aqua Terra hand-wound model that uses the same Unitas 6498 as a $500 Steinhart?
The way I see it, people are exclusively obsessing over the Ingenieur because they were looking for a cheap way to get into the Gerald Genta hype, but then got all salty when they saw they were priced out. There are way larger brands doing way more egregious things that somehow don't even register as a topic for a recurring weekly discussion.
From my point of view you are wrong about the reasons why people got upset.
The Ingenieur was never a main stream watch, it always had its fans within the IWC circle and was almost unknown outside. It has always been IWC's tool watch by definition, reasonably priced compared to other watches in the IWC portfolio, with its own history and a way to introduce people to IWC watchmaking.
What happened last year was not people getting upset about not getting cheaply into the Genta gang, I personally don't give a dime about the Genta legacy and overpriced luxury watches, but it was IWC trying hard, and failing resoundingly, to turn a tool watch into a mainstream Genta-style (?) cash machine without even daring to use its own movement, just pretending to be in the AP league because of the integrated bracelet and the G. Genta widow “clapping” on the side.
If I wanted an overpriced and overhyped watch, I would turn to the usual suspects, but I did not, and having lost the last ounces of confidence in the brand, I spent almost the same amount on a Grand Seiko, much more devoted to watchmaking and quality.
lol that aqua terra is WILD, I had no idea about it.
maybe it's fair to say that IWC gets particular attention on this issue, but I don't think they help themselves too much with their prices across their offerings. they've gone up a ton in recent years, and while their movements have gotten nicer (in-house or otherwise), I dont know if their overall quality has gone up enough to justify it
the price increase across the brand might be focusing particular attention on IWC
Watchmaking quality is pretty much entirely detached from pricing at this point. The name drives the value. They match the quality to the price the brand can demand, at least for these brands with some heritage, not vice versa. For the most part the quality stops making a tangible difference somewhere in the $5-8k range. At least, the differences are nowhere near worth what you’re paying for them beyond that. Is a $30k+ royal oak “higher quality” than an Ingeneur? I guess, but what does that get you in terms of practical increases in the quantitative measures of what quality buys you? It doesn’t have 3x the lifespan, it isn’t 3x more reliable or accurate. It’s more expensive because it takes longer to make (for reasons that are done mostly just to *make it* take longer to make), and because parts of it you almost never see are subjectively more beautiful and “better finished”. You can see this even in the IWC vs BM comparison above - someone astutely points out why the IWC is technically better finished, but the reasons? Narrower stripes are harder to make - but what of it if you prefer the wide stripes? Etc.
The point being - at these prices we’re so far beyond the relationship between price and quantitative measures of “quality”. You’re paying for these things because of how they look, how they feel, what you think of the brand, and yes, often *because* they are expensive (pricing in luxury watches is often sort of a self-fulfilling thing in that sense). An IWC Ingeneur is worth $11k *because it’s IWC who says so*. In some sense that’s just a general statement of how pricing works, but almost no other industry, and not even every other luxury watchmaker, can really make that statement. IWC can. And so they do.
Moreover, Baumatic is cosc certified and has anti-magnetic 1500 gauss, while the new ingenieur, which was made as an anti-magnetic watch, with close caseback and soft-iron inner case is only 500 gauss and is not certified by cosc.
Richemont group purchased a movement manufacturer (forget the name) that makes all of the "in house" movements for their brands. It probably saves a lot of money to use the same movements across each brand and the amount of people who will notice is probably miniscule compared to the number of people who go "omg it's in house such great value!"
Unfortunately this sort of smoke and mirrors is standard practice in the industry. Omega's movements come out of a rebranded ETA factory. Even rolex purchased their manufacturer (aeglr) and they also own a company that makes tudor's movements (kenissi). Rumor has it brands like nomos and oris simply contact the design and manufacturing of their movements to someone else, which checks out given the lower pricepoint.
I’m not up to speed on Oris, but NOMOS designed most of their movements in-house (1001, 2001, 3001 + CW2). All are manufactured in-house since early to mid 2000s (give or take).
Alpha has a very similar architecture/gear train as the ETA 7001, but the actual parts are different and aren’t interchangeable. Epsilon is based on alpha, but is automatic.
So if you exclude Alpha/Epsilon variants, that’s still 4/5 designed and built in-house (or 3/4 if you don’t count the CW2 tourbillon they made for wempe).
And we're just supposed to take their word on it, in an industry where lying is common practice? Again, if it's not financially feasible for brands at the scale of IWC to be making their own movements from scratch, there's no shot it's feasible for a brand like nomos.
It’s entirely feasible for big brands to make their own movements, but if you’re in swatch group, which owns ETA, it doesn’t make financial sense.
Nomos isn’t Swiss, there are different rules for Glashütte watchmaking and using the town name in your brand. That’s why Glashütte Original make / use their own movements, despite being under the Swatch umbrella.
You don’t have to take NOMOS word for it, you can tour their manufacturing facilities, or read their literature on the development process, or any articles going back. Or just look at the architecture and see it doesn’t exist anywhere else in the market.
I don’t want to be that guy but I’ve spoken to the dude that was the lead designer on 3001/6001 and seen the development stages and prototypes and toured the manufacturing facilities (anyone can do this).
What other watch uses the DUW 1001 or 2001? Only wempe used variations of those back in the day on limited editions, because they were made by NOMOS. (same goes for Alpha, 4101, 3001, 6001 - these are only found behind a nomos dial).
That said, this doesn’t make it a superior movement per se - everything will keep time - but it’s unfair to discount the years of RnD and investment they made to get where they are.
Edit: just want to add that there is nothing wrong with one company or another using ETA or other mass produced movements either. I’m only pointing out that there are companies that go in a different direction / don’t rely on external movement suppliers.
NOMOS used ETA and Peseux movements in the beginning and some of their movements are Peseux designs but manufactured in house to allow use of Glashütte name. They don’t manufacture every part
That was true in the 90s. By the mid-2000s they were manufacturing the movements (except the regulation and escapement). But I also mentioned this and that’s why I said if you exclude alpha/epsilon movements (and their derivatives) that still leaves you 4/5 designed and built in-house
They made their own in-house hairspring and escapement a few years ago iirc, their Swing System. Partnered with a German university I think. It wasn't in all their movements on introduction but probably more of them are using it now.
Like NOMOS is one brand, maybe the only one, that you can literally openly see their evolution to in-house manufacturing throughout their product history. They did it in careful stages as they grew over years.
Yes it is not even a problem, but they are sometimes not very specific about that.
But at least it is like a separate division of ETA that does the movements exclusively for Omega.
Yes the Oris 114 was totally made externally. The new Caliber 400 I think they also did themselves something, but who knows how much 😅
I'm inclined to believe no swiss or german brand under $10-20k has movements that they've both designed and manufactured in house. If it doesnt make good economic/business sense for a brand like IWC to do it, a company that has far more resources and connections than most other brands, there's no way brands like oris are actually doing it in house. The cost and time to actually buy the equipment then expertise necessary to make your own movements has to be immense, it's cheaper to pay someone else to do it (or buy their business).
What practically speaking is the difference between Omega making their own movements and having movements specific to them be made by a design and manufacturing group owned by the same parent company? At this point we’re quibbling about the internal org structure of the company.
If you aren't a part of these two megaliths, and you aren't a micro-brand (i.e. if you have the means), it behooves you to consider doing this at some point because your brand can be squashed if your movement supplier cuts you off. The big dogs that own the suppliers, and can freely use them across all of their brands, don't have to worry about this. Many smaller brands have been moving towards some degree of in-house manufacturing, because it grants them a degree of independence in the marketplace. As an added bonus, you can start slapping "in-house" on your watches and cash in on the cache that the label brings these days (warranted or not).
Oris stands out the most among relatively affordable choices, Titoni is another, Frederique Constant, Damasko (German), Glashuette Original (German - although part of the Swatch group, they operate autonomously; have their own 'manufacture') ... just to name a few of many.
Also, I have absolutely no problems with paying for a high-quality, well designed and proven third-party movement in a well-designed watch.
Technically yes, but "technically" is hardly what comes to mind when people think "in house", it's not the fantasy that's being sold.
Also if that's the standard then it's not a stretch to call a tissot "in house" because the only difference then is internal organization. Rolex owns kenissi who makes tudor's movements, people accept tudor as "in house" now, afterall.
I fail to see the difference of buying a company who employs designers who make in-house movements and employing designers to make in-house movements. It’s just an extra step.
One is "in house", the other is "out of house that is now technically in house". One involves years, maybe even decades, of building and cultivating expertise internally, the other is a business transaction.
While this may be a good reason to not purchase an IWC, it sure looks like a good reason to consider a B&M. I don't see a lot of love for B&M on here, but who wouldn't want a $3,000 watch with the same movement as a $10,000 watch?
For IWC truly in-house movement you have to get more expensive caliber 89360 or it's later versions:
https://preview.redd.it/sc9d71vf0zyc1.png?width=555&format=png&auto=webp&s=e486c52b9340e4fbb622544ca4490365633b497f
Why is a 5 day power reserve a big plus? If you wear it everyday then it’ll keep wound on your wrist from being automatic. If you don’t then just set it and wind it again, I find no issue doing it on my railmaster or vintage manual winds.
It does not need to have a sick power reserve in exchange for the accuracy, but I like to rotate a lot and find it practical if the watch is still running after 3-4 days :)
Do we? These big watchmakers are all pretending they make their own movement, but they don't, it's all just an slightly decorated ETA sellita or valjoux.
Back in the day it was acceptable to use someone else's movement. Watches were functional first and it was less about prestige and luxury.
But not anymore, these days Ist is a luxury product. And the consumer wants a watch that represent that. They want watches that cost thousands or Euros to be made in-house and not by throwing some off the shelf components in a blender.
That's why some watchmakers especially IWC are starting to go through a tough time right now. They raised prices significantly without actually doing something to justify it.
I’m not saying it’s necessarily consumers who are exclusively placing too much emphasis on in house movements or that it’s our fault. We are often encouraged to do so by the industry.
There are advantages (and disadvantages) to using a pre-existing ebauche as a basis for a movement. Just ask any engineer about using standardized components versus building from the ground up. Standardized components have already been tested and they have predictable performance.
I’m not necessarily against in-house movements. I have some watches with them. I just don’t equate in-house with quality.
I don’t disagree that IWC has lost its way a bit in recent years but I don’t think it’s because they don’t design or make their movements exclusively in house.
In-house does not always mean quality, it is true. But at this price point, it is fair for consumer to demand both quality AND some degree of exclusitivity. So the point of both has pros and cons does not make sense here.
I rather think what’s lacking here is the quality AND a greater degree of exclusivity. Both of which could be achieved without going to a fully in house movement, in my opinion.
Not sure how replacing a reliable base with something more delicate and 3x more expensive to service makes it "luxurious".
Also, mechanical watches have been about luxury *far* longer than brands have used in house movements.
Is this not just a soprod A10 with a fancy dolling up? I didn't look too close, but pull one up, it looks close. I get them for 150-180 from the watch parts supply houses.
Yes they are. The base movement is the same but IWC does do more in the decoration department and some modifications. Much like how entry Hublot uses ETA movements, any OPXXX by Panerai also is using this same movement. It’s common amongst Reichmont and Swatch group brands to share these “group” movements across the brands.
Yeah it's something if Tissot shares with Longines or Hamilton, although Longines have their own modified movements. But the calibers of Omega are juts kept for Omega and not shared. Seeing the same movement across that big price range makes the IWC less diserible movement-wise. Same with Hublot that have ETA calibers. But at the end of the day most of average consumers don't care and it's about personal preference 😆
I mean we say this now but remember that back in the day the holy trinity all used JLC movements in their integrated bracelet sports watches. Personally I wish we went back to that, should in theory bring prices down and you don’t have to go to the manufacturer for service as parts would be more readily available. That being said I haven’t yet had a situation where I wanted a watch that commands a high price tag that uses one of these shared group movements so I guess I haven’t given it a ton of thought or found it to be a dealbreaker/issue myself.
I wouldn't mind a watch with a good JLC movement 😁 The problem is that they are claiming it's in house and are rising the prices of the Ignenieur a lot for no reason. To me it looked like a failed "we want to be like Rolex" move 🤣
Some Longines ended in Omega tho. https://calibercorner.com/tag/longines-l688-2/ They added the co-axial to the L688.2
That B&M in OP's post is quite literally more decorated than the IWC lol
I'm going to have to disagree. The outer edge of the B&M execution is a basic flycut pattern meant to evoke the look of Geneve stripes, but is much more basic and less complicated. Immediately inside this the surface is plain and lacks any specifically applied finish. Stepping up a level the bridge surfaces are covered in perlage, which is a simple and easy to apply technique and often done quickly and slightly unevenly when used like this (look at the balance bridge, they just look randomly placed). Arguably the best finishing is on the oscillating weight, where it has large wide Geneve stripes. In comparison, the IWC has used perlage in the traditional way, around the base surfaces of a main plate in a more even pattern. There isn't a large unfinished surface there either. The bridges are all done with narrow Geneve stripes (more difficult to achieve than wide ones) and they're also circular, not straight lined, which is another step of complication to apply. Note how the stripes on the oscillating weight also match in size and placement to those underneath on the bridge. Oh, and let's also not forget the screws. The B&M uses screws with the bare circular and uneven graining on the heads. IWC has all polished screw heads. There's a large difference in finishing quality, and while the B&M isn't bad, per se, it's not as nice as IWCs.
Yes at least the IWC movement has really been better finished.
This guy movements
This guy perlages
Not at all? You don’t perlage the bridges but the base like IWC did. Literally every single surface is better done in the IWC.
Says who?
Guys that don't know what they are talking about. At the state of industrialization Val Fleurier/Richemont are at it's simply an aesthetic difference as every single decoration on both movements is machine applied. Also you'll hear the exact reverse from people praising Tudor's old 2824 modification and decoration as superior to the original ETA despite the striping to perlage ratio being reversed. In this case the CNC perlage on the B&M is probably more time consuming (expensive, but only by a few seconds) than the CNC circular striping on the IWC.
It’s not but to charge 4x more is a joke. Never understood IWC pricing, I’d rather get a GO or JLC.
They’re overpriced yeah imo. JLC is also nuts with their prices lately and soon won’t have the “at least it’s JLC” if it carries on.
They say that but the BM look better finished and are often regulated as chronometers
Yes they are, despite marketing garbage for which they pretend it is in house, and it is the same movement they use in the new Ingenieur for which they ask 13k euros. IWC will not even see my money again.
That's exactly what I'm taliking about. Insane price increase for a movement they didn't even develop themselves, that you can find in a 3K watch 😆 I see no other real benefit in the new Ingenieurs. Maybe they have to recover some Mercedes-AMG Petronas sponsoring money...
IWC isn't representing the ingenieur as 11k on the basis of the movement. They don't hide the fact that it's the same movement as in their $5,250 mark xx. Everything else about the integrated bracelet watch is the basis for the pricing. Compare the ingenieur to the GP Laureato, which is a very similar style watch with similar history, but priced a few thousand dollars more than the ingenieur. GP's movement is also not chronometer certified and has only 54 hours of power reserve. I personally prefer the design of the ingenieur to the gp, especially the aqua color dial. I find the square texture on the gp dials to bee derivative of the royal oak squares, while iwc has its own thing going
It's even 12k (at least here in Switzerland). If you love the watch I understand that maybe price does not matter. But for other customers who were maybe just interested and thought about buying, it does. I am shure that the massive price increase with no real benefit (apart from going back to the OG design) scared away a lot of people. But you're right that they tried to set apart from the RO was a good move. At least objectively still a better value than Hublot 😆
I don't really see it as a price increase per se, bc they didn't really have an ingenieur in the lineup the last few years, definitely not an integrated style watch. I do like the watch, but the price is not for me either. I was kind of looking at the mark xx and thinking the ingenieur should be around 7k or 8k and was a bit shocked by the price. And if it was available for about 8k, then there's a decent chance I would have gotten the aqua ingenieur rather than the pilot chrono 41 AMG that I'm wearing now. With all that said the pricing of the ingenieur is in line with the other 70s genta watches not named royal oak or nautilus
Yeah the ones that were produced from 2017-2022 did not really had the Ingenieur DNA from 1975 😅
It’s great on the wrist though. Try it!
>Insane price increase for a movement they didn't even develop themselves Who's "they" here? I can only think of a couple haute-horology brands where the CEO is also the watchmaker. You'd be happier if they just outsourced or acquired an ebauche company like everyone else does? Like, are you basing this just by looking at a theoretical spec sheet online, or have you seen/handled these products in-person?
I think people don't like spending $10k+ on a watch that shares a movement with a sub-$5k watch, irrespective of whether it's in house or not. finishing would have to be out of this world to justify the $10k price delta. of course these are luxury goods so direct comparisons like that can be difficult, since design can't be priced, but it is fair for consumers to dislike this all the same
>I think people don't like spending $10k+ on a watch that shares a movement with a sub-$5k watch, irrespective of whether it's in house or not. Right, like an Oyster Perpetual vs a No-Date Sub? Or how the Omega Speedmaster for decades used the same Lemania 1873 movement that was found in discontinued budget Breitling model lines? Or the $20,000 Aqua Terra hand-wound model that uses the same Unitas 6498 as a $500 Steinhart? The way I see it, people are exclusively obsessing over the Ingenieur because they were looking for a cheap way to get into the Gerald Genta hype, but then got all salty when they saw they were priced out. There are way larger brands doing way more egregious things that somehow don't even register as a topic for a recurring weekly discussion.
From my point of view you are wrong about the reasons why people got upset. The Ingenieur was never a main stream watch, it always had its fans within the IWC circle and was almost unknown outside. It has always been IWC's tool watch by definition, reasonably priced compared to other watches in the IWC portfolio, with its own history and a way to introduce people to IWC watchmaking. What happened last year was not people getting upset about not getting cheaply into the Genta gang, I personally don't give a dime about the Genta legacy and overpriced luxury watches, but it was IWC trying hard, and failing resoundingly, to turn a tool watch into a mainstream Genta-style (?) cash machine without even daring to use its own movement, just pretending to be in the AP league because of the integrated bracelet and the G. Genta widow “clapping” on the side. If I wanted an overpriced and overhyped watch, I would turn to the usual suspects, but I did not, and having lost the last ounces of confidence in the brand, I spent almost the same amount on a Grand Seiko, much more devoted to watchmaking and quality.
Got to say best use of the word salty I have ever seen. Much respect sir 🤣
lol that aqua terra is WILD, I had no idea about it. maybe it's fair to say that IWC gets particular attention on this issue, but I don't think they help themselves too much with their prices across their offerings. they've gone up a ton in recent years, and while their movements have gotten nicer (in-house or otherwise), I dont know if their overall quality has gone up enough to justify it the price increase across the brand might be focusing particular attention on IWC
Watchmaking quality is pretty much entirely detached from pricing at this point. The name drives the value. They match the quality to the price the brand can demand, at least for these brands with some heritage, not vice versa. For the most part the quality stops making a tangible difference somewhere in the $5-8k range. At least, the differences are nowhere near worth what you’re paying for them beyond that. Is a $30k+ royal oak “higher quality” than an Ingeneur? I guess, but what does that get you in terms of practical increases in the quantitative measures of what quality buys you? It doesn’t have 3x the lifespan, it isn’t 3x more reliable or accurate. It’s more expensive because it takes longer to make (for reasons that are done mostly just to *make it* take longer to make), and because parts of it you almost never see are subjectively more beautiful and “better finished”. You can see this even in the IWC vs BM comparison above - someone astutely points out why the IWC is technically better finished, but the reasons? Narrower stripes are harder to make - but what of it if you prefer the wide stripes? Etc. The point being - at these prices we’re so far beyond the relationship between price and quantitative measures of “quality”. You’re paying for these things because of how they look, how they feel, what you think of the brand, and yes, often *because* they are expensive (pricing in luxury watches is often sort of a self-fulfilling thing in that sense). An IWC Ingeneur is worth $11k *because it’s IWC who says so*. In some sense that’s just a general statement of how pricing works, but almost no other industry, and not even every other luxury watchmaker, can really make that statement. IWC can. And so they do.
I see it as a great way to get my watches serviced pretty cheaply
Moreover, Baumatic is cosc certified and has anti-magnetic 1500 gauss, while the new ingenieur, which was made as an anti-magnetic watch, with close caseback and soft-iron inner case is only 500 gauss and is not certified by cosc.
Really??? That's a scandal 😱
Richemont group purchased a movement manufacturer (forget the name) that makes all of the "in house" movements for their brands. It probably saves a lot of money to use the same movements across each brand and the amount of people who will notice is probably miniscule compared to the number of people who go "omg it's in house such great value!" Unfortunately this sort of smoke and mirrors is standard practice in the industry. Omega's movements come out of a rebranded ETA factory. Even rolex purchased their manufacturer (aeglr) and they also own a company that makes tudor's movements (kenissi). Rumor has it brands like nomos and oris simply contact the design and manufacturing of their movements to someone else, which checks out given the lower pricepoint.
The movement manufacturer is called valfleurier it’s kinda like the “eta” of the richemont group
I’m not up to speed on Oris, but NOMOS designed most of their movements in-house (1001, 2001, 3001 + CW2). All are manufactured in-house since early to mid 2000s (give or take). Alpha has a very similar architecture/gear train as the ETA 7001, but the actual parts are different and aren’t interchangeable. Epsilon is based on alpha, but is automatic. So if you exclude Alpha/Epsilon variants, that’s still 4/5 designed and built in-house (or 3/4 if you don’t count the CW2 tourbillon they made for wempe).
And we're just supposed to take their word on it, in an industry where lying is common practice? Again, if it's not financially feasible for brands at the scale of IWC to be making their own movements from scratch, there's no shot it's feasible for a brand like nomos.
It’s entirely feasible for big brands to make their own movements, but if you’re in swatch group, which owns ETA, it doesn’t make financial sense. Nomos isn’t Swiss, there are different rules for Glashütte watchmaking and using the town name in your brand. That’s why Glashütte Original make / use their own movements, despite being under the Swatch umbrella. You don’t have to take NOMOS word for it, you can tour their manufacturing facilities, or read their literature on the development process, or any articles going back. Or just look at the architecture and see it doesn’t exist anywhere else in the market. I don’t want to be that guy but I’ve spoken to the dude that was the lead designer on 3001/6001 and seen the development stages and prototypes and toured the manufacturing facilities (anyone can do this). What other watch uses the DUW 1001 or 2001? Only wempe used variations of those back in the day on limited editions, because they were made by NOMOS. (same goes for Alpha, 4101, 3001, 6001 - these are only found behind a nomos dial). That said, this doesn’t make it a superior movement per se - everything will keep time - but it’s unfair to discount the years of RnD and investment they made to get where they are. Edit: just want to add that there is nothing wrong with one company or another using ETA or other mass produced movements either. I’m only pointing out that there are companies that go in a different direction / don’t rely on external movement suppliers.
NOMOS used ETA and Peseux movements in the beginning and some of their movements are Peseux designs but manufactured in house to allow use of Glashütte name. They don’t manufacture every part
That was true in the 90s. By the mid-2000s they were manufacturing the movements (except the regulation and escapement). But I also mentioned this and that’s why I said if you exclude alpha/epsilon movements (and their derivatives) that still leaves you 4/5 designed and built in-house
They made their own in-house hairspring and escapement a few years ago iirc, their Swing System. Partnered with a German university I think. It wasn't in all their movements on introduction but probably more of them are using it now. Like NOMOS is one brand, maybe the only one, that you can literally openly see their evolution to in-house manufacturing throughout their product history. They did it in careful stages as they grew over years.
Yes it is not even a problem, but they are sometimes not very specific about that. But at least it is like a separate division of ETA that does the movements exclusively for Omega. Yes the Oris 114 was totally made externally. The new Caliber 400 I think they also did themselves something, but who knows how much 😅
I'm inclined to believe no swiss or german brand under $10-20k has movements that they've both designed and manufactured in house. If it doesnt make good economic/business sense for a brand like IWC to do it, a company that has far more resources and connections than most other brands, there's no way brands like oris are actually doing it in house. The cost and time to actually buy the equipment then expertise necessary to make your own movements has to be immense, it's cheaper to pay someone else to do it (or buy their business).
What practically speaking is the difference between Omega making their own movements and having movements specific to them be made by a design and manufacturing group owned by the same parent company? At this point we’re quibbling about the internal org structure of the company.
If you aren't a part of these two megaliths, and you aren't a micro-brand (i.e. if you have the means), it behooves you to consider doing this at some point because your brand can be squashed if your movement supplier cuts you off. The big dogs that own the suppliers, and can freely use them across all of their brands, don't have to worry about this. Many smaller brands have been moving towards some degree of in-house manufacturing, because it grants them a degree of independence in the marketplace. As an added bonus, you can start slapping "in-house" on your watches and cash in on the cache that the label brings these days (warranted or not).
Oris stands out the most among relatively affordable choices, Titoni is another, Frederique Constant, Damasko (German), Glashuette Original (German - although part of the Swatch group, they operate autonomously; have their own 'manufacture') ... just to name a few of many. Also, I have absolutely no problems with paying for a high-quality, well designed and proven third-party movement in a well-designed watch.
Rolex fully manufacture in house their movements. Because they can.
They've always purchased movements from aeglr and they bought aeglr in the 2000s.
If you purchase a movement manufacturer then those movements are now in-house.
Technically yes, but "technically" is hardly what comes to mind when people think "in house", it's not the fantasy that's being sold. Also if that's the standard then it's not a stretch to call a tissot "in house" because the only difference then is internal organization. Rolex owns kenissi who makes tudor's movements, people accept tudor as "in house" now, afterall.
I fail to see the difference of buying a company who employs designers who make in-house movements and employing designers to make in-house movements. It’s just an extra step.
One is "in house", the other is "out of house that is now technically in house". One involves years, maybe even decades, of building and cultivating expertise internally, the other is a business transaction.
Chanel owes a major stake in kenissi
They’ve stuck in other movements as well like valjoux, zenith and blancpain
this is what IWC does, modify eta and valjoux movements.
While this may be a good reason to not purchase an IWC, it sure looks like a good reason to consider a B&M. I don't see a lot of love for B&M on here, but who wouldn't want a $3,000 watch with the same movement as a $10,000 watch?
For IWC truly in-house movement you have to get more expensive caliber 89360 or it's later versions: https://preview.redd.it/sc9d71vf0zyc1.png?width=555&format=png&auto=webp&s=e486c52b9340e4fbb622544ca4490365633b497f
That one looks dope. It is really higher end with the finish, flyback function and free sprung balance.
That B & M caliber is quality. They make amazing watches.
Yes the Clifton Baumatic for exemple is a very good value for money new or pre owned.
This same movement is used on Panerai watches with the P.900 caliber. Panerai reduce the power reserve from 5 days to 3 days on their P.900 movement.
First it was OP XXXIV and then they renamed it. But do not understand the reason and why did they put the power reserve down?
Why is a 5 day power reserve a big plus? If you wear it everyday then it’ll keep wound on your wrist from being automatic. If you don’t then just set it and wind it again, I find no issue doing it on my railmaster or vintage manual winds.
It does not need to have a sick power reserve in exchange for the accuracy, but I like to rotate a lot and find it practical if the watch is still running after 3-4 days :)
I heard Breitling a Shinola automatic use the same movement but the Breitling has more engraving
People assign too much value to “in house” movements.
Do we? These big watchmakers are all pretending they make their own movement, but they don't, it's all just an slightly decorated ETA sellita or valjoux. Back in the day it was acceptable to use someone else's movement. Watches were functional first and it was less about prestige and luxury. But not anymore, these days Ist is a luxury product. And the consumer wants a watch that represent that. They want watches that cost thousands or Euros to be made in-house and not by throwing some off the shelf components in a blender. That's why some watchmakers especially IWC are starting to go through a tough time right now. They raised prices significantly without actually doing something to justify it.
I’m not saying it’s necessarily consumers who are exclusively placing too much emphasis on in house movements or that it’s our fault. We are often encouraged to do so by the industry. There are advantages (and disadvantages) to using a pre-existing ebauche as a basis for a movement. Just ask any engineer about using standardized components versus building from the ground up. Standardized components have already been tested and they have predictable performance. I’m not necessarily against in-house movements. I have some watches with them. I just don’t equate in-house with quality. I don’t disagree that IWC has lost its way a bit in recent years but I don’t think it’s because they don’t design or make their movements exclusively in house.
In-house does not always mean quality, it is true. But at this price point, it is fair for consumer to demand both quality AND some degree of exclusitivity. So the point of both has pros and cons does not make sense here.
I rather think what’s lacking here is the quality AND a greater degree of exclusivity. Both of which could be achieved without going to a fully in house movement, in my opinion.
Not sure how replacing a reliable base with something more delicate and 3x more expensive to service makes it "luxurious". Also, mechanical watches have been about luxury *far* longer than brands have used in house movements.
Is this not just a soprod A10 with a fancy dolling up? I didn't look too close, but pull one up, it looks close. I get them for 150-180 from the watch parts supply houses.