Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
uBeast

New IWC caliber -- will it be used in the Ingenieur 3239

Recommended Posts

 

A while back there was a thread about the new IWC in house movement caliber 42110. (See link below). The question was raised as to whether or not it could/would be used on existing models, or whether new models would be designed around it. Any intelligence on this. Specifically, any idea of whether or not it could be used in the 40 mm IWC 3239?

New Calibre 42110

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I was in an IWC boutique yesterday, yet again sampling the various 3239 models (I think they are understandably weary of my chronic 3239 browsing), including the fantastic Laureus limited edition. I started that thread about the caliber 42110, and I asked about it yesterday at the store. The employees at the boutique don't know when or if it will make its way into the current 3239, and they pointed out that it can take a couple years between announcement to implementation for any new caliber, which makes sense. I'm sure it will take some time to get the caliber to acceptable quality standards for in-house production, followed by selecting the models (current or new) to house the new movement. I'm not sure it's a simple matter of just swapping the 42110 for every 2892-based watch, though that was the way I looked at it. The 3239 is expensive for an ETA/Sellita, but the design, size, and feel are very compelling to me; and if circumstances permit, I will probably get one sooner rather than wait and hope for one with the new caliber, which may or may not happen.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I just wonder if they'll put a transparent caseback on it should they pair the 42110 with the case of the 3239. That would affect the thickness (in addition to the movement thickness). Though at 10mm, a small increase would still work well.

Given other Ingenieur models have featured transparent backs, they may forgo a solid back and/or look for other anti-magnetic measures. Of course all speculation at this point.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

And if and when IWC does introduce the new caliber 42110 into the 3239, I hope they don't use it as an excuse to jack up the price. It's already expensive, and Nomos and Tudor have shown it's possible to sell at reasonable prices watches with manufacture calibers. And from the photos I saw, the 42110 looks pretty basic and is probably just IWC's planned replacement for a dwindling ETA supply.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I would also hope that when launching some of the new models that feature its new movements, IWC will provide early versions with COSC certification. Having a chronometer grading would demonstrate that their new calibers are accurate time keepers, something that cannot be claimed in their current crop of in-house movements (I speak from my experience with the 5001).

Some argue that COSC is irrelevant, that the top manufactures exceed their criteria. I would say that this is true of IWC's 2892 and Valjoux based models, but that most of their in-house calibers would benefit from an extra level of post production scrutiny.

In any event, I would personally hold off buying any model with their proposed 42000 calibre until it establishes a good track record. The same goes for the performance of the chrono functions on the 69000. The 52000 is probably similar enough to the 5000 series that no serious new kinks will arise.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That may be true, but I still like the idea of having one central independent organization acting as reference and arbiter. I've been impressed by what I've read of old chronometry competitions held at the Neuchatel observatory or the outstanding performance of my COSC certified Ebel BTR (average +1.8 seconds per day).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...