ANSWERING THE CRITICS ABOUT MOVEMENT QUALITY

From time to time (pun intended) I come across and read less than kind criticism, from consumers and watchmakers alike, regarding the construction and quality of IWC’s movements. Their negative remarks cover both modified and the current in-house movements made by IWC.

As a watchmaker myself, I suppose I have a built in tendency to be critical if I find a weak point or design flaw within any mechanical movement. So, it would be very easy for me to jump on the band wagon of naysayers were it not for the fact for my many years of experience working with the IWC company. That unique privilege of servicing their diverse calibres and timepieces on a daily basis gives me, I believe, a much more balanced analysis of IWC’s emphasis on quality control.

For example, IWC’s series of their in-house basic calibre C5000 continues to undergo modifications and revisions from the mainplate to wheels and operating levers. One of the most stressed parts in that series of movements is the pawl lever mounted and automatic device winding wheel. In the newer calibres the earlier bronze levers have been replaced with ceramic ones to ensure better longevity and performance. Such attention to detail undoubtedly costs the IWC company additional huge sums of money to cover everything from retooling, manufacturing new parts, keeping up a larger inventory, and, of course, providing up-to-date training with fresh technical information for their team of watchmakers worldwide.

In my professional opinion, this dedicated devotion to deliver the best of products illustrates that the company continuously strives to achieve precision par excellence. Moreover, it should demonstrate a contrary vision to their critics because no technical product can always be made 100% perfect to start with prior to actual usage by consumers over several years. The fact that IWC, behind the scenes, works hard to also update timepieces sent in for repairs with new revised parts where necessary is a testament to true commitment to their products.

There are not many other companies that go that extra mile. Owning an IWC timepiece is also an investment to consumers supported by a company which cares about them and puts their money on the line as proof of that. I think that most IWC fans already realize this. And, for the others out there I hope my words are reassuring and food for thought.

Wishing all forumners a happy and healthy 2014,
Jack Freedman

Jack good timing.
We were having the same conversation earlier today on a private chat group.
Thanks for clearing things out.

Yes, the discussion was very interesting and revealing. Good to hear an experienced point of view!

Indeed appreciated Jack.

Well formulated and reassuring information: thank you very much! I have not much reason to doubt the quality of the IWC watches. But the negative discussions, apparently based on less than truthful information - because of spite? - still leave a mark, so this kind of information by a professional is very welcomed.

Kind regards,
Paul

Thanks for the information update Jack. Coming from you it means a lot to those of us who are less technical.

Happy New Year.
Regards,
Kevin

Thanks Jack for your experienced view.
I believe this for many years now.
Some people will probably never believe, but I think a lot of happy critical customers exist out there and appreciate your work and that of IWC over all.
Happy new year 2014!

Jack - congratulations to your comment!

As most of the people here will expect from me as a true fan of IWC, still having quite some nice pieces in my collection, I would like to add something Georges Kern highlighted in the interview he have to Alexander Linz: IWC is in the industry sector, hence having quite a risk when it comes to investments. So this ultimately will also lead the company to strive for cost-efficiency projects, which might turn out to the disadvantage of the quality of the watches produced. Maybe this won't be noticed by the owner immediately, but maybe in the years later, i.e. when it comes to servicing a watch.

The issues I witnessed with newer IWC watches compared to the older ones don't really put me in a mood of positive expectations, however, the count will be made probably 10 years from now, when different people will run the company.

Hello 'Regulateur',

Let me address your specific concerns regarding what Georges Kern said.

My comments are unofficial and here's how I see the picture. The top brass at IWC have a mission and a responsibility to add value to the brand while assuring the parent company Richemont a healthy profit at the end of their fiscal year.

Having said that, there are many ways to implement cost cutting measures without hurting the quality of their in-house movements. Furthermore, if the bottom line was the only thing they worry about then they might as well buy ALL movements from other parties. Cost efficiency projects can mean different things to different people and I think management would be less than happy if production of movements is compromised resulting in a sudden influx of problematic calibre movements to be prematurely serviced. It would only add an increased strain on the service department with a further drain on their resources.

As far back as I can remember, and that's many many years, IWC has driven itself like a precision minded company interested in delivering near perfection. It's almost in the DNA of the company perhaps characteristic of the nature of their German neighbors near Schaffhausen in Switzerland. Therefore, it would go against the grain of the production department to switch gears and produce movements deliberately of inferior quality just to cut corners.

Unless radical new policies are issued from the top, something I don't think is likely to happen, I wouldn't read too much into general statements made in the interview you mentioned.

Thanks for giving me a chance to share my personal thoughts on this matter.

Regards,
Jack

It all sounds good to me. I'm highly likely to keep buying IWC's for a long time to come so it is interesting reading.

Cheers,

Jarrod

Hi Jack
Very interesting indeed to read this experienced comments from you. As a relatively new forumer I appreciated very much.

Happy 2014

Chris

To be efficient doesn't mean cost cutting to reduce quality.
I see IWC increase quality by efficient development, construction and quality assurance processes. Efficiency can improve a product if well applied. That's what I see.
This discussion has been held in all the forum years since 2001 and before I guess too. So ten years from then IWC has improved quite a bit.

Great input Jack.

and as regards improvements (on existing movements) I have indeed seen some of my watches come back from service where "parts were exchanged" for newer / different components.

Jack, and David
This is a most interesting thread. One of you is an insider and experiences the processes IWC utilizes to manufacture presumably superior watches (I have always believed that) and the other I only know from this Forum as somewhat of a sceptic when it comes to claims of quality vs. value in IWC watches; but who I have come to realize is extremely knowledgeable of the watch industry and has a consistent point of view.
You both discuss the Kerns interview and you each take different things from it. Where is this interview so others (me) can assess it for ourselves? And Jack: you referred to "other" means of cutting costs without scimping on quality-what were you talking about?
Thanks for both of your contributions to this thread so far.

Hello Mike

Thank you for your answer. I have quite been an insider to IWC, living not far from the factory and having had many contacts with the people being responsible for different divisions and even GK himself. From these contacts I gained some insights about how this company is run, and therefore I take the freedom - as long as it is granted by IWC to me - to make my remarks here. I am biased - as I have been able to observe the company for quite some time and I have seen the changes that have happened in the last 12 years. In my perception, some things turned to the better, but some to the worse; this is the reason why I stopped adding new watches of IWC to my collection two years ago. The same reasons might not be valid for other IWC fans - and I still consider myself as huge IWC fan (for example I wear my 5022 right now and enjoy every second with it). By the way, the interview I am referring to can be found here.

Regards,
David

Interesting post. I am looking at my 3rd IWC (Portuguese chrono classic) and no other brand has the same appeal to me at the moment (since a very long time..), so I am following up all new products and movement developments of IWC with great interest.

While IWC likes to position itself more often as a haute horlogerie brand, they must take care to comfirm this with their products. For some watches with closed backs (engineer and the latest aquatimers) it is sometimes difficult to know if IWC uses ETA or Selita movements as well as knowing the degree in finishing of the movements. I have seen some pictures published on manufacture IWC movements used in closed backs' pilot watches which didn't have a finishing level up to a brand promoting haute horlogerie. I guess it would help by being more transparent and by publishing movement pictures of all watches (should be quite obvious for brand promoting technology and engineering). For myself, these pictures (I even don't know if this project was realized) scared me enough to discourage myself from buying a closed back watch.

Gladfully, there are enough watches with transparent backs to spend my money (too much) on... I also hope we will also see some new manufacture movements (My hope goes to the next Da Vinci) to convince us all on the quality of the inside of the watch in line with haute horlogerie (and prices...).

Best regards to all IWC supporters,
Jl

Jack - I think that we agree on the result of having inferior quality, but not on the timeline. For most of the people here buying frequently new watches of this brand the (long term) quality won't matter, as the issues arising will only show after some time. The less you wear the watch, the longer it will take for the issues to show up. But even for a "frequent wearer" of IWC watches, the delay will be at least 7 to 10 years - the period until the watch first comes to a service. Now, looking at the average time senior management is in place in companies like IWC nowadays, I don't think their main concern is how the perception of the quality will be after that lifespan of 10 years. Their main concern is - and this is what they are measured against by the group - the margin they are able to realize on the products sold and the total value. It is all about incentives - IWC is no exception here.

Having said that, it is possible to produce a heavily reliable, mechanic calibre with high quality standards, four days power reserve, quite antimagnetic and 100% swiss made for a price of less than 50 USD, even being completely produced by robots and meeting COSC standards. SISTEM 51 is the example for it, and I consider this product as a revolution. But to accomplish that, there is the need of investments in the right place, research and interest to do so by "entrepreneurs", resulting in absolutely no necessity to buy movements from other manufacturers.