As the title states I might be interested in a possible purchase of a cal89
Seen a couple in the metal and loved them but previously priced high. This is up for £850. Are there any knowledgeable IWC fans who can tell me if this looks ok?
I recognise that this is a replacement crown but I have a further question about that!
Any help would be much appreciated.

 

Personally I wouldn't buy this one. The dial does'nt look original. Problem with these iwc dials it's difficult to see. But the fading numeral dots together with the thick font would worry me. So it would be a pass for me. Maybe other have other opinions.

 

Thanks for the input. The images are fairly clear on the pics advertised and there is some uniformed wear on the wording when zoomed right in which I personally feel would be incredibly hard to fake.
Also someone had kindly put up a IWC letting chart on OF which shows onwards from 54 with the thicker lettering, could this hold up better than the markers?

 

Yes, I know that chart. But I'm still a bit troubled by it. I think I had like 7 or 8 of these iwc's with this dial set up. But I always bought the thinner fonds. The picture you posted of the dial is a bit blurry. Maybe you have some better ones?

 

I will have a look tomorrow and see if I can add some close ups. Thanks for your advice it’s much appreciated.

 

I think @Tony C., @Dan S and @gatorcpa could chime in. They have love for IWC as well.

 

Yes, there were a number of variations of IWC dial signatures, but the chart reproduced above was not compiled by the manufacturer, and therefore is not necessarily a reliable guide.

I would prefer to view a larger image, but based on the OP's image, I am skeptical of the dial originality. I don't believe the crown to be original, either.

 

TBH, I don't think I can add much after @Tony C. and @gatorcpa have spoken. I saw the thread earlier, but really didn't feel confident one way or the other based on the photos. I guess the one thing I can say is that I would not buy it based on those photos, they just don't make me comfortable enough that the dial is original.

 

The fish point is accurate, but my skepticism is based mainly on the depth (I believe that it should be more shallow, or thinner, if you prefer).

 

Morning. Thanks everyone, I’m in the U.K but based on your thoughts I will give a miss. Plenty more lovely watches out there to spend hard earned cash on!

 

Yes, move on. That Dial printing is not up to IWC standards from that period. Especially the thicker R and N worries me. Go for the thinnest possible print.

 

I would agree on the font of 'International', it does not seem to be on a straight level and some letters look to thick/painted. Unless the crystal is damaged right there ??

 

A little late to the thread but thought i'd add a pic of my former cal 89 dial for reference. This is the 648a reference.



Edit: sorry this is contains the cal 853 automatic movement

 

Maybe I have a fit of madness but I thought the 89 was a manual... Yours is a automatic.

 

This was one of mine 89 (similar as yours which is probably a 853?).

 

oh my yes you are completely right!
i realised this was a cal 853. sorry for the error!

pls all just use the pic for reference on the IWC logo only