Community Stories

Do IWC vintage watches trump (no pun intended) vintage Seamasters?

Spruce
Posts
8,672
Likes
71,865
@Shabbaz is offering this very nice looking IWC R820A for sale. I’m sure it’s a nice watch and in good condition and very reasonably priced but when @JwRosenthal posted, “Hellloooo!! Where is everybody!! This thing eats Seamasters for breakfast“, it got me thinking.

I’ve never owned a vintage IWC watch and don’t know much about them but are they that much better than a vintage Omega Seamaster?

upload_2020-7-13_15-46-41.jpeg
 
JwRosenthal
Posts
16,307
Likes
44,998
My statement was very tongue-in-cheek, I have always put them on the same playing field as Omega, if not a slight notch above, but my view has only been perceptual and not based on any particular experience. This watch in particular has those sensational beefy angled lugs and factory bracelet- and is rare in comparison to the volume of 60’s silver Seamaster’s we see.

But it raises a question that I also am curios about- how are vintage IWC’s in comparison to vintage Omega’s?
 
Tony C.
Posts
8,115
Likes
28,601
Yes, they are generally a small notch above, if for no other reason than the superior movement finishing. Also, I'd choose a (Albert) Pellaton automatic movement over the admittedly also excellent Omega movements of the period.
 
Spruce
Posts
8,672
Likes
71,865
Thanks for this. I checked that Thomas had no issue with the thread before I posted it - in case he felt it might affect his sale - and mentioned that he has a great collection of 60s sunburst dials - as do you.

I know that there are Seamasters and Seamasters, no surprise there, but I don’t know enough about 60s non chrono IWCs (and Rolexes for that matter) to appreciate if there was any significant difference.
 
Shabbaz
Posts
4,997
Likes
18,550
You buy a rolex to impress your friends, you buy a IWC to impress your watchmaker...😁
 
STANDY
Posts
16,863
Likes
47,905
Most vintage collectors have at least one IWC in the collection

336FB4D4-FDB3-41A4-9BE5-842233C6E0D8.jpeg 7F945CD8-D171-44BF-977A-7B95D839D63F.jpeg BEA925E7-05CD-45A9-ACD5-EAE0857B95A6.jpeg 6D295603-987E-4DF0-A048-C66A4DBC5DAA.jpeg 3CD5FBB1-AC0E-4A6C-879B-EDF219EE5510.jpeg 5BAC7CDA-2286-4D22-BDE4-FC9F6794578B.jpeg 843F6699-156A-4125-B533-F5E5357089B5.jpeg A71BCA3F-5639-4102-BF9E-701676F9AEEB.jpeg
 
cristos71
Posts
7,920
Likes
35,905
I've had a couple and yes nice watches, my favourite was this R 810 A, but TBH I find IWC dress watches just a bit boring to look at. I've always been more impressed by design than technology and the variety of dial design found in the Seamaster range just keeps me coming back for more.

044.JPG
 
Spruce
Posts
8,672
Likes
71,865
Another perspective is the logo, or lack of one.

I like the Omega symbol, Rolex and Tudor have distinctive symbols. Longines, for which I have a soft spot have the winged, raised hourglass and even Cyma and Certina have a circled ‘C’.

But nothing for IWC - unless you count the initials.

Still, from reading the above, it really seems to be a matter of taste rather than any particular quality.
 
High Hope
Posts
576
Likes
2,162
Not vintage but still my favorite watch:


IWC.jpg
 
Tony C.
Posts
8,115
Likes
28,601
Spruce Spruce
Still, from reading the above, it really seems to be a matter of taste rather than any particular quality.

You're not reading carefully. Finishing is a distinct quality, and there is no doubt that IWC movements were finished more finely than Omega. The in-house Pellaton winding system was so good that variants are used to this day, 60 years later. Etc.
Edited:
 
TimeODanaos
Posts
1,839
Likes
3,737
Spruce Spruce
I don’t know enough about 60s non chrono IWCs (and Rolexes for that matter) to appreciate if there was any significant difference.
Whenever you see a good vintage IWC for sale, you - and everyone - should avoid it, and I will take it away and deal with it for you. 😉
 
ConElPueblo
Posts
9,596
Likes
27,708
cristos71 cristos71
I've had a couple and yes nice watches, my favourite was this R 810 A, but TBH I find IWC dress watches just a bit boring to look at. I've always been more impressed by design than technology and the variety of dial design found in the Seamaster range just keeps me coming back for more.

044.JPG

Agree. $1500 opens up for a huge variety of great dial and case designs from all sorts of manufacturers, chronometer-rated Omegas and top condition vintage Seiko divers. I find the IWCs a bit bland to look at and would probably prefer a contemporary Seiko dress watch based on looks. They are $150 though and not $1500.

I am sure a lot of new collectors feel the same way, and if a rather mundane IWC dress watch like this one were to get the pulse of a seasoned collector racing, it would have to offer something more than just being from a good brand. Perhaps a condition rarity specimen? Tiffany-signed? Owned by someone special? A prototype dial/case?

I just don't see the USP, sorry.
 
Shabbaz
Posts
4,997
Likes
18,550
ConElPueblo ConElPueblo
Agree. $1500 opens up for a huge variety of great dial and case designs from all sorts of manufacturers, chronometer-rated Omegas and top condition vintage Seiko divers. I find the IWCs a bit bland to look at and would probably prefer a contemporary Seiko dress watch based on looks. They are $150 though and not $1500.

I am sure a lot of new collectors feel the same way, and if a rather mundane IWC dress watch like this one were to get the pulse of a seasoned collector racing, it would have to offer something more than just being from a good brand. Perhaps a condition rarity specimen? Tiffany-signed? Owned by someone special? A prototype dial/case?

I just don't see the USP, sorry.
It's EUR 1500. I'm Dutch.😉
 
TimeODanaos
Posts
1,839
Likes
3,737
JwRosenthal JwRosenthal
Ok, it’s all yours🍿
https://omegaforums.net/threads/iwc-r820a.116474/
😬 Still paying off the instalments on this one, and my next target in steel is [*classified*].
Seriously, I agree that IWC's product range is, understandably, no match for the wonderful variety offered by Omega, and it's true that some of their dress watches - like this one - could be considered a little "worthy" (aka dull, a bit). But there's no argument about the quality of what they did! 🙄
30.JPG 31.jpg
 
Shabbaz
Posts
4,997
Likes
18,550
I have a hard time comparing the iwc caliber 852, 853, etc, dress watches with 50's and 60's seamasters. I think iwc production rates were much lower. Not sure though. But it's quite easy to find a seamaster in good condition for reasonable money. With iwc it's more difficult.

For the boring bit. I've sold quite a few iwc's in my life and I have the impression they are bought by young professionals who want something classy but not to flashy (read: boring). It wears great under a suit. A seiko diver is just a different ballgame. You dont wear that to a business appointment unless you have the erge to express yourself. And for the seamaster... well, I can pick any week of the year a seamaster under eur 600. But how many r810a/20 or iwc pie pans (etc) are out there for under eur 1000.

Oh god, is this really a sales talk!?! Sorry...
 
75 More Posts...
Sign up or log in to reply...

Similar threads

Thatguy

Hi guys! I'm new in this forum, so, nice to meet you all :) and I need some hands (no pun intended)

Thatguy Vintage Omega Watches Help, Discussion and Advice
Thatguy
Thatguy
Posts
0
Views
1K
ctime3

Right on time no pun intended

ctime3 Modern Omega Watches
ctime3
ctime3
Posts
0
Views
1K