The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Watch Forum > Other (non-Rolex) Watch Topics > Watch Reviews (Non-Rolex)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 13 December 2010, 03:54 AM   #1
Altair
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: KSA
Watch: Patek 5270
Posts: 210
Clash of the Titans Part I: Rolex Deep Sea Vs. IWC Big Inge.

I seem to get a number of emails and replies to my threads here and elsewhere asking me about how I feel a certain watch stands up to another, and that started me thinking (always a sign of impeding horror) that I would do a series of comparative reviews, now I have been thinking of which watches to compare and what categories to have, and how tog o about it all together. here is what I have come up with.

The reviews will compare watches that are similar in style, size, and price point and are thus likely to attract the same potential buyers, hence being the most useful. The reviews will have a consistent set of categories as detailed below. You will notice that design and general attractiveness as it pertains to that aspect is not included, this is an attempt on my part to be as fair and impartial as possible as this particular aspect of watches polarizes opinion.

I certainly am not as familiar with watches as many other serious collectors and horological experts are, but I feel that I have owned enough watches and have read up and done enough research to legitimize my opinion, if nothing else. Take these reviews with a grain of salt, and as the opinions of a relatively new, 29 year old watch collector.

The Review: Rolex Deep Sea Vs. IWC Big Inge.




The Watches; an Introduction: Although these watches are classified as different technical types, one being a diver's instrument while the other is an engineer/scientist's tool, they do share allot in common. For one thing, they are both modern interpretations of classical iconic sport watches, both are relatively heavy and large steel behemoths, they both have relatively simpler dials, are both at the same price point (street value if not retail) at ~$8000, and both come from well known and respected watch brands.


Brand History and Legitimacy: While Rolex is definitely the better known brand and most impressive to the layman, the serious collectors most often than not tend to have their reservations about the brand's legitimacy, viewing the house of Rolex more as a well managed and sterile corporation with an ingenious marketing and distributing scheme rather than a Manufacture filled with passionate artisans many, on the other hand, tend to view IWC as an old school watch company that has stuck to its roots and championed its style of watchmaking. The fact is however, both brands have a long history of making timeless pieces that have been used in virtually every possible field, from civilian and military aviation to scientific or military deep sea diving, to classical watch making for the civilian market. Neither brands accomplishments can be denied, and their adamant improvement on their watches and model originality ensure their legitimacy in my opinion.


Winner: Tie!


Movement Features: Both watches have modern technology evident throughout their parts, micro gear toothing, all sorts of rhodium plating and Teflon coating as well as solid gold construction for the heavier parts. Real quality stuff! The Rolex obviously has their excellent Blue Parachrom hairspring which is unaffected by magnetic fields and does not require a soft iron cage, it also is 10 times more resistent to shocks. Other Rolex technologies are the use of a KIF system, and a Breguet overcoil for better isochronism.

The IWC has been outfitted with the spectacular (in theory and design) caliber 51111, a 42 jewel 8.5 day power reserve behemoth measuring in at and producing 21,600 vibrations per hour. Although the movement has a rating of over 8.5 days, an ingenious mechanism stops the watch when it has 36 hours remaining to prevent the unavoidable decrease in torque as the mainspring winds down and the resultant significant decrease in accuracy. Hence the 7 day power indicator on the dial.

The other main feature of the Calibre 51111 movement is the much touted Pellaton Winding System, originally created by the IWC Technical Director, Albert Pellaton in the 1940's. In contrast to standard watch design, the movement of the rotor is not transmitted to a wheel train via a gear system but through a cam which increases the durability of the rotor wheel.

Although both watches have some very serious technology going into their movements, and IWC's execution of the design is lacking, the nod still goes to IWC.

Winner: IWC

Case Finishing: I actually had to place both watch under direct light and examine them again to determine the winner here, they both have excellent finishing and polishing work applied, the Rolex tends to have a slightly more uniform and consistent finish, even at the most difficult to see and get to parts, while the IWC has a more visually attractive one due to the larger size and better executed finish grain, it is hard to explain but the IWC finish feels more authentic and the Rolex finish might be more assisted in terms of machinery than average. Not unlike the obvious difference between a hand stitched and a semi-machine stitched leather item. The polished parts on the Rolex are superior to those on the IWC however. Overall it is not difficult to give IWC the nod here.









Winner: IWC!

Case Construction: The multi case construction on both of these models is incomparable in my experience, they are built like tanks and feel like they can go through several lifetimes of intense abuse and withstand any torment you can through their way. Upon close inspection, the Rolex does seem to have the edge here, especially impressive considering that it has a bezel unlike the IWC and a well engineered one at that.

Winner: Rolex!

Watch Features: While the IWC does have the very impressive 7 day power reserve, and honestly that is far more useful for the vast majority of owners, it does not match up to the fact that Rolex has the most impressive depth rating of any mechanical watch ever made at 12800 ft.

Winner: Rolex.

Technical Movement Finishing: A quick explanation first, it not very well known that the technical aspect of movement finishing is as important to the durability and functionality of a watch as the basic design and subsequent engineering that goes into the movement. The attention to finishing on the barrel, mainspring, and pinion can have a dramatic effect on how smooth the watch operates, this extends to all other parts of the movement as well, as there are no unnecessary parts in a watch movement. For example the polishing on the sides of the gears can determine how much wear results when friction occurs between the moving parts, and ultimately effect the durability and need to replace parts. Watches tend to fluctuate to the poorly polished to some that are so immaculately polished that they achieve what is known as "black polish", a name reserved for parts that are so finely finished that when they are turned to the side appear as if they are black.

As an aside, it is amusing to consider that A Lange, who is world famous for their finishing quality in all aspects, only performed technical watch finishing up until the mid 70s as in their beginnings it was commonly thought that any finishing beyond the functional and purposefulness was a counter productive aspect of "Capitalist watches" under the socialist regimen according to their latest publication citing their top watch finishers. In any case, there are many aspects to this subject that require a dedicated article, in the mean time on with the review.

Both brands are very well known for their technical watch finishing, Rolex parts have been known to rarely need replacing due to their excellent movement finishing and clever "cheating" techniques such as Teflon coating the gears after initial finishing and IWC has had a tremendous impact and influence in this area, extending their image of technical watches down to the smallest detail of watchmaking. That said, IWC is the clear winner here, as they cut absolutely no expense in developing and implementing movement finishing techniques that are without peer in their price range and rival that of brands that cost many times their cost such as A Lange and Patek.

Winner: IWC!

Decorative Movement Finishing: This part deal with any finishing techniques that are used to add visual interest and appeal to the movement, such as polishing or bluing screw heads, circular brushed finished on gears, decorative engraving etc. This one is easy, Rolex are known to apply minimal decorative touches to their movements, only enough so that they do not look outright ugly, while IWC has a history of going to great lengths to decorate their movements, as you can see from these pictures"








The winner: IWC by a mile.

Overall Reliability: I have owned several Rolex watches, and have never been one to treat them with kid gloves, yet never have I had a single issue with any of them, and they seem to have earned almost universal praise in that regard. The Deepsea is no exception, I have owned mine for over a year ans it consistently runs within COSC standards. The IWC on the other hand, is a total failure in that regard and is a hopeless case, I have handed it in many times to IWC and they still are unable to get it to work within their advertised range, a problem that seems to plaque only watches equipped with this particular caliber. Worse, it seems IWC has an unofficial position of "deal with it"! In fact I suspect they did not even inspect the watch the last time I brought it in, and it unfortunately still runs at +30 seconds fast a day, totally unacceptable especially from such a respected company and for a watch at this price point.

These watches are at complete odds here, winner: Rolex.

Bracelet/Strap: This could be a controversial category to tackle. the Rolex bracelet seems to polarize opinion due to its tapering, but I have noticed that critique usually comes from guys with smaller sized wrists. I will leave the issue of comfort and aesthetics untouched as that is a very personal thing.

From an engineering standpoint, both the IWC and Rolex have large, solid, extremely well built bracelets that taper to differing degrees, the Rolex has a more classical design inherited from past Rolex sport models and modified, similarly the IWC BI bracelet has the same exact design as the previous smaller models. Both bracelets exhibit excellent finishing that is consistent with the case, and again the finish on the IWC is more impressive. Both are integrated designs and seamlessly attach to the case and offer a uniform look and feel exceptionally tough and solid.



When it comes to the clasp however, I find that the fantastic bit of Rolex engineering and ingenuity that is put into their clasp to be in stark contrast to the tin foil clasp of the BI, it amazes me that so much workmanship and effort could go into a bracelet yet the company would let everything fall with an unsecure and weak clasp design such as you can see on this bracelet.







If the clasp on the IWC was a bit better thought out, it would be a clear winner, as it stands the IWC still has the superior bracelet, but only slightly outshines the overall Rolex offering.


Winner: IWC

Readability: While both watches offer large, clean dials, the Rolex does have larger and better defined hands while the IWC has a larger dial. The IWC has a flat crystal with excellent AR coating so there is minimal reflection, while the Rolex's domed crystal does cause noticeably reflections it is far more legible underwater. The luminosity of the Rolex Deepsea is far and beyond that of the IWC however.

The Rolex over all has the advantage here.








Winner: Rolex.

Value: Both watches offer reasonable value for the money they ask, taking into consideration their features, finish, and other criteria. Though the Rolex does have better resale value, they are still comparable.

Winner: Tie!


That comes down to a 5:4 win for the IWC. Both watches are excellent and provide slightly different areas of satisfaction for the owner, many people have one area that is more important for them personally. Any one adamant about timekeeping would obviously forgo the IWC for the Rolex obviously, while overall the IWC is a more involved item.

Well there you go, I hope you enjoyed that review as much as I enjoyed writing it.

The watches in my next reviews are going to be:

Panerai 323 Radiomir 10 days Vs. IWC Big Pilot 7 days

AP ROO Safari Vs. Hublot Aero Bang, just for Roff :mrgreen:

Breiting 6.75 Vs. Panerai 359

Breitling Chronomat Vs. Panerai 000

Blancpain Fifty Fathoms Vs. Jaever navy Seals Alarm

Seiko Ananta Vs. Omega PloProff

Jaeger World Alarm Vs. Panerai 305 Sub.

Plus a few other reviews I have in mind, I hope to get to these soon as time permits.
Altair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 December 2010, 01:17 PM   #2
dddrees
"TRF" Member
 
dddrees's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Real Name: Dan
Location: USA
Watch: This N That
Posts: 34,251
Excellent comparison, and great review.

Great Pics.

Thanks for sharing.
dddrees is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 December 2010, 01:41 PM   #3
oo7
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Real Name: Julius
Location: Toronto CANADA
Posts: 217
Holy crap! Nice effort and pix. Thanks
oo7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 December 2010, 09:15 PM   #4
Ultraman
"TRF" Member
 
Ultraman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,175
Great review!!
Ultraman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 December 2010, 09:48 AM   #5
Shelby-villian
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: S** ****, C*
Watch: 18**
Posts: 255
Looking forward to the next review!
Shelby-villian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 December 2010, 09:54 AM   #6
thesmallwave
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Real Name: Levi
Location: Romania & England
Watch: Sub C Black
Posts: 568
Amazing, well done..So much time spent to gather all those info, thank you.
thesmallwave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 December 2010, 10:47 AM   #7
psv
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North America
Posts: 11,053
Altair,

thanks for an excellently written review which obviously is very well prepared.

If I can provide some constructive criticism is that I don't agree with your selection of evaluation criteria or the fact that you don't weigh the various areas. To evaluate a extreme diving tool on Technical or Decorative movement finishing is not appropriate. Hence, I'm not trying to defend the Deepsea here per se, but as far as professional diver is concerned the two most relevant areas are reliability and readability.

But still, it was a interesting and compelling read.

Thanks!
psv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 December 2010, 03:25 PM   #8
jedinite
"TRF" Member
 
jedinite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Real Name: TC
Location: GMT -8
Watch: SeaDweller Deepsea
Posts: 582
Thats a great review thanks
__________________
Tudor Submariner 76100/Rolex TT Submariner Blue X/Victorinox AirBoss Mach 6/Longines Grande Vitesse/Rolex SeaDweller DeepSea V/ GShock GW-3000B/ Tudor Prince Date 74034/ Rolex ExII 42 WD/ Rolex Submariner 116610 LV/ Tudor Pelagos Blue
jedinite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 January 2011, 12:02 PM   #9
uhmeebuh
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Real Name: Brandon
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Watch: Sub-C No-Cyclops
Posts: 58
Great review - looking forward to your next in the series!
uhmeebuh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10 January 2011, 06:07 PM   #10
duckdown
"TRF" Member
 
duckdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Real Name: R
Location: Toronto, Canada
Watch: d a t e j u s t 2
Posts: 462
Is your nickname from Assassins Creed?
duckdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 February 2011, 02:48 AM   #11
Altair
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: KSA
Watch: Patek 5270
Posts: 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by duckdown View Post
Is your nickname from Assassins Creed?
Nope, altair translate to the flyer in Arabic, my other passion.
Altair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 February 2011, 03:11 AM   #12
witch watch
"TRF" Member
 
witch watch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Scotland
Watch: Milgauss GV
Posts: 1,201
Excellent review and brilliant photos, can't wait for the others.
witch watch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 April 2011, 12:25 AM   #13
unprdctb1e
2024 Pledge Member
 
unprdctb1e's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Real Name: Tony
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 605
Excellent comparison!!!!!!!!!!!
unprdctb1e is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 April 2011, 05:06 AM   #14
serdal22
"TRF" Member
 
serdal22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Real Name: Serdal
Location: B.C., Canada
Watch: 16610-1680-16710
Posts: 456
Fantastic review, indeed. Hope you will continue reviews, my friend . . .

Capt. Serdal
serdal22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7 May 2011, 10:31 PM   #15
Tony-GB
"TRF" Member
 
Tony-GB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: Tony
Location: Oxfordshire, UK
Watch: 116680 & 116622
Posts: 3,953
Incredible review & pics. Thanks for sharing.
__________________
"...why oh why, didn't I take the blue pill...?"

http://www.helenanddouglas.org.uk/

www.cheetah.org
Tony-GB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6 July 2011, 09:20 PM   #16
dysondiver
"TRF" Member
 
dysondiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Real Name: tom
Location: northern ireland
Watch: my fins
Posts: 10,063
nice pics , and a great read
dysondiver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7 July 2011, 04:20 AM   #17
TSW
"TRF" Member
 
TSW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Real Name: TSW
Location: Le Brassus
Watch: Rolex & AP's
Posts: 27,449
Great comparison!
__________________

AP Owners Club
IG @swiss.watch.connection
TSW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9 July 2011, 10:30 PM   #18
Alexus
"TRF" Member
 
Alexus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Real Name: Alex
Location: Switzerland
Watch: SD/PAM74/ExII/SRSD
Posts: 393
Thanks for this article and the pics! :)
__________________
The young do not know enough to be prudent, and therefore they attempt the impossible, and achieve it, generation after generation.
Pearl.S.Buck
Alexus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31 July 2011, 03:59 PM   #19
bvm183
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: ITALY
Posts: 88
thaks for your work...both classic watch
bvm183 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31 July 2011, 04:18 PM   #20
vbuskirk
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 42
Thanks. I enjoyed that. (I'm sure I'll be scrutinizing my Ingy clasp when the sun comes up. WTF is he talking about??? grin)
vbuskirk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4 August 2011, 07:18 PM   #21
nGage7962
"TRF" Member
 
nGage7962's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Real Name: Mark
Location: Sydney
Watch: DJ41 TT Champagne
Posts: 507
Thanks for that. A certain lack of objectivity comes through to me in it, but regardless your efforts deserve recognition and to a degree credit.
nGage7962 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 August 2011, 02:40 AM   #22
jay_kay
"TRF" Member
 
jay_kay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Barrowford
Watch: Tudor Black Bay 54
Posts: 1,699
Great review, apearancewise can't help but think the IWC is missing a bezel!!!
__________________
Rolex Explorer 214270, Omega Speedmaster '1957 Relaunch' 3594.50.00, Panerai Luminor 1950 PAM00127-E, Panerai Radiomir 1936 PAM00249-I, Panerai Mare Nostrum PAM00716-T, Panerai PAM00785-Q Set, Panerai Luminor Black Seal PAM00594-Q, Panerai Luminor Daylight PAM00604-Q, Tudor Black Bay 54 79000N, Heuer Carrera Re-Edition CS3113, Hamilton Military W10 & TAG Heuer F1
jay_kay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 August 2011, 03:04 AM   #23
L-16610
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 825
that's what I call a review

Than you very much !!!
L-16610 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18 July 2012, 11:21 PM   #24
VICI
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Real Name: Alex
Location: Gotham City
Watch: IG: Mr_Right_NYC
Posts: 5,672
Very well written - 2 perfect watches for a comparison.

I would suggest a brietling b01 vs AP ROO
VICI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 August 2012, 07:26 AM   #25
Megalobyte
"TRF" Member
 
Megalobyte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Real Name: Ari
Location: Florida
Watch: ...me go broke
Posts: 2,427
I still can't wrap my mind around considering any high end watch incapable of doing better than 30 seconds a day remotely worthwhile.

My vintage collection Aquatimer, also with an IWC in house w/Pellaton winding has been under a second a day. I'd tell IWC they need to replace the watch if they can't get it better than a $100 Invicta, actually the Invicta wouldn't even run that badly. That's just unacceptable to me.

Makes me nervous about sending mine in for it's first service in a few years.

Nice review though.
Megalobyte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 August 2012, 07:44 PM   #26
HRV
"TRF" Member
 
HRV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Real Name: Andrew
Location: johannesburg
Watch: ROLEX
Posts: 4,407
Thanks
HRV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11 August 2012, 01:07 AM   #27
smartson
"TRF" Member
 
smartson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Real Name: Roger
Location: Toronto
Posts: 604
Great review. Look forward for more.
__________________
116610LV
Tudor 79190
Seiko MM300
Seiko SDGM001
smartson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 December 2012, 02:45 PM   #28
amigomason
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: boston
Posts: 89
wow talking about great effort and detail photos great read
amigomason is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 December 2012, 04:13 AM   #29
jt-
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Real Name: John
Location: Toronto
Posts: 171
I just stumbled on this thread, what a great review. A shame you didn't get an opportunity to post the other reviews, but considering the time and effort completely understandable.

"The watches in my next reviews are going to be:

Panerai 323 Radiomir 10 days Vs. IWC Big Pilot 7 days

AP ROO Safari Vs. Hublot Aero Bang, just for Roff :mrgreen:

Breiting 6.75 Vs. Panerai 359

Breitling Chronomat Vs. Panerai 000

Blancpain Fifty Fathoms Vs. Jaever navy Seals Alarm

Seiko Ananta Vs. Omega PloProff

Jaeger World Alarm Vs. Panerai 305 Sub.

Plus a few other reviews I have in mind, I hope to get to these soon as time permits"
jt- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 December 2012, 12:03 PM   #30
lebowski321
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Real Name: Tyler
Location: Hill Country, TX
Watch: Rolex
Posts: 496
Excellent comparison with fantastic pictures. Very well done!
lebowski321 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Takuya Watches

Bobs Watches

Asset Appeal

My Watch LLC

OCWatches

DavidSW Watches

Coronet


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.