IWC Da Vinci Taiwanese maker TW vs Gen

[Repworld]

Sent from the RWI App

 

[Repworld]

Sent from the RWI App

 

[Variatio Delectat]

Good work, really good work!

 

[Awesomeo]

The biggest and quickest tell is the seconds hand.

On the gen it only extends to the boundary of the minute tick markers - on rep it goes to boundary.

I expect that's why the gen photos omit the hands entirely.

 

[Variatio Delectat]

Eagles eye!

However, that would then be a pretty easy fix. I must say I'm impressed from the quality already.

 

[Repworld]

Can't catch any flaw in my eyes


Sent from my iPad using RWI

 

[Variatio Delectat]

Can't catch any flaw in my eyes


Sent from my iPad using RWI

Compare to https://www.iwc.com/de/kollektion/davinci/IW3566/#, it is quite obvious that the sec hand of the rep is too long and the end is a bit wrongly shaped.

 

[gamba66]

Do you have any more information about the Taiwanese-Maker TW?

Are they the same ones from 10 years ago? And more importantly: Will they release a 5 or 6 digit daydate again?

 

[Cee]

It's best to find real pictures of the gen watch for comparison, rather than the photoshopped / computer versions on the official IWC website btw.

This looks like a great rep.

 

[gamba66]

It's best to find real pictures of the gen watch for comparison, rather than the photoshopped / computer versions on the official IWC website btw.

This looks like a great rep.

Yes and often in these comparisons there are photoshopped pictures as was proven in the past.

So it is definitely not a 100 percent safe bet even when it looks promising.

The factories definitely know how important hype is to sell their products so I wouldn't be surprised if the end-product looks different than in those pictures.

 

[pippo]

Excellent rep of a mediocre watch.

Thanks for sharing though!

 

[Awesomeo]

It's best to find real pictures of the gen watch for comparison, rather than the photoshopped / computer versions on the official IWC website btw.

This looks like a great rep.

That's the 38mm, in which the hands do extend to the boundary. The rep is listed as 40mm, which afaik does not.


Edit: seems the hands are that long on the 40. My IWC catalogue and website show it short - poor form IWC!

 

[Variatio Delectat]

I wonder why IWC would show wrong hands on their website, however if they do so: Shame on them! :angry:

Anyway, as I already mentioned, a great rep.

 

[Awesomeo]

Think we need a new category on the consensual list. Reps more accurate to gen than the manufacturer photos!

 

[Repworld]

Think we need a new category on the consensual list. Reps more accurate to gen than the manufacturer photos!

It's mean second Hand correct


Sent from the RWI App

 

[Awesomeo]

It's mean second Hand correct


Sent from the RWI App

I honestly can't tell, all of the official IWC material suggests the hands should be shorter, but press photos show it as long.

Here's an overview of the Da Vinci collection, 40mm is at 12:25 with shorter hands.

I'll do some more digging.

 

[Repworld]

https://youtu.be/3k09lOO8MJs


Sent from my iPad using RWI

 

[jamingui]

I was on an AD this Saturday. I tried the one with rose gold numerals white dial, 40mm, and had the seconds hand touching the circle, so this rep got it rigth. The problem is QC, see the misaligned numerals ( i.e. the horrible 12 in the rep white dial). Remembers me ZF QC... :shok:

 

[Variatio Delectat]

Good video, clearly shows the sec hand.

 

[Variatio Delectat]

The problem is QC, see the misaligned numerals ( i.e. the horrible 12 in the rep white dial). Remembers me ZF QC... :shok:

Hahaha indeed, just like ZF uses to do.