-
Tired of adverts on RWI? - Subscribe by clicking HERE and PMing Trailboss for instructions and they will magically go away!
M+ releases "Mark XX Patrouille Suisse", aka Mark XX in Titanium, IW328209
- Thread starter Reaps
- Start date
- 4/9/10
- 447
- 267
- 63
Fantastic news. I want to get a titanium and swap a blue dial into it. I don't care for accuracy and am set on the idea of a titanium+blue 40mm watch. Let's see which one will be first. The ingenieur or mark XX
- 25/9/22
- 6,764
- 18,582
- 113
This V7 attempt does not look as impressive as the M+F, not sure is it because of the lightings.
The V7 dial looks flat and the grey is a shade darker. In the gen, the slate-grey dial is radially brushed with some sunburst.
Also, in the gen, the case is in titanium, matted and sandblasted but still retains the metallic titanium look. But the V7 case seem blackened like it is pvd.
Well, I might be wrong as it is hard to believe V7F, that has done admirably well with other rep Pilots, got so many things wrong in this model.
- 25/9/22
- 6,764
- 18,582
- 113
M+ does it better agreed except for the movement. But the M+ M9015 is no slouch and I prefer it to the A2892 or whatever. I'll post more pics and apparent specs when I get the chance.
- 4/9/10
- 447
- 267
- 63
- 25/9/22
- 6,764
- 18,582
- 113
If I could humbly add, M+ has experience with titanium before, I'm not sure V7 does (look at the Ingeniuer line and others, they haven't done Ti manufacturing), so it can explain why M+ is better than V7 in terms of case at least.
V7F has released the Ti version of the Mark XVIII, they have experience indeed.
I remember someone here was complaining about titanium being too dark compared to other pictures posted on RWI.
Different production batches probably.
Dial was very well replicated though.
ShiroTenshi
Mythical Poster
- 7/12/11
- 6,797
- 251
- 83
- 25/9/22
- 6,764
- 18,582
- 113
If you read this it makes good points about someone who has handled both V7 and M+. They conclude M+ is better if you don't mind the movement.
Key points :
M+ crown better size, the seconds hand is flat (like gen), V7 is curved, (not like gen)
Finishing better on M+
Apparently buckle is better on M+
Everything else is the same basically
I placed an order for the M+ today. 2-3 weeks for QC, and then another 3 weeks for shipping - so it's going to be mid/end January until I eventually hold it in my hands. I hope it's worth the wait - not many real life photos of the gen are available for comparison, and since it's a Switzerland-exclusive watch, I also can't have a look at the IWC boutique here.
I trust Susan's assessment, that it is indeed better then the V7 (well, we can all see the weird finishing on the V7...).
I trust Susan's assessment, that it is indeed better then the V7 (well, we can all see the weird finishing on the V7...).
Watchloverzz
'lost access to my old account
johnchpark
Active Member
My concern, especially with the 9015 reps, is the structural integrity.
Meaning, all the Mark series with 9015 from various factories (ZF, M+, BLSF) don't have any movement clamps securing the movement to the mount or the case.
This means, the only thing keeping the movement in place and not falling through is the crown stem. That's a lot of stress on the crown stem.
I had issues with the ZF Mark XX, since it used a metal spring to lock the movement/holder once the caseback is screwed down. If you weren't careful, the whole movement would shift while tightening the caseback, making the movement rotate, thereby shifting the date position relative to the date window.
Meaning, all the Mark series with 9015 from various factories (ZF, M+, BLSF) don't have any movement clamps securing the movement to the mount or the case.
This means, the only thing keeping the movement in place and not falling through is the crown stem. That's a lot of stress on the crown stem.
I had issues with the ZF Mark XX, since it used a metal spring to lock the movement/holder once the caseback is screwed down. If you weren't careful, the whole movement would shift while tightening the caseback, making the movement rotate, thereby shifting the date position relative to the date window.
johnchpark
Active Member
My concern, especially with the 9015 reps, is the structural integrity.
Meaning, all the Mark series with 9015 from various factories (ZF, M+, BLSF) don't have any movement clamps securing the movement to the mount or the case.
This means, the only thing keeping the movement in place and not falling through is the crown stem. That's a lot of stress on the crown stem.
I had issues with the ZF Mark XX, since it used a metal spring to lock the movement/holder once the caseback is screwed down. If you weren't careful, the whole movement would shift while tightening the caseback, making the movement rotate, thereby shifting the date position relative to the date window.
I should note, this is specifically because the dial on the ZF was secured to the movement mount, not directly to the movement.
IE, the movement mount had holes where the dial feet would go in. So the dial wasn't secured to the movement itself.
I don't know about the M+ since there aren't any photos. If the dial feet is secured directly to the movement in a traditional manner, then it's a little better. The dial would also give a little support to the movement and prevent it from falling flat through. But if the dial construction is the same as ZF, then there is nothing except the crown stem suspending the movement in space. In this case, unscrewing the crown could lead to vertical play.
johnchpark
Active Member
The 9015 datewheel font is thicker than gen.
Honestly, i’m a bit confused why M+ decided to use Miyota 9015. They used a2892 in other models, so it’s not like they don’t have the setup.
They claim that the Mark XX date flips UPWARDS (towards 12’ clock), which Miyota 9015 also does. That is my guess why M+ used 9015.
However, that information is wrong…Gen Mark XX date flips DOWNWARDS (towards 6’ clock).
It seems someone at M+ Factory didn’t do their research properly.
Honestly, i’m a bit confused why M+ decided to use Miyota 9015. They used a2892 in other models, so it’s not like they don’t have the setup.
They claim that the Mark XX date flips UPWARDS (towards 12’ clock), which Miyota 9015 also does. That is my guess why M+ used 9015.
However, that information is wrong…Gen Mark XX date flips DOWNWARDS (towards 6’ clock).
It seems someone at M+ Factory didn’t do their research properly.
It's not the direction the datewheel moves, it's the direction you turn the crown to quickset the date.