Adeodatus

New member here, but glad to see you back n your feet. Be well, man.

Yeah, Franck Muller are great watches and the replicas seem to be accurate, right? But they are more of a oh-my-gosh-you-just-spilled-the-chateau-on-my-gucci-shoes kind of watch and the font they use on their dials is too cartoonish for my taste. Do you know what I'm saying?

Enjoy:

Paper architecture by Sant'Elia Yes, I'm that guy... I find rectangular watches to be masculine and practical. They look like true machines to me and remind me the futuristic Boccioni sculptures, Marinnetti's and Mazzoni's architecture and paintings of Natalia Goncharova. An era of man, who admired machine-like architectural environments and riding a motorcycle as a true integration of men and machines. There aren't that many beautiful rectangular watches out there and even fewer reps. In the past I owned Oris Rectagular Titan, which I bought for a very cheap price, but unfortunately I had to let it go. This is something I regret to this day and will definitely consider this watch again for the right price. I think it would be interesting to see other rectangular watches you guys own, gen or reps. Are there any good reps for rectangular watches you can recommend?

God, that's just like my Grandfather's, may he rest in peace. I remember him wearing it 20 years ago when he was still alive. Such a treat to see this watch being worn...

Moon phase on a Pilots watch? And what about that year calendar? "Excuse me, sir, I'm a bit confused, what year are we?" "Absolutely, sir, let me check my IWC pilots watch... Hmmm... It seems to be 2012, sir. Good thing, have this IWC Pilots watch!" The spitfire, 3777 and 3880 look great, though!

The strap does feel very good and it's soft and comfortable, but if you look closely at the last picture of the strap, under the first hole, you will see some wear already (it's the greyish patina). Now, that wear is not much of a concern to me, but I wonder would it happen to a real croc strap? I mean when leather is scratched, you'll still see leather. Here - I'm not so sure... Somehow this scratch feels synthetic

Judging by my three day old Spitfire the AR is very good and the strap is of a good quality. So maybe it is abetter version.

Guangzhou is nothing special, so I don't think you will enjoy it as much. It's a large, modern city with very few interesting historical landmarks. As someone who have been to China on many occasions I must say that traveling in china alone can be very difficult and frustrating even. On a business side of things I can't see you getting good deals there since no Chinese in his right mind will give you, as a foreigner, a substantial discount. In their mind if you are a foreigner you must have money and the price will go up. That might change if you will buy a large stock to resell later, but take into account the costs of the flight , hotels and customs risks. Plus if you will get caught transiting counterfeit products in large quantities jail time (in China!) in inevitable.

Laphroaig quater cask

I see your point, sempire. Reading between the lines of Pho's initial post I think that maybe his knowledge of watches was disputed in the original thread (correct me if I'm wrong, phoband) and this is why he responded harshly and went on with his history in reps' world. Obviously phoband needed to shed some light on the original thread and not to repost as is... Anyway, I don't even know why am I responding here... I don't actually give a damn PS: "schizophrenic drunk on acid" - LOL. I have to use it sometimes!

seafoam: what an exquisite design! LHOOQ: I absolutely love everything I've seen so far from your collection. Great taste. Me, I can't get enough of my new Spitfire:

Oh my God, people... I don't think that Pho needs to beef his reputation up, nor it was his intent. Sure, the post didn't came out well, taken out of the context like that and maybe the phrasing is a bit harsh, but I'm pretty sure Pho meant well by posting. As a newb/noob/n00b or whatever you call it, to the rep world I must agree with some of the points raised in the initial post. People do have some very unrealistic expectations from a rep watch. Obviously some reps are better than others, but as a rule of thumb I believe we do need to treat these watches with extra care. The materials, the assembly and the QC is not even close to the original watches and people expecting a 300$ watch to act as a 10000$ watch is not only unrealistic but also foolish. After all, almost always, you get what you pay for. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that was what Phoband was trying, maybe not so successfully, to say.

Agrrr... Typos in the review... Damn it!

OVERVIEW IWC Mark XVI Spitfire was the watch that actually brought me to RWG, so I feel obligated to "give back" to this wonderful community and thank everyone here. I've been on the market for this particular piece solely because I consider this one of the best all-around watches. It is elegant and wears great with a suit, while being manly enough for a daily use. It is a very light watch, one you can wear all day without ever noticing it on your wrist. At 39 mm it is also not a as noticeable as some AP or Hublots or even Ingenuiers, so I believe you will not be called out, unless you will try to show it off. If you are interested in IWC Pilots watches history and heritage please read a wonderful review of the black version of this watch by chrgod. That review is a must for all IWC aficionados. TECHNICAL INFO Movement: Nickel Plated 2892 Automatic Asian Clone. Insignia Rotor with Cortes de Geneve. Dimensions: Diameter 39mm; Case height 11 mm; Width (including lugs) 48 mm; Crystal: Sapphire crystal with colorless AR Case: Stainless steel Crown: One piece screw down with O ring Lume: Markers, Hands and Numerals CASE The case is constructed and polished well, and dimensions are extremely accurate. The only issue I saw was with the internal parts of the lugs, which are as sharp as a razor. The engraving on the case back is at the correct position, although a bit more rough than on a gen. DIAL The dial seems to be of a good quality and just stunning. Unfortunately it isn't accurate. As you can see there is a 1mm space between the minutes numbers and the case. This isn't a major issue, though, and unless you compare this watch with a gen or have a really good knowledge of this rep and the gen you will not be able to spot it. Under a magnifying glass you can also see that the hour numerals, especially the silver part of them, is a bit thinner that on gen. Again not a major issue and you will not notice that unless you compare it to gen under a very good lighting and a magnifying glass. Unfortunately there is one major issue with the dial. The dial is not fully "silver" plated. The stripe that holds the numbers is white and has no ridges as per gen. This is a serious blow for this rep. I have contacted the dealer about this issue and he replied that this "was the way these dials were made", so there is no better dial for this watch. Personally I like it this way and I wish IWC actually made the watch with a white stripe, as it differentiates the silver parts of the dial and allows the numerals to stand out and really shine. So if you are looking for an exact rep this will probably be the biggest tell. I think the issue here is that the factories simply printed the Mark XV dial layout on a larger (39mm) Mark XVI. HANDS The hands are very accurate and well executed. My only concern here is the hour hand which is place way too close to the dial. I'm not sure if this is also the case with the gen, but once I open the watch for service I will definitely have it raised half a millimeter from the dial. The seconds hand is half a millimeter shorter than on gen, (again, I, personally, like it better this way). CROWN The watch features a screw crown with Probus Scafusia on it and O ring, and screws down very smoothly. The crown is, by far, my favorite part of the watch. It feels as genuine as it gets. DATE WHEEL The date wheel is really good. The font is a bit thinner than on gen, but ever so slightly, probably by a few microns. Good luck spotting that. Again, unless you are comparing this rep to a gen under a proper lighting you will never notice the difference. LUME The lume, as expected, is very weak. It doesn't hold up more than a couple of hours after "charging" in the sun. I'm not that concerned about it and I can't see myself re-luming this watch, but for those of you who like great lumes, I guess this will require a visit to Zigmeister. AR As you can see form the photos the AR is very good and has a slight blue(ish) hue. Nothing to add here except that I'm very impressed with the AR job the factories have done with this watch. BUCKLE CLASP The clasp is poorly constructed. Even before we start with the shallow and off center “IWC” engravement, I have to say that the overall feel of the clasp is very “reppish”. The clasp is as sharp as a razor as well, to the extent that when you wear the watch it rubs against the strap and damages it. I’m sure the factories can do a better job at polishing the piece and removing these sharp corners. The clasp has all the engravemnts as per gen, but the most important one, as I mentioned earlier, is too shallow and off-center. STRAP I opted for a Croc strap and it is very comfortable, thin, soft and feels of a good quality. Although the dealer sweared by the god-all-mighty it was a genuine Croc, “a real croc for sure”, I'm not that convinced. Nevertheless, I’m not a leather expert, so I’ll give our trusted dealer a benefit of the doubt. MOVEMENT I didn't open the watch so I have nothing to say about the movement, except that it's a 2892 Asian clone and is widely used in other reps and has been reviewed here time and time again, so I can't say I have more to add. SUMMERY All in all I'm extremely pleased with the watch, the dealer and the transaction. All went smoothly and without any issues whatsoever. I also enjoy the overall look and feel of this watch. Sure it is not 1:1 Ultimate Extreme Super As-Per-Gen replica, but I actually like it even better than the genuine watch. The issues with the dial are definitely fixable and in any case the drawbacks are only visible under a very good lighting and can be spotted only if compared to a gen side by side. Having said that I will definitely try to franken this watch with a gen dial in the future (or as soon as Concepta will answer my PM ). Hope you will find the review useful and any additional thought and comments are welcome. Let the nitpicking begin! On a side note: If you are looking for a similar watch with a more correct dial, I'd recommend trying the Mark XV form Trusty or another dealer, as it seems to have the correct dial for that model. And the last shot: me, wearing it well...

This is the only time in my life I wish I had a junk dirt cheap Rulax.

Still rocking my brand new Mark XVI Spitfire.

It's a N-Factory rep. I can see that from the shape of the tube in the video.

Just got the watch. Man... Am I happy for not buying a gen! Will write a review over the weekend but to give you a taste of it, here is my first rep:

Look at what just has landed at my door...

Ha! Stopped by a shop to see what the fuss was all about and ended up buying that Seiko 5. Still think that the article is rubbish, but I have to say: I love the watch. The design is extremely efficient. The movement is simple and beautiful. The dial and the hands are of a good quality, although the printing isn't consistent and the bracelet is rubbish. If the printing was of a better quality and the price tag was over 2000$, I can almost see how people would be drooling all over this watch and "best ultimate v3 1:1" reps would have been made in no time.

I've had the same G-shock for 12 years. The watch took a hit by a shrapnel and still worked for years afterwards. A super-ugly watch, but I guess it's like a sledgehammer - it gets its f***king job done.

I recognize the design and horological value of chronographs and I like how ballanced the dial is on such a watch. I'm not much of a chronograph person myself, though. I like simple designs and although I do own a chronograph I've never actualy used it, except one instance to time egg boiling . When I run or bike I always use a digital watch, in fear of destoying it, and as a military veteran I, personally, find using mechanical watch in a mission or in training a bit laughable and so called "military" watches a gimmick. Never in my life have I seen a mechanical watch used in a real battlefield situation or in training (G-Shock have always been the tool of choice for us). There are many reasons for that: lume is unaccaptable because it always glows and may compromise you at night, the movement is too fragile, chrono is less accurate than a simple stopper, readability, etc. Having said that I recognize that some people may find chronos useful and I'm interested in other's opinion. So, do you actually use a chronograph, or is it more of a nice-to-have feature?