IWC Mark XVII or bremont solo 37
Like Tree8Likes

Thread: IWC Mark XVII or bremont solo 37

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 28
  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    23

    IWC Mark XVII or bremont solo 37

    So, I am going to be selling my breitling in a week or two for ~£2400 and I am planning on purchasing an IWC mark XVII or a bre not solo 37. However I don't really know much about the movements inside the two. So I ask for your opinion on which is better based on two things:

    1) the quality of the watch and movement. Which is better made and which is the better make?

    2) resellablity. Which would be easier to sell when I come to sell it? I would probably list it on gumtree and this forum but which do you think would be easier to shift?

    thanks for all your opinions.
    Attached Images Attached Images




  2. #2
    Member dbakiva's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Chicago area
    Posts
    3,661

    Re: IWC Mark XVII or bremont solo 37

    I'd rather have a Mark XVI.
    Over a half century of "just the right amount of odd."


  3. #3
    Member brrrdn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    austin, tx
    Posts
    3,804

    Re: IWC Mark XVII or bremont solo 37

    I'd pick IWC based on looks and size. Quality is about the same. Most likely easier to sell the IWC.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    WatchUSeek.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4
    Member bullshark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    45° 31' 0.10'' N 73° 29' 49.62'' W
    Posts
    706

    Re: IWC Mark XVII or bremont solo 37

    They both use ETA movement, no, except modified and decorated in the case of the Bremont?

    For the rest, the Bremont has a hardened steel case, exhibition caseback, applied indexes...It simply is a better quality product IMO.

    Resale value? we are talking in the future, and I don't have my crystal ball with me today.
    Last edited by bullshark; April 2nd, 2015 at 20:00.

  6. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    4,038

    Re: IWC Mark XVII or bremont solo 37

    I dont think the Mark XVII is anything special. There is nothing "unique" or special about it at its price point. The Bremont has better specs and IMO a better aesthetic overall (the triple date makes no sense to me and detracts from the dial)

    There are so many nice pilot style watches that can be had at like 1/4th the price with almost same level of spec. You are paying for the name at this point. All this coming from an IWC fan.

    My favourite Pilot is the Muhle Glashutte Terrasport. It looks great, has great specs, nice looking movement modified by them for some unique features, and wears well, all at 1/4th the price of the IWC.

    The Bremont has more going for it in this battle. COSC, highly decorated movement, hardneded steel and unique case design and IMO better lume, lower price point.

  7. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    1,344

    Re: IWC Mark XVII or bremont solo 37

    I generally prefer the IWC in this case. As others have said, there are some really nice options for a lower price range.

    If I was getting the IWC, I would opt for the bracelet as well. It looks great on that watch IMO.

  8. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    891

    Re: IWC Mark XVII or bremont solo 37

    Bremont's 37mm is a lot smaller than Mark XVII's 41mm case. I urge you try both of these out before making a decisions. IWC's Mark XVI at 39mm is a better comparison.

    After reading many pros for the Bremont above, here are some of the pros for the IWC:
    As for the movement, I believe IWC's 2892-A2 ETA is a bit better than a modified 2836 movement on the Bremont.
    IWC also has a soft iron cage that allows resistance to magnetism.
    Bremont looks quite thick from the picture (again, be sure to try both watches out).
    I've read a lot of good things about IWC's bracelets, have not heard anything about Bremont's.
    Bremont has a display case back, but the movement looks a bit out of proportion.
    IWC's accuracy standard is different from COSC, but I wouldn't say it is any worse than COSC.

    Here is my Mark XVI, I would say it is anything but dull.

    Name:  16141531993_6301da8cf3_c.jpg
Views: 712
Size:  190.2 KB

    Name:  16573900898_972f22432e_c.jpg
Views: 634
Size:  58.3 KB

  9. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    4,038

    Re: IWC Mark XVII or bremont solo 37

    Quote Originally Posted by dak_la View Post
    Bremont's 37mm is a lot smaller than Mark XVII's 41mm case. I urge you try both of these out before making a decisions. IWC's Mark XVI at 39mm is a better comparison.

    After reading many pros for the Bremont above, here are some of the pros for the IWC:
    As for the movement, I believe IWC's 2892-A2 ETA is a bit better than a modified 2836 movement on the Bremont.
    IWC also has a soft iron cage that allows resistance to magnetism.
    Bremont looks quite thick from the picture (again, be sure to try both watches out).
    I've read a lot of good things about IWC's bracelets, have not heard anything about Bremont's.
    Bremont has a display case back, but the movement looks a bit out of proportion.
    IWC's accuracy standard is different from COSC, but I wouldn't say it is any worse than COSC.

    Here is my Mark XVI, I would say it is anything but dull.

    Name:  16141531993_6301da8cf3_c.jpg
Views: 712
Size:  190.2 KB
    Looks great!

    FWIW the bracelet version is a full 1k more, so it pushes the price point and difference even further. Especially since it wasnt mentioned by the OP, I dont think its a fair comparison to bring that in.
    COSC vs IWC spec is a toss up I wouldnt really give an advantage to one over the other like you said.
    2892 vs 2836 is really only a matter of thickness of the movement, I wouldnt necessarily call the 2892 a "better" movement.

    That said, looks are probably a HUGE factor here and if you want the IWC look, then thats your "only" option :D
    dak_la likes this.

  10. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    891

    Re: IWC Mark XVII or bremont solo 37

    Quote Originally Posted by jilgiljongiljing View Post
    Looks great!

    FWIW the bracelet version is a full 1k more, so it pushes the price point and difference even further. Especially since it wasnt mentioned by the OP, I dont think its a fair comparison to bring that in.
    COSC vs IWC spec is a toss up I wouldnt really give an advantage to one over the other like you said.
    2892 vs 2836 is really only a matter of thickness of the movement, I wouldnt necessarily call the 2892 a "better" movement.

    That said, looks are probably a HUGE factor here and if you want the IWC look, then thats your "only" option :D
    All fair points. I would say that the 2892-A2 is still a bit better because of the additional PR (42hr v. 36hr).

    But I agree with you that it all comes down to the aesthetic. That's why I urge OP to try both of them out before making a decision.

  11. #10
    Member ghoststar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    428

    Re: IWC Mark XVII or bremont solo 37

    Every thread that asks about the Mark XVII you'll find at least one member stating that he prefers the Mark XVI, as though he's saying something that hasn't been stated by every traditionalist and that he isn't aware that it wasn't offered as a choice in the first place (basically, he's just trying to show how much of a traditionalist he is, and thus assert his WUS authority).

    Another common comment about the Mark XVII is criticism of how the triple-date window makes no sense. You can ignore the opinion of anyone who states this, since he clearly doesn't know enough to be trusted on this watch. The triple-date window serves both a functional and aesthetic purpose. The functional aspect is in the ability to know the date even when the minute hand covers the center of the window, which happens 24 times every day. The aesthetic purpose is, this being a pilot watch, the triple-date window mimics the altimeter you find on the dash of older planes (google images of an altimeter and you'll immediately see the design inspiration).

    And the guy, in a poor attempt to be witty, who made the snarky comment about not knowing which has the greater possible resale value because he didn't have his crystal ball with him seems to have a hard time understanding that the OP's question was regarding educated guesses, not guarantees. The IWC will likely retain more of its value.

    Finally, in response to the commenter who said there is nothing special about the Mark XVII and would opt for the Bremont, he is also not to be trusted. Bremont has about a 20 year history with most of its value purchased through extensive celebrity endorsements. IWC is the standard for pilot watches, and is one of the few originators of the classic flieger look. Google the history of IWC's pilot watch and decide for yourself whether that heritage is worthy of being called "special."

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

    Similar Threads

    1. Bremont Solo v. IWC Mark XVI
      By meliaser in forum Bremont
      Replies: 25
      Last Post: December 7th, 2014, 12:38
    2. IWC Mark XVII vs Bremont Solo
      By Jackson Filth in forum Public Forum
      Replies: 20
      Last Post: May 13th, 2014, 12:39
    3. Replies: 35
      Last Post: April 5th, 2014, 13:39
    4. IWC Mark XVI v. Bremont Solo
      By meliaser in forum IWC
      Replies: 16
      Last Post: January 26th, 2012, 23:25
    5. Replies: 10
      Last Post: October 14th, 2011, 21:07

    Tags for this Thread

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •