IWC Ingenieur Movement by Baume & Mercier?

I'm right there with you. Absolutely love this watch. I'm too poor to feel comfortable about the price but if money were no option this would be a no-brainer for me.

My understanding is:

• The movement is shared with the much cheaper Mark series.

• The base movement (32110) was rumored to be based on ETA 2892. But IWC clarified that it shares nothing (including dimensions, apparently) with the ETA one.

• The movement isn't produced by IWC but ValFleurier, under Richemond

It does seem to me that the movement is brand specific? However, given that it's produced by the group's producer, it might be either shared directly or having cousin calibers with other Richemond brands.

It's just an eta which is in their IWC watches less than half the price. I wouldn't go by the name of the caliber. It's just rebranding

Google is your friend:

https://calibercorner.com/iwc-caliber-32111/

In short, no, it’s not an ETA movement, it’s a Val Fluerier, and a version of it is used in some B+M’s.

A lot of people like to slam IWC movements as ‘being ETA movements’ without doing their research. You’ll see a lot of commentary that the Pilot Chrono 41’s 69380 is ‘just an ETA 7750’ … which it can’t be, since it uses a column wheel and the running second hand is in a different place. It might have a lot in common with an out-of-patent movement, but it’s significantly different and built by IWC/VF.

I believe some people use the name "ETA" to mean "Swiss ebauche," just as "Sea-gull" means "the movement is from somewhere in China."

This particular movement is group (Richemond) movement. Technically, it's "inhouse" for their group. In reality, calling it "inhouse" is........... too much.

The IWC 32111is actually a movement from ValFleurier builed for the Baumatic movement line. The development of this movement is based on ETA 2892 (Selitta SW300).

(unfortunately some fellows misunderstand the term "based" which doesn't mean "cloned", but using the existing and technical established ground structure of a movement and changing it to their own needs).

The definition of "manufacture" is not hundret percent clear as it can also be defined as "self building the movement parts and ensembling and decorating them" without "self developing the movement on scratch". There is nothing wrong as long the movement isn't build/ensembled by a third party. Many manufacture movement are based on their ground structure on other movements.

But IWC Ingenieur basicly uses the Baumatic which you can find in the Baume & Mercier Riviera and changed some little minor parts. That's enough to give it a new name and as long they build and ensemble it in house they can call it "manufacture".

The movement is a proper and reliable workhorse with great specs. But despite the minor changes it is basicly a movement that exists already used in watches (and made for watches) that costs 4 times less.

On a watch for around 13 grands I and many others would expect an (more) exclusive movement.

But the influnce of IWC on this movement is too less to justify the price.

I personally would definatly go for the B&M Riviera if you like the Design (it was also designed by Genta...at least the version of the 70s) and you get the same movement and specs.

There is a lot more to the watch than the movement, although of course it's an important part. There is a long history of shared movement bases, modified by the brand. Historically IWC have used and or modified, sometimes extensively, ETA, Selita, JLC. My understanding is that whilst all the Val Fleurier bases will share architecture and some components; finishing, quality control and some modifications will differentiate an IWC from a (still excellent) B&M. So many of the components and movements of so many brands, including the highest of high end, will be "non in-house" by the strictest of definitions. If you love the Ingenieur (and can afford it), go for it!

O

Yeah, using “ETA” to describe something that isn’t ETA isn’t really helpful 🙂

For sure - the in-house/in-group/‘manufacture’/sourced movement issue is frustrating industry-wide (outside of micro brands, really). Val Fluerier and the Richemont brands in particular are headache-inducing to parse. Richemont obfuscates that they have a centralized manufacturer that services some (all?) of their brands, while some (none?) of their brands do everything themselves, and the brands also source from ETA/Selita/elsewhere for some of their pieces (I think there are some ETA-based chronos from IWC still, but not sure), and some of their brands also source movements sister brands (Cartier uses Piaget movements in some of their watches, for example; but are those movements manufactured/assembled by “Piaget” employees, “Val Fluerier” employees, or “Cartier”employees? Does it matter?).

WRT to this situation, I’d prefer IWC call it a “Val Fluerier XXXXXX manufactured for IWC” or something like that, since it’s a COSC-spec version of the VF movement that B+M doesn’t (currently) have access to.

The most idiotic thing in this story is that the Baumatic is COSC certified and has an antimagnetism of 1500 gauss, while the new Ingenieur, which was made as an antimagnetic watch,with closed caseback and the soft-iron inner case is only 500 gauss and it hasn't got COSC. Crazy.

Judging by the reviews, 32111 may not be accurate enough, but there are different situations. Also, this family of calibers has one unpleasant feature, when pulling out the crown, the minute hand jumps, due to the large power reserve - 120 hours. This is a constructional error by ValFleurier, which they do not recognize as a warranty case. The Oris 400 had a similar problem, but they quietly released an update to their caliber and fixed it, unlike the ValFleurier. Overall, the 32111 is reliable, relatively accurate and convenient due to its power reserve. IWC chose it because it is thin. Their own calibers are thicker and if they had chosen it, the Ingenieur would not have fit so perfectly on the wrist.

There is no jumping minute hand on my 32111 🧐 This issue might have been solved.

I have understood that IWC procures this caliber from ValFleurier as an ébauche and that is why they call it « manufacture » (assembly and regulation 0/+7 done by IWC employees at IWC manufacture).

Maybe there are instances without this problem. I was in a boutique recently and the minute hand jumped every time. You can also find how It looks on YouTube:

https://youtu.be/LhMo8hIe16o?si=s0cX-WkbTutzRwiY

Wow, that’s a jump ! 😄

I cannot believe this a common issue on a caliber used by at least two brands, one of which sells it 12K in its Ingénieur watch. They should have solved or will solve it^^

The IWC Ingenieur is a gorgeous watch...just massively overpriced.

Let's see how the secondary market reacts to these over the long term.

I'd love to buy one at half the list price...