In 1948, the Mark XI was born not as a luxury item but as a precision tool — a watch built for the RAF navigators with strict Britain's Ministry of Defense specifications. It had a soft iron inner cage to shield the movement from magnetism and a design st...  

It is alway easy to imitate but very hard to duplicate. But I think IWC is doing a great job bringing the Mark XX to a bigger and newer audience.

...  

The original short baton hour-hand on the Mark XI was the very essence of British design—unmistakeable and part of the MOD specs for the companies that produced it. IWC’s inexplicable subsequent decision to switch to Luftwaffe-style angular leaf hands on ... 

had no problem supplying both sides during the war... IWC ignited my passion for horology when I discovered the Portuguese line on 1993, but my interest in IWC stopped at the 1995 vintage

I don't care for newer hands, and to me the position of the date window on later versions detracts. I could go on but, really, the newer watches are perfeclty OK. They just don't seem as true to their roots. The newer 32111 movement seem like a plus.

I owned and really enjoyed a Mark XVI, but that's the first of the post-soul Marks. The XII and XV are much better.

As a fan of the IWC Mark series, and also having owned different pieces, to me it is not a question of one or the other. I can equally enjoy my newer ones, and look back in admiration on the original with respect. They’ve made some great lim. ed. a long t...