MILITARY WATCHES GENERAL INFORMATION AND DETECTING THE FAKES
MWC v CWC the Full Facts
I find this a really boring and tedious subject but I
get around half a dozen emails about this very subject every week with all
sorts of bizarre bits of conflicting and inaccurate information.
What I propose to do here is to state the facts based
on what I know to be 100% correct from reliable and accurate sources. Where
something is conjecture I will state as much to avoid adding to the confusion.
I am going to look at firstly the question of quality. Telford Services who are one of the leading
MWC dealers commissioned a report to put this very issue to bed. They asked
Paul Mason a respected member of the British Horological Institute to conduct a
test on an MWC G10 Battery Hatch model which is a direct competitor to the CWC
G10 models. It turns out that Mr
Mason was recommended by the BHI as an independent watchmaker of the highest
integrity with over 35 years experience.
Keep in mind this test is of the MWC G10 with battery hatch and that this
model should not be confused with the MWC G10A or ZA which is a lower specification model made in a variety
of variants by MWC to their contract clients specific requirements. This means
that in the case of the G10A and G10ZA there are vastly varying qualities of
the same watch. In the case of the G10 Battery Hatch model the basic watch is
the same and only the details tend to vary such as dials and whether they use
Super Luminova or GTLS. The full report is copied below.
MWC
G10BH PVD 2007 Military Watch
Report by
Paul Mason FBHI
Introduction
Telford
Services LLC, the United Kingdom’s leading supplier of military watches asked
Mr Paul Mason FBHI to carry out an inspection of a Military Watch Company (MWC)
G10BH Military Watch. Mr Mason was recommended by the BHI as an independent
watch maker of the highest integrity with over 35 years experience.
About
Paul Mason
He served
his apprenticeship in Watford repairing watches and clocks. He came third in
Europe in his Final’s horological exams earning the right to become a Fellow of
the British Horological Institute. He worked for five years at Cartier, New
Bond Street, London, the premier jewellers, repairing and assembling new build
watches.He started his own business in 1973. In 1980 Paul commenced making
clock movements. First for longcase clocks and moving on to small movements and
automata for the West End object d’art trade.
Paul carries
out repair and overhaul of all leading brands of watches from rotary to Rolex
to Patek Philippe. Repair and restoration of all pocket watches from English
lever to top quality minute repeaters.
The
Report
Watch : M.W.C Military Quartz Watch
Strap : Fully functional, hard wearing
with stainless steel fittings.
Glass : Mineral Domed with polished edge.
Scratch resistant.
Back : 2.7mm thick stainless steel, very
strong. Good fit to case front. Screwed aperture for fitting battery.
Case
Front : Stainless
steel with Physical Vapour Deposition black, hard wearing, coating.
Movement : Ronda 705, good shockproof
qualities.
Dial : Black with white lettering. Luminised
Arab Numerals. Easily Readable.
Hands : White Batton with luminised
centres.
Summary
Hard wearing
robust watch. Good accuracy of timekeeping. Waterproof to 50 metres. Ideal for
its intended use. Good Value for money.
About the
Ronda 705 from Ronda Technical
Metal
movement, repairable
Very long
battery life
Power saving
mechanism with pullled out stem: Reduction of consumption approximately 70%
Movement
available as 2 or 3 hands version
Battery No. 371
Battery-life 6 years
Swiss Made 5
jewels, gilt EOL
__________________
I think the
report clarifies the exact position regarding the MWC G10BH range.
The CWC G10
I don’t think anyone seriously disputes that the
quality of the CWC is fine but there are clearly issues with water resistance and
the quality of the current G10 2000 compared to earlier models. I have referred
to this myself because they seem much lighter and less substantial generally. I
have several older CWC G10’s and the G10 2000 just feels like it’s built to a
lower standard in the same way MWC make the G10A as a lower grade G10. As a
point of note both the G10A from MWC and G10 2000 from CWC have snap on backs
which are not ideal for immersion hence MWC rate the G10A at only 30m water
resistant and the G10BH at 50m.
These were the forum postings which are worth reading:
|
|
Cwc |
|
|
|
|
|
Post #1 |
|||
|
|
I'm a
newbie here, so apologies for asking questions, but... |
|||
|
|
|
|||
Jun 24 2006, 09:30 AM 
|
|
Post #2 |
|
|
None of
the CWC watch except the Divers models are very water resistant. They will
survive a quick dunk,as I think Jot said,but no swimming in them.For that you
need the diver.The chrono I would not even splash.No pilot is going to get
wet,at least not intentionaly
Alex |
Accuracy:
I have
tested the CWC and MWC G10’s and frankly the Ronda 705 in the MWC and the ETA
955 in the CWC are both highly accurate as you would expect with a quartz
movement so it is hard to go wrong.
Build
Quality:
If we compare the old CWC prior to the 2000 I would
say that the MWC and CWC felt the same as far as solidity but if you put a CWC
2000 against the MWC G10 Battery Hatch model it feels less substantial but in
terms of performance they are both ideally suited to the job they are designed
to do.
MWC and CWC
Models – A general overview
The rest of the models vary dramatically with CWC
scoring in some areas and MWC in others. For example the MWC self luminous
models are 100% brighter than any CWC with Tritium or Luminova but when it
comes to divers watches the CWC bezel is more positive although the black PVD
versions of the MWC has a better finish in my opinion that the CWC. One other
factor to consider is of course price, The CWC is vastly dearer but on the
other hand if you want a UK issue watch the price might not be an issue.
In the case of chronographs I have evaluated the CWC
Quartz Chronographs and the MWC Mil-Tec MKII and again because they both have
quartz movements there is very little to say regarding accuracy because both
are very similar and most quartz watches are accurate to 2 or 3 seconds a week
in any case. Interesting the MWC copes well with immersion in water which is
not always the case with a chronograph. As far as design I own a CWC and prefer
the overall appearance because I think it is less busy looking. What surprises
me is that MWC make a chronograph very similar to the CWC model and thinking
back I remember it on the website for the last time in around 2002-3. I found
out recently from a US based MWC dealer who I buy various straps and other
items from that they still make this model so why it is not on the site
currently is totally beyond me. I have emailed them but no reply as yet.
The MWC and CWC W10 models are interesting. I have
looked at both and really can’t see any benefit of one over the other. The MWC
Automatic W10 is considerably cheaper than the CWC though.
Who Supplies
what to whom
It is interesting that if you speak to CWC they will
drone on and on about how they are suppliers to the British Army and MWC are
not. I spent 45 minutes talking to Richard Bliss at Silvermans about this point
when I went into the store. So this is the position as I see it.
CWC:
Beyond doubt suppliers to UK forces and at times Australia.
MWC:
Based on The
Concise Guide to Military Timepieces 1880-1990 by Ziggy Weslowski which MWC
and other military watch dealers sell it confirms that MWC supplied the British
Army with W10’s in 1990 and yet if you ask Dieter at MWC who has been there
since 1981 he says he has no comment on this particular sale so clearly not an
admission or denial. I spoke to Richard at MWC who confirms that they sell to various
forces abroad and emailed supporting documents. He also confirmed that they
have supplied the UK Government and among the organisations is the Metropolitan
Police Anti Terrorist Unit and various other departments but he also pointed
out that they are not overly interested in UK contracts as they have no UK
presence to speak of but if approached they would tender but do not actively
solicit the business. In spite of this I am aware MWC’s were provided to
Gurkha’s at Catterick Garrison in 2003 and 2004 but again I found out the
details of this from serving Gurkha’s not from MWC themselves but because the
watches were MWC branded they must have reached them by some route.
Below is the MWC response and my original email.
|
Datum: |
Freitag, 17 Okt 2008 14:53:06 +0200 (CEST) |
|
Von: |
"MWC Uhren Gesellschaft / MWC Watch Company"
<info@mwcuhren.de> |
|
Betreff: |
RE: MWC and CWC |
|
An: |
ian.crowley@military-watches.net |
Ian,
I am more than happy to address these issues.
I can confirm that MWC have supplied the anti terrorist unit of
the Metropolitan Police and various other UK government departments at a number
of different times currently and in the past but I see no reason to provide
exactly times and dates as there is no obligation for the company to justify
anything. As I explained on the phone we do not now nor have we in the past
claimed to be a supplier to the British Army. To some extent this has been
fuelled by the fact Sean Bean is seen wearing an MWC G10 in the recent film The
Outlaw see http://www.discount-chronographs.co.uk/g10bhsl.htm but
I really have no comments to make regarding exactly who we supply in
the UK and who we do not. Were we to tender for a UK contract as the result of
an approach to us - because we do not actively seek such a contract
in the UK - we would certainly not state the full details publicly. I can
confirm we hold several contracts with non UK government agencies and have
attached two documents for you to examine privately along with the name
and number of a Police Officer at the Anti Terrorist unit who can confirm
the details above. I have also attached details of a person at the Ministry of
Defence DCB who you might wish to contact.
Re; Question 2 - As regards the quality of our watches I think the
report from Paul Mason at the BHI says more than I can and cannot be seen to be
biased in our favour.
Re: Question 3 - I often laugh at this point. I agree our W10 is
very similar to the CWC (the CWC is also identical to the Hamilton) although
technically our watch is entirely different in the way it is
dismantled etc I am not saying it is inferior or superior it is simply
different by virtue of the fact it is not the same watch. Other than this
model and some of our diver’s watches all other models are totally different in
appearance. For example our G10's all use glass crystals and CWC use Perspex.
We also make models with cutting edge Swiss GTLS Tritium Vials; there are no
watches in the CWC range with this technology. Interestingly you will often
find rumours on various websites claiming we used pictures of the Marathon in
advertising for our own self luminous 2008 divers watches but from the side our
watch and the Marathon are totally different and ours is much larger with 24mm
lugs as opposed to 20mm on the Marathon. Marathon does now make a large diver’s
watch but ours was launched prior to the new Marathon model and the Marathon
uses Luminova where we use GTLS vials. The fact is we never have used Marathon
images and it is a blatant and defamatory lie to suggest we have. I am aware a
reseller mixed up the images but that is not something e can control as he
sells both watches and it was clearly a genuine mistake. I suspect even the allegations made against
CWC in emails to ourselves informing us of what they did and didn't say are
frequently simple trouble making but I have some interesting sound files I will
send you later today which clarify that they are not squeaky clean. Do not post
them to the web unless you seek my agreement first as clearly it will set the
cat among the pigeons big time.
4. I can confirm Ray Wong does not make watches for us and again
our watches are generally very different to those made by him. One of the
issues is that some of his watches are passed off as CWC or MWC and in fact I
saw one branded CWC and knew immediately it was not a CWC from the bezel but
clearly someone is buying watches and repainting the dials.
5. It is true that we own some CWC domains and they in turn own
some MWC domains. You refer to this yourself on your site where you say
"MWC is a
direct competitor to CWC and the companies claim to hate each other. Oddly I
discovered that if you do a whois search on www.mwcwatch.co.uk it is registered to Silvermans who
own CWC! No doubt there is a fascinating story behind this but if the story
about MWC and CWC owning each other’s domains is true surely they would sort it
out by now wouldn't they? You can follow this link to confirm this
bizarre situation http://who.is/whois-uk/ip-address/mwcwatch.co.uk/ All I can say is it is totally
baffling"
The truth is we are keen to see an end to the confusion but
clearly on Silvermans part the desire to put the issue to bed is simply not
there. I agree it is leading to people jumping to all sorts of conclusions so
it is something that should ideally be sorted out. I recall this nonsense has
been going on for 6 or 7 years and really should be put to bed.
6. I can confirm that there is no connection between the two
companies although whether anyone believes me is another matter.
So there you have it. Hopefully it will go some way to setting the
record straight.
Richard Alexander
ian.crowley@military-watches.net wrote:
Dear Richard,
Further to our conversion last week I am planning to add a section to my site
relating to the CWC v MWC argument. I am driven crazy but weekly emails on this
point and would like you to answer the questions below if you are happy to do
so.
1. Are MWC a current government supplier to the UK or other countries?
2. Are MWC made to comparable standards to CWC?
3. Are any MWC models copied from CWC?
4. Does Ray Wong Make any watches for MWC?
5. Why does MWC own some CWC domains and CWC own some MWC domains?
6. Is there any common ownership between CWC and MWC?
I would appreciate a reply in order that it might put a few questions to bed
and stop me receiving constant emails which assume I am able to answer them
when in reality I am in no position to do so.
Best Regards
Ian Crowley
So where does
this leave us?
I feel it adds some clarity but I would be keen to
know more about the Gurkha issue although at the end of the day the question is
does it really matter? Clearly CWC and MWC will both keep making watches and no
doubt the squabbling will continue too. If anyone has any comment or input they
think its worth me posting please email me at ian.crowley@military-watches.net
Click Below to go to the CWC and MWC Websites