Again, not really trying to change any minds here, but I totally love my Mark XVI. This debate has been battled out ad nauseam on the watch fora probably since the day the XVI was released.
And I agree that it could be a superb "onewatch", although I could personally never get by with just one watch!
My own reasoning, in brief, for going with the XVI:
- I think the extra millimeter of the XVI sits a little nicer on my own wrist (approx 7") vs. the XV version (39mm as opposed to 38mm)....and yes, I realize that only watch nuts would split hairs like this. It's only a millimeter, but still....I guess that's why we are watch nuts.
- I never really loved how the XV and other iterations, had the pointed tip on the minute hand, but the hour hand was blocked-off. That's just me. I like the new shapely version and its aggressive, not-quite-sword-shaped taper.
- the numerical font is preferable TO ME on the XVI...yes, it is larger and I suppose more "modern" looking, rather than the traditional dial. But I think it looks super crisp in person, and just really catches my eye in a good way.
- the missing 3, 6, and 9 are often what drive the haters crazy about this watch...but I'm just taken with how it opens up the dial on this particular piece. Strictly a preference in this case
So, vive la difference and all that.
I would not kick a Mark XV out of my bed if I had one. That is not what I'm saying at all. They are highly desirable in their own right, and I truly understand the XVI doesn't quite fit into that same exact IWC strain of pilot's watch DNA for everyone.
Honestly, if I could have checked out a 40mm Stowa in person (sterile dial, ETA-powered, blued hands), then I might have opted to save the $$ and go that route. But I was able to get my Mark XVI from an authorized dealer at a reasonable discount and see it on the wrist prior to buying.
Might as well use the mini-rant as an excuse to post the below pic (not mine, and not sure who to credit), but I thought this was a pretty good image: