Why is SS so popular?

[vjb.knife]

Originally Posted by BigHat

Well of course you'e entitled to your opinion but a couple of points.

1. WG and SS are not significantly different in terms of durability in a watch. Why own it? Because it's gold, looks better than SS and the weight makes it more appealing to me. Of course, the reason the dials are great on the WG models and suck on the SS models is so Rolex can get people to pay the difference.

2. The Sub isn't a dive watch. It used to be a dive watch. Face it, most people don't even shower with it on. You can hang on to old notions. but it's the look that sells the Submariner, not the water resistance feaures.

So based on that I own this.

By the way I think it total that you'd take a SS over a WG Daytona if the price was the same. Nice try though. Is there ANYONE else that would opt for SS over WG at the same price? Please weigh in.


And why did you buy the TT if you're so enamored with SS, they make one in steel you know. Aren't you afraid it will be "weaker"?

And of course you are entitled to your opinion but don't tell me that mine is BS when you asked for an opinion on the issue. Why do ask the question if you aren't going to let someone respond with out calling them a BS'er. First of all I am not talking about the dials just the case material. And stainless is more durable than white gold, period. I don't particularly care for any of the Daytonas and have no plan to buy any of them. I like Subs and GMT's, and I dive the Subs.

1. You obviously have limited knowledge of materials science. The durability in terms of scratch resistance, strength, and wear of parts especially in the bracelet links is far superior in Stainless than any Gold.

2. I don't care about most people but the sub is a dive watch for me; I was a Commercial Diver for many years. I dove them on the job and for sport many many times. I treat it like the rugged watch it was intended to be.

You are the one that set the premise that if $$$ were not the issue no one would take SS over White gold so I responded. I don't care if you don't believe it but in a watch like a Sub especially I would always go for stainless. I don't want a Daytona but if I did it would be SS. Looks the same lasts longer. I don't like to carry extra weight for nothing.

I think there is a big difference in the look of the all gold models and the same watch in two tone, some like the full gold look, I don't think it is bad, but where I would usually buy the all SS model GMTIIC I decided to try a two tone, just for fun. I like it in the GMT which I won't dive and the yellow gold at least has a different appearance than the white gold.

I usually don't like using these little cartoons but I think this one is good for you pinhead.

So based on this I own these, no BS:

[scottschoe]

What a silly topic. SS is 'popular' because it's more affordable, period. There are a few exceptions, but it's a pretty broad question to start with.

[rescue7]

Nice collection Vince, I personally own the 2 middle ones and love them both.

Personally I would JUMP at the chance to get a WG Daytona (not with a leather strap) for the same price as a S/S Daytona.

But being a realist that's a slim chance, seeing it's nearly 150% more cashola for one and the only way to get one is by shear luck, or finding a desperate seller!

By the way I notice the scratches, smudges and finger prints more on the polished stainless center links than on the gold polished center links.

[BigHat]

Originally Posted by vjb.knife

And of course you are entitled to your opinion but don't tell me that mine is BS when you asked for an opinion on the issue. Why do ask the question if you aren't going to let someone respond with out calling them a BS'er. First of all I am not talking about the dials just the case material. And stainless is more durable than white gold, period.
1. You obviously have limited knowledge of materials science. The durability in terms of scratch resistance, strength, and wear of parts especially in the bracelet links is far superior in Stainless than any Gold.

2. I don't care about most people but the sub is a dive watch for me; I was a Commercial Diver for many years. I dove them on the job and for sport many many times. I treat it like the rugged watch it was intended to be.

You are the one that set the premise that if $$$ were not the issue no one would take SS over White gold so I responded. I don't care if you don't believe it but in a watch like a Sub especially I would always go for stainless. I don't want a Daytona but if I did it would be SS. Looks the same lasts longer. I don't like to carry extra weight for nothing.

I think there is a big difference in the look of the all gold models and the same watch in two tone, some like the full gold look, I don't think it is bad, but where I would usually buy the all SS model GMTIIC I decided to try a two tone, just for fun. I like it in the GMT which I won't dive and the yellow gold at least has a different appearance than the white gold.

I usually don't like using these little cartoons but I think this one is good for you pinhead.

So based on this I own these, no BS:

Great bold type. Very impressive, but I'm not intimidated.

Your opinion on diving was interesting, but even that becomes suspect now that I know you're so full of crap on everything else. I see you weighed in with the assessment that the new Sub would soon be available in SS. Based on that alone I know that you don't know sh*t about Rolex and their policies either.

Yea, SS is stronger than gold in the strictest sense, but it's a WATCH not something you hang from or hammer nails with. There is no serious difference for the average wearer. PEOPLE BUY SS BECAUSE THEY ARE CHEAPER. PERIOD

The dial issue is another BS digression I'm not letting you get away with. The dials on the WG models are nicer, everyone acknowledges that. MY point was at the same price point, and with better dials, NO ONE would opt for SS over WG. You needing to be argumentative at every turn?

And who gives a crap that you were a diver, that makes you some kind of "burning bush" on watches?? Rolex will sell a million new Subs in WG/YG before a SS version appears. Get over it. People buy non-SS Subs and most Subs, including SS models never even see the bottom of a sink.

Great answer on the GMT TT question. Mr Adventure Boy, you aren't afraid that YG will weaken the bracelet because you don't DIVE with it, but others watches are in peril? What a joke. .000001% dive with these watches and when is floating around in the water more stressful on YG than SS?

I guess we're still waiting for another poster that would take ANY SS watch over the same model in YG. You make it sound like gold is butter or that we use our watches as carabiners part-time.

I plan on calling you on every BS statement you make. I think I'll be busy.

[astcell]

The SS Daytona fetches about $12,000 but the TT Daytona can be had for under $8,000. That about shows it is not about the material as much as the demand.

And yes gold is weaker than steel but come on, plastic is weaker than both yet that seems to be a common watch band material. If I am in a situation where the gols on my watch fails and I lose the watch because it was not SS, then I have bigger issues than losing a watch. That's like the argument that when you polish gold you "lose" gold and should never polish it. How much gold does one lose? Not even measurable.

I know NO ONE who dives with their Rolex any more. I knew one guy who did and then he found out the watch was very valuable and he sold it. Now he wishes he still dove with it and never knew the value. Live and learn.

My 19 month old TT GMT looks like a train hit it. Know what? I don't care.

[vegaseddie]

WG durability was recently on another thread, and as I recall there is no such thing as "White Gold", rather White Gold is an alloy, yellow gold mixed with alloys to give it it's color and as I recall WG is very durable due to the mixture of the alloys. At least this is what I remember.

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by duxdrummer

I love the look of my TT Bluesy, and my wife's TT LadyDJ. "Ridiculous" or not, TT watches speak to me. My wedding band is a combination of WG and 18K..... JJ, did you not own a TT Bluesy at one time? I know you appreciate the look as well....

I did.....and I still love TT watches; but I was just expressing general feelings toward TT models and the extra amount people have to fork out for the very little gold they actually got in return.

JJ

[lorsban]

Why Stainless Steel?

1. Cost - SS is cheaper to buy, maintain.
2. Aesthetics - it looks good polished or brushed and can be worn with anything.

[BigHat]

Originally Posted by vegaseddie

WG durability was recently on another thread, and as I recall there is no such thing as "White Gold", rather White Gold is an alloy, yellow gold mixed with alloys to give it it's color and as I recall WG is very durable due to the mixture of the alloys. At least this is what I remember.

You would be correct.

Rolex blends two very hard metals (pallatium and rhodium) in their white gold alloy. While it makes processing a bit more difficult than working with yellow gold it's pretty durable stuff. Certainly durable enough for a watch case and bracelet.

[vjb.knife]

Originally Posted by BigHat

Great bold type. Very impressive, but I'm not intimidated.

Your opinion on diving was interesting, but even that becomes suspect now that I know you're so full of crap on everything else. I see you weighed in with the assessment that the new Sub would soon be available in SS. Based on that alone I know that you don't know sh*t about Rolex and their policies either.

Yea, SS is stronger than gold in the strictest sense, but it's a WATCH not something you hang from or hammer nails with. There is no serious difference for the average wearer. PEOPLE BUY SS BECAUSE THEY ARE CHEAPER. PERIOD

The dial issue is another BS digression I'm not letting you get away with. The dials on the WG models are nicer, everyone acknowledges that. MY point was at the same price point, and with better dials, NO ONE would opt for SS over WG. You needing to be argumentative at every turn?

And who gives a crap that you were a diver, that makes you some kind of "burning bush" on watches?? Rolex will sell a million new Subs in WG/YG before a SS version appears. Get over it. People buy non-SS Subs and most Subs, including SS models never even see the bottom of a sink.

Great answer on the GMT TT question. Mr Adventure Boy, you aren't afraid that YG will weaken the bracelet because you don't DIVE with it, but others watches are in peril? What a joke. .000001% dive with these watches and when is floating around in the water more stressful on YG than SS?

I guess we're still waiting for another poster that would take ANY SS watch over the same model in YG. You make it sound like gold is butter or that we use our watches as carabiners part-time.

I plan on calling you on every BS statement you make. I think I'll be busy.

You miss the whole point of my second post entirely. Regardless of whether we agree on a point or not, you asked for an opinion and I gave mine. Most people would agree to disagree but since you seem to think that only your opinion is valid you call mine BS. That is where you got me going. You seem to be the one who is argumentative at every turn. Larger print is by the way just a little easier to read not meant for intimidation like your rhetoric.

Perhaps I don't know anything about Rolex policy on when to bring out certain models; oh you got me there, I am so sorry. So now everything I say is BS. Maybe I am wrong on that point of when the SS Sub will come out; I only said that because it did not seem so long between the vrious GMT model to me. You got me there cheif.

Again you missed my point on the Daytona dials. I could not tell you what any Daytona dial looks like because the watch in general does not interest me. I was saying that I really don't know or care what the dials are like on any Daytona model and was just trying to explain my preference for a SS case over a white gold case. But now since I also don't know which dial looks best in someones opinion then again everything I have to say is BS.

I did not say that I was an expert on watches because I was a diver but you said that nobody dives a Submariner more than to put it in the dishwater. I say you are wrong I know many guys who dive high end watches including Subs. One factor in watch durability that I desire is scratch resistance and diving as an activity can lead to scratches on equipment, it is a little more than just floating around. You are once again missing the point and reading something into what I said.

As far as the materials are concerned you are wrong there as well. There are more important properties to the metal used in a watch that gets used for rough duty including diving than tensile strength. And some of these also come into play with any average use watch. One important one for this comparison is the hardness of the material. No Gold alloy is as hard as 904L stainless steel. This means that not only will the Gold alloy scratch easier but that it will wear faster. Even desk jockeys, like you probably are, will wear down the links of their watch from the constant abrasion of their desk top materials on the side of the watch bracelet. It is common to need a replacement bracelet after 20 years or so of desk work. My wife's datejust bracelet wore flat on one side and the gold links were nearly worn through, at which time we got a replacement bracelet for $1100 on a trade basis for her worn one. Even the gold crown had a wear place on it. another wear area is the contact point in the bracelet between the center links and the pins. Gold will wear faster at these points and the gold links will deform easier. These are facts; you can call them BS all you want but they are still true.

Believe it or not some people buy a Rolex because they are tough and we want durability and longevity in the timepiece rather than heavy metal. I bought the GMT in two tone with more of a casual / dress watch in mind and liked the look. It will probably never be in the woods or the ocean so the wear and lower durability of the gold sections is not as much of a concern. It also only gets worn about 10% as much as my Submariners.

Regardless of the dials the Stainless Daytona usually carries a premium on it's price and is still hard to find yet the gold models are commonly discounted, yet they are easy to find at the dealers. This illustrates the point that there is a portion of the Rolex buying public that prefers the SS model above the gold. I doubt if it is entirely because of the price; although I grant you that is part of most people's equation. By the way that alloying metal that you mentioned would be Palladium not "Pallatium" which along with Rhodium another metal from the Platinum group that you mentioned are both much softer than 904L stainless steel. Didn't take Chemistry in school either did you?

The bottom line for my response here is that I posted an opinion that you did not agree with and you could not stand that for some reason so you had to get offensive and call it BS which is calling me a liar. You have a lot of class. If you plan on following all of my posts to call some sort of BS on them then good luck. Your posts will just continue to show the rest of the readers just what an ass you truly are.

[Gaijin]

Hang on.. I need to grab some popcorn for the next round.

[BigHat]

Vince,
I don't wish to fight with you. I don't have anything more to say on the subject. Sorry for the typo on "palladium." Never said the metals added to make WG were harder than SS, just that it doesn't matter in a watch.

I did truly appreciate your insights on the dive stuff when we were talking about the SD helium valve. We were treading water on that subject here until you weighed in.
\
Matt