ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
|
18 February 2014, 07:06 PM | #1 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: San Diego
Posts: 99
|
Steel vs. Ceramic
Pro's vs. Cons of the older steel models vs. the ceramic models?
|
18 February 2014, 07:16 PM | #2 |
"TRF" Life Patron
Join Date: Jun 2005
Real Name: Peter
Location: Llanfairpwllgwyng
Watch: ing you.
Posts: 53,024
|
Its only the inserts that are ceramic and depending on what model watch you are talking about.Myself not a huge fan of the ceramic inserts the so called advantages out way the disadvantages of the ceramic insert.Now if they were the same price as the older inserts and was a simple to change yourself job, then perhaps the ceramic could prove to be a slight advantage over the older type insert.
__________________
ICom Pro3 All posts are my own opinion and my opinion only. "The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop. Now is the only time you actually own the time, Place no faith in time, for the clock may soon be still for ever." Good Judgement comes from experience,experience comes from Bad Judgement,.Buy quality, cry once; buy cheap, cry again and again. www.mc0yad.club Second in command CEO and left handed watch winder |
18 February 2014, 07:21 PM | #3 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Real Name: Travis
Location: FL / NYC
Watch: Yes..
Posts: 33,405
|
The ceramic bezels (cerachrome) are said to be more scratch resistant, corrosion resistant and not affected by ultraviolet rays (meaning they won't tend to fade).
However, they can break or shatter. If they do it's pretty pricey for a replacement. They are also quite shiny. Some like that. Some don't. Some prefer the aluminum inserts because they are true to the original, inexpensive and appreciate some nice patina with time. All comes down to personal preference. I like both, but am more of a ceramic guy myself. |
18 February 2014, 08:14 PM | #4 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: singapore
Posts: 6,424
|
What Travis said - spot on!
And yes, I'm a pro-ceramic man myself. |
19 February 2014, 01:20 AM | #5 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: Tom
Location: In a race car!
Watch: ME RACE PORSCHES
Posts: 24,123
|
|
19 February 2014, 01:34 AM | #6 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: ATL
Watch: 126610LV
Posts: 2,745
|
Have always said the bracelet/clasp alone is worth it to buy the Ceramic models.
|
19 February 2014, 10:27 PM | #7 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Brian (TBone)
Location: canada
Watch: es make me smile
Posts: 77,742
|
|
18 February 2014, 09:50 PM | #8 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Real Name: Joe
Location: New Mexico
Watch: Explorer
Posts: 12,838
|
Ceramic is shiny and nice. That said, it costs big money to replace. The aluminum insert was more user friendly
__________________
It's Espresso, not Expresso. Coffee is not a train in Italy. -TRF Member 6982- |
30 April 2014, 11:54 AM | #9 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Real Name: Russel
Location: N/A
Watch: N/A
Posts: 755
|
Quote:
And correct about the older model inserts. They can be bought from many sources and replaced easily at little cost. |
|
18 February 2014, 10:03 PM | #10 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Real Name: Chris
Location: NCR
Watch: Today's watch
Posts: 736
|
As a Bell and Ross ceramic owner...
I obviously dig the qualities of ceramic. Yes, they can break if knocked really hard...but are virtually scratch proof and have the other qualities already mentioned. Depends on which one you like the most really...both have their pros & cons, many of which are subjective and based on your preference. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk |
18 February 2014, 10:10 PM | #11 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Real Name: Anthony
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Watch: Dblue
Posts: 6,723
|
The pros of the ceramic bezel is durability. Smack it against something and not a scratch. No fading as well. It always looks as good as the first day you bought it. It also really adds to wrist presence.
|
19 February 2014, 12:12 AM | #12 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Real Name: Jay
Location: TEXAS
Watch: Daytona
Posts: 7,648
|
What wrist presence? Does that mean look at me I have a Rolex?
|
19 February 2014, 12:18 AM | #13 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Real Name: Anthony
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Watch: Dblue
Posts: 6,723
|
|
19 February 2014, 02:03 AM | #14 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2012
Location: planet rolex
Posts: 1,728
|
|
19 February 2014, 02:50 AM | #15 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Real Name: Anthony
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Watch: Dblue
Posts: 6,723
|
|
19 February 2014, 08:23 AM | #16 |
TRF Moderator & SubLV41 2024 Patron
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: .
Watch: 126610LN
Posts: 35,503
|
That's a very hard watch to photograph. You nailed it
__________________
JJ |
4 September 2014, 11:41 PM | #17 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2013
Real Name: Joe
Location: USA
Watch: ROLEX
Posts: 1,928
|
Great Picture!!!
__________________
|
18 February 2014, 10:13 PM | #18 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2013
Real Name: Jack
Location: The Triangle
Watch: Several
Posts: 6,719
|
How many examples of a shattered ceramic insert have been reported? And what type of impact does your watch have to take to cause such damage?
As to the price, how many Sub owners have actually had to replace their insert, aluminum or ceramic?
__________________
Sub 116613 LN; GMT 116710 LN; Sinn 104R; Exp 214270; GS SBGM221; Omega AT |
19 February 2014, 01:55 AM | #19 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Diego
Watch: Sub-C blue, DSSD
Posts: 2,482
|
Quote:
+1. With all the new threads on here, how many have you read about someone breaking a ceramic insert? One? Two? Three? My old aluminum inserts were always scratched up. I would replace them, and in no time it was scratched up again. Plus all the other upgrades especially the solid bracelet, and clasp are just wonderful. |
|
19 February 2014, 03:04 AM | #20 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: San Diego
Posts: 99
|
Great question regarding how many have you actually heard about breaking! And thanks everyone. This forum is great, full of knowledge and people willing to share. I know that I will eventually want a birth year Sub w/date (1975), but looks like I will also be in the market for a ceramic model as well. Thank you all for the replies. I work in the medical field and will probably bump into a lot of things, so ceramic will probably be a good everyday wearer.
Thanks again! |
19 February 2014, 12:14 AM | #21 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Cave
Watch: Sundial
Posts: 33,940
|
I see them as two different watches. Get the one that you like best.
|
20 February 2014, 09:09 AM | #22 |
⭐⭐⭐⭐2024 SubLV41 sponsor & Boutique Seller
Join Date: Apr 2011
Real Name: Thanh Takuya
Location: Dont mess w Texas
Watch: AP/Rolex/PP
Posts: 52,734
|
Agreed! Different watches and looks as well. So get the one you like most.
__________________
2 Factor Authentication Security Active Instagram @takuyawatches |
19 February 2014, 12:23 AM | #23 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Real Name: HC
Location: London, UK
Watch: Sea-Dweller 4000
Posts: 186
|
The main difference in aesthetics apart from the glossy finish of the ceramic is that the ceramic bezel appears much thicker/fatter than the metal bezel, with the maxi dial looks very different to the older subs, much chunkier
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
19 February 2014, 12:29 AM | #24 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Real Name: Charles B
Location: GMT -7
Watch: Hulk 116610LV
Posts: 6,131
|
Everyone so far has just focused on the ceramic bezels, the OP asked about the differences between the ceramic models vs the older models.
The Submariner, for example, has a much nicer (IMO) solid center link bracelet, wider lugs (more squared off appearance) and the superb Glidelock clasp which allows quick adjustments to always dial in the perfect fit. I own both and greatly prefer the feel of the newer models.
__________________
Hulk 116610LV + GMT II 126710 BLNR + Explorer 124270 + Air King 126900 + Submariner 16613LB |
19 February 2014, 12:41 AM | #25 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Real Name: Neil
Location: UK
Watch: ing ships roll in
Posts: 59,368
|
Quote:
|
|
19 February 2014, 12:33 AM | #26 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Real Name: Anthony
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Watch: Dblue
Posts: 6,723
|
just for comparison, not the best quality cell phone pic ive taken, but you get the idea
|
19 February 2014, 12:59 AM | #27 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: VT
Watch: 16610
Posts: 93
|
LOVE the blue lume.
|
19 February 2014, 01:02 AM | #28 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Real Name: pete
Location: NYC
Watch: 116610LN
Posts: 1,011
|
ceramic
|
19 February 2014, 01:09 AM | #29 |
2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Sep 2013
Real Name: Danny
Location: Bay Area CA
Watch: Yellow Gold
Posts: 20,301
|
Ceramic plus you would love the band better.
|
19 February 2014, 01:13 AM | #30 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Real Name: Anthony
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Watch: Dblue
Posts: 6,723
|
mmmm ceramic daytona :)
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.