Steel vs. Ceramic

[sdlivin]

Pro's vs. Cons of the older steel models vs. the ceramic models?

[padi56]

Originally Posted by sdlivin

Pro's vs. Cons of the older steel models vs. the ceramic models?

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.

[travisb]

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.

[Singslinger]

What Travis said - spot on!

And yes, I'm a pro-ceramic man myself.

[joe100]

Ceramic is shiny and nice. That said, it costs big money to replace. The aluminum insert was more user friendly

[Ru4scuba]

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

[antbkny]

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.

[Jack T]

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?

[landroverking]

Originally Posted by Rolex Dude

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.

What wrist presence? Does that mean look at me I have a Rolex?

[kilyung]

I see them as two different watches. Get the one that you like best.

[antbkny]

Originally Posted by landroverking

What wrist presence? Does that mean look at me I have a Rolex?

the ceramic bezel definitely adds to the bling factor and grabs attention. if you are looking for low key, than the ceramic bezel models aren't for you.

[hhcave]

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

[SaddleSC]

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.

[antbkny]

just for comparison, not the best quality cell phone pic ive taken, but you get the idea

[AK797]

Originally Posted by SaddleSC

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.

Agree with Charles, plus maxi dial and blue lume.

[levic900rr]

LOVE the blue lume.

[petenyc]

ceramic

[Danny83]

Ceramic plus you would love the band better.

[antbkny]

mmmm ceramic daytona :)

[FTX I]

I always wanted a Submariner but I could never justify the money asked for one with the old bracelet, so the release of the new models was important to me. The ceramic insert came with them and I cant complain. Love it.

[tkerrmd]

Originally Posted by Singslinger

What Travis said - spot on!

And yes, I'm a pro-ceramic man myself.

+1

[Wesley Crusher]

The ceramic models a few great improvements over the older models. Maxi dial, ceramic bezel, solid bracelets, better clasps, etc... There is no comparison, really.

[elcompa]

I especially like the solid link band that comes with the newer ceramic models. Heavier feel, better clasp, easy-link. The blue lume is nice and the larger case without really making it a bigger watch is god by me too. The fact that the creams bezel won't fade and always looks new is just a bonus.

That sais, I'ii ill be in the market for a 1675 once funds allow. I love the idea of going from Pepsi to Black at will. Coke never really turned me on.

As far as the GMT in general, I think they really got it right with the 1675.

[elcompa]

These are some pix I found posted on the net (not mine) when I was trying to "see" the difference between the ceramic and "vintage" models. I hope this helps.


compare maxresdefault.jpg

compare Steel-Sub-Comparisson-1-600x386.jpg

compare subs comparison2.jpg

compare subs DSC02309.jpg

[ronricks]

Have always said the bracelet/clasp alone is worth it to buy the Ceramic models.

[Keith1]

Originally Posted by Jack T

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?

+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.

[jack81]

Originally Posted by Rolex Dude

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.

Thats a very nice shot

[Cru Jones]

absolute best ceramic watch i've seen is the ceramic AP Diver.

as for rolex, all has pretty much been said. for each model, there are pros and cons each way.

i have a ceramic submariner that i love, so, if i were to get a GMT, it would be a prior generation.

[Broker Boy]

Yep, lots of talk about the potential to break the ceramic bezel but never any actual stories or pictures. My ceramic bezel has held up well to everyday use.

I own the older sub and the new one. The ceramic sub is incredible.

[QueueCumber]

I prefer ceramic. Nothing I do with a watch on is a threat to the ceramic getting damaged, unless of course it falls out on its own...