Broken Ceramic Insert

[Calatrava r]

Never do this stuff. Let Rolex do it.

[Calatrava r]

Originally Posted by JacksonStone

What happens if someone were to throw away the old, broken insert without thinking, and didn't have it to submit at the time of repair? Would Rolex refuse service?

They can and probably would refuse.

[EddieK12]

Originally Posted by dwjez14

Sucks man. Would that make it a Diet Pepsi now ? I just wish I had one to wear. You are taking yours apart. I hope the repair is not to heavy on your pocket book. Hope you got it at retail so the repair doesn’t sting as bad

Thank you for this. This is the comment I was looking for! Diet Pepsi NOW!!
Fortunately or unfortunately, I did pay quite the premium for this, not retail.

To update everyone else, the local Rolex AD made me go home and get the broken insert. They said it is a must to get a replacement. He estimated a 3 week return time and roughly $350 guesstimate. I will let y'all know when its back and will post a new thread of what the new insert looks like with the total $ amount. SCIENCE!!

[JacksonStone]

Originally Posted by Calatrava r

They can and probably would refuse.

SearChart acknowledged RSC would likely make an exception. It would be completely unreasonable to refuse repair of a part that may not be able to be provided for exchange, and that, without the repair of which, the watch essentially loses its total value. If Rolex is really that rigid, then they've truly gone over to the dark side.

Is this the kind of thing an independent with a Rolex parts account could do?

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by JacksonStone

All well and good, but your anecdotal experience doesn't change the broader reality of the market. If the higher-end Swiss brands tried to compete on purely functional terms with quartz and digital watches - and now cell phones and smart watches - the industry would be gone. Luxury is now the its raison d'être, and the watches reflect this. This is simply not a debatable point.

Again, not really sure how this is relevant. My point was the old tool watches hold up better than today’s jewelry. I was not commenting on the economics of the 1970’s. The so called quartz crisis was just a temporary fad and Rolex and the large houses came out just fine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jerrocop]

Sounds like something I would try. Spendy mistake but I'm still tempted . . .

[Finslayer83]

That stinks.

I too am in Franklin.

[Paul_I]

Maybe you'll get lucky and your next one won't be purple.

[whatsthetime?]

Originally Posted by EddieK12

He estimated a 3 week return time and roughly $350 guesstimate.

The bezel insert alone is $375.00

[JacksonStone]

Originally Posted by Chester01

Again, not really sure how this is relevant. My point was the old tool watches hold up better than today’s jewelry.

You said ceramic has no place on a tool watch. From that, I inferred you were saying they are still tool watches with features inappropriate for their purpose. If you were saying they aren't tool watches, then I agree with you.

[crazycarlitos]

Originally Posted by whatsthetime?

The bezel insert alone is $375.00

That’s not bad considering it’s a ceramic insert.

The 16610LV green aluminum insert was about $250-300 when I replaced mine few years ago at RSC (can’t rememeber exact $)

Off topic: doesn’t the gmt look pretty plain without the bezel? What a difference little color makes. Lol

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by JacksonStone

You said ceramic has no place on a tool watch. From that, I inferred you were saying they are still tool watches with features inappropriate for their purpose. If you were saying they aren't tool watches, then I agree with you.

I was saying the ceramic versions are more jewelry now. Nothing wrong with that and as you pointed out, perhaps part evolution as many don’t really need them for that anymore.

However, The pre-ceramic were indeed pure tool watches and crafted that way. Function over form, nothing more nothing extra.

The ceramic versions “evolution” is really not adding any extra function, simply
Cosmetic changes.

The old bezels while easily scratched but cheap to replace and less likely to fail as evidenced by the post. The old bracelets had 4-5 fine adjustments as were lighter- when wearing them for the intended purpose is helpful. The new bracelets are nicer , I have one on my Daytona but adds no extra strength.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[101031-28]

I still can't believe you would do that to your BLRO

[MSchott]

Originally Posted by EddieK12

I don't think you should think that you need to be a watchmaker to do some basic things on a watch. You can swap your bands, swap metal inserts out, and open your case back to check it out. Those are all things that are simple in my opinion..

With little knowledge and experience, you can take your movement out with a small flat head screwdriver, a thin pin, and a some steady hands :)

From there it gets a little more advanced but still not to difficult.. If you break something, it will cost you some money, but that's a lesson.

Can't say I agree about opening the case back on a fairly high WR watch unless you have a replacement gasket and a pressure testing device.

[CaliBear]

Here's your sign.... Apparently there are two extremes on TRF - either too scared to remove the stickers, or HULK SMASH!!

[whatsthetime?]

Originally Posted by crazycarlitos

That’s not bad considering it’s a ceramic insert.

The 16610LV green aluminum insert was about $250-300 when I replaced mine few years ago at RSC (can’t rememeber exact $)

Off topic: doesn’t the gmt look pretty plain without the bezel? What a difference little color makes. Lol

No, not too bad. After taxes and shipping it come in just under $500.00 US as mentioned.

Any 'tool watch' looks naked without their insert bezel.

[Onikage]

Originally Posted by AK797

Also the insert's font looks very thin, maybe the lighting.

I don't think ceramic pepsi fakes exist (yet). Only Rolex can do it.

[whatsthetime?]

Originally Posted by Onikage

I don't think ceramic pepsi fakes exist (yet). Only Rolex can do it.

They clone fake Land Rovers (literally) so I'm sure Rolex isn't the only one that can do it.

[Onikage]

Originally Posted by whatsthetime?

They clone fake Land Rovers (literally) so I'm sure Rolex isn't the only one that can do it.

I brush up on what the fake factories are turning out. Essential practice for a pre owned buyer. I've yet to see one. Tag Heuer would be doing it if they could.

[TickTockChuck]

Wow, now that's quite the thing indeed! As you found out, ceramic by it's nature is super hard but brittle. I would expect that Rolex uses special service tools for that. The aluminum inserts have some flex and are more forgiving. A brave but expensive endeavor on your part. Thanks for sharing though. Amazing how much the bezels add to the look of the GMTs. I had also thought the replacement Cerachrom BLRO bezels would be much more expensive given all the fuss about their development by Rolex. Good luck in your repairs and hope it will be as good as new again. Cheers!

[Etschell]

You'll never live this down but it is what it is. I'd never try this on a 6 digit only a 5.

[Ben.McDonald7]

Ouch, just ouch. I can see why you were curious as I used to have a 16710 with all 3 bezels and switched them myself often. Hope you can get it fixed in a reasonable amount of time.

Sent from my VS996 using Tapatalk

[ArL]

I admire your bravery even its wrong move.
You have guts to do it yourself, appreciate it for sharing with us


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bxtek]

Wow, I'm sorry to see this thread and what happened here! Thanks for sharing though, as this will save other curious owners from doing the same thing. I'm one of those curious types too! Wishing you a smooth and speedy repair.

[EddieK12]

Originally Posted by MSchott

Can't say I agree about opening the case back on a fairly high WR watch unless you have a replacement gasket and a pressure testing device.

No offense, but that is like those who use a torque wrench to tighten their oil drain bolt.. It's not really a necessity to replace the case back gasket just because you opened it a few times, I would say time is the gaskets worst enemy.. not having common sense with a case back opening press and stripping the teeth is another battle I can see some running into though.

[KVNNSCHNG]

Interesting numbers being thrown around in regards to the replacement cost of the insert... Just received my Hulk back from RSC Dallas and the insert alone was $630.00 USD. I’m willing to guess the cost of the BLRO insert is considerably more due to the bi-color configuration.

[JacksonStone]

Originally Posted by KVNNSCHNG

Interesting numbers being thrown around in regards to the replacement cost of the insert... Just received my Hulk back from RSC Dallas and the insert alone was $630.00 USD. I’m willing to guess the cost of the BLRO insert is considerably more due to the bi-color configuration.

Bas gave us the Swiss price. The CHF is nearly on the penny with the dollar right now, but all that tells us is the conversion of the Swiss price; that doesn't mean that's what US RSCs charge for the part. I would guess you're right that if the LVc insert's part cost is $630, a BLRO insert is going to be more.

OP, when you get a quote, would you be good enough to update the thread so we know?

[Fat_ninja]

Is this a mark4?

[Gotham777]

Like Thomas Edison said: “I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work.”

Bravo for your curiosity! Considering the secondary market price of the watch $500ish is not too bad.

[cvo]

Thanks for sharing - I can’t wait to see it get fixed and back on your wrist soon!