Gold vs Stainless

[Devildog]

This thread needs a pic

I’ve had this for nearly 2 years now. Bezel was unmarked when I got it. I’m generally pretty careful with my watches and whilst ii think it still looks great, under bright lights or sunlight it’s clear that the bezel in particular is covered in micro swirls and fine scratches when viewed closely. Although I would say that the marks between the 85 and 70 markers in this picture are mostly dust and a thumb print since washed off)

None of which, however, takes anything away from the pleasure of wearing it





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[geoach]

Originally Posted by espanol

+1

As I get older I realize how taxing modern Rolex watches can be on the wrist. Having recently bought a 14270 Explorer 1, the (lack of) weight in Rolex of old wears much more comfortable IMO. Wouldn't enjoy wearing super case solid gold every day.

+2

[1st amg]

Love the feel and look of any gold pieces. Just something special.

[Calatrava r]

Your gold model has PCLs which show the scratches more than the brushed finish of the Sub. All Rolexes scratch and from my experience more so than any other brand.

[mato123]

Originally Posted by Calatrava r

All Rolexes scratch and from my experience more so than any other brand.

It's because 904L steel (that Rolex uses) is softer than 316L steel (that most of the brands use).

[PenDelicate]

OP, avoid gold at all costs.

Here's my daily since last April:
20250130_112859d by Tom Kennedy, on Flickr

Bezel completely destroyed by scratches, as is the case though you can't see it clearly here. Bracelet? Just look at it! It's a mess. Ravaged by micro-scratches, dings, dongs and warpings.

Folks, I know the economy isn't the best right now, but please - please - find a little compassion and donate generously to Sufferers From Swirls: www.paypal.com/SufferersFromSwirls

No one should have to live with this shame.

Sufferers From Swirls: because steel friends care ...