Broken Ceramic Insert

[drmizzou]

Man! Sounds like you’ve got the right attitude about it all OP! While I’m not nearly as adventurous as you, at least this isn’t a thread about a hairline scratch on the clasp and someone thinking about sending it in for polishing etc...

[enginerd]

Oh how I love the old ones...let me count the ways.

[toxicavenger]

Op thanks for sharing your experience with us. I have to say I am tinkerer also. I believe that when you are you are the guy who figures stuff out, instead of sitting on your hands all day paying people to do it. So my hat is off to you.

Bummer on the install. I wonder if a crystal press with a wide die would have worked better? I do not know.

Either way good luck.

[JacksonStone]

Originally Posted by SearChart

You can't keep your old insert if you want a new one, they are on exchange base only.

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?

[Brian Page]

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?

Good question

[Wizardly]

Very sorry this happened to you. It will be sorted out in time. Throw money at it. That's what's its for.

For me, even thought I'm a 'hands on' guy, and have opened, adjusted, changed straps on more than a few vintage, new, (although 'lesser') watches, I will never perform any maintenance on my new Rolex. Never. I probably won't even changed the strap myself or adjust links. For me, one false move and you can't take that moment back.

[Kyle3130]

Originally Posted by Gtecko

so glad I have a 5 series GMT, popping the bezel off and changing the insert like no other haha
I feel for the OP though,,, looks like an expensive fix.

Originally Posted by enginerd

Oh how I love the old ones...let me count the ways.

Another pro for the 5 digits!

OP, did you at least research how to do it before you attempted it?

[SearChart]

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?

Tricky one, I have no idea.

[JacksonStone]

Originally Posted by SearChart

Tricky one, I have no idea.

I can't imagine they wouldn't service it. That would render the watch forever ruined. I know Rolex/RSC is finicky, but surely they're not draconian. (I hope.)

[RTG]

Originally Posted by EddieK12

Well, curiosity pushed me to see what the assembly of the insert is like myself in person. A normal pry in between the case and bezel popped it, and cracked it at the noon marker... THEN FIGURING OUT THIS FUNKY SPRING AND PLASTIC GASKET.
Put it back together, hard to rotate.. took it apart, put the gasket in clearly the wrong spot putting pressure on the insert from the inside out, pushed down to snap it in and BOOM. Figured someone would enjoy some ceramic Pepsi brittle..
It's a one time use gasket guys lol

Thanks for sharing. I admire your bravery but 'curiosity killed the cat'. Might I suggest 'if it isn't broke, don't fix it' instead.

Please let us know what the repair or replacement costs.

[mmmmp]

Originally Posted by Dsmith1974

Bravo sir! Curiosity and learning is what it’s all about. I would feel more united with this watch than ever once its fixed up. Now would be a good time to buy a tropic strap and wear it without the bezel like Marlon Brando in Apocalypse Now for a few weeks.

And thanks for sharing! ����

Yes, Duncan has it right. As an intrepid and curious guy myself, I frequently used to (sometimes foolishly) disassemble things just to see what made 'em tick. pun intended) Although I got into some "jackpots" myself, I luckily was able to avoid completely messing up the my 'expiditions' but danger was always just around the corner. I was aware of my limitations which usually stopped me from committing some truly diabolic mistakes.

Although this example will cost the OP some bucks, ya can't fault a guy for being curious and wanting to learn. A pricy lesson but not the end if the world by any means. Don't tamper with the mvt - no good can come of that.

Good luck and please post the follow up.

Mark

Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk

[Onikage]

Originally Posted by JacksonStone

I can't imagine they wouldn't service it. That would render the watch forever ruined. I know Rolex/RSC is finicky, but surely they're not draconian. (I hope.)

Losing the shards during an accident isn't unimaginable. Unless they expect you to collect them.. Perhaps wearing a plaster cast or bandages might help when taking an insertless watch in.

[SearChart]

Originally Posted by JacksonStone

I can't imagine they wouldn't service it. That would render the watch forever ruined. I know Rolex/RSC is finicky, but surely they're not draconian. (I hope.)

Of course, but these rules are to prevent people from obtaining spare bezels which they will inevitably sell...

According to the general rules these are on exchange base only, but I can definitely see some scenarios where you'd get a new insert without having to send in a broken/lost one.

[JacksonStone]

Originally Posted by Onikage

Losing the shards during an accident isn't unimaginable.

I was thinking that, too. Sometimes saving the scraps might not be an option.

[j-watch]

Actually, the real interesting part of this equation will be when Rolex Service replaces that bezel,........... will it be the original color (can't tell from his photo's if it's the lighter more pastel variant, or the seemingly newer darker version), and what the OP will think about that if it's not the same as what he had???

[Navarino]

Ouch. That hurt just looking at that photo.

Best of luck getting this fixed by RSC. I personally would be much happier with a mk1 bezel over the new, darker mk2s.

[jfmiii]

Originally Posted by SearChart

Yes... This is MSRP excluding VAT and the cost of placing the bezel.

ummm...if anyone can get one for CHF 471, ill gladly pay 2x that!

[Chester01]

Yes well. This should end the ceramic is almost as tough as aluminum business. Yes they can and will break and can chip as well. No place on a tool watch.

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by enginerd

Oh how I love the old ones...let me count the ways.

That’s the difference between tool watch and jewelry right there. No doubt you have a classic tool watch.

[JacksonStone]

Originally Posted by Chester01

Yes well. This should end the ceramic is almost as tough as aluminum business. Yes they can and will break and can chip as well. No place on a tool watch.

In theory you're right, but that perspective overlooks the reality that mechanical watches essentially ceased being tools once there were better tools on the market, namely quartz and digital. The entire Swiss watch industry almost died as a result, and it had to reinvent itself as a luxury industry. Think of it in real tool terms: if you need to hammer a nail into a wall, are you going to use a $25 hammer from Stanley, or are you going to spend $5,000 on a Louis Vuitton hammer? Rolex watches aren't really tools any more, no matter how we might like to romanticize them. Name me one situation for which a watch is needed simply to perform a function, and odds are I can come up with an option that is far cheaper, and more effective, than any Rolex.

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by JacksonStone

In theory you're right, but that perspective overlooks the reality that mechanical watches essentially ceased being tools once there were better tools on the market, namely quartz and digital. The entire Swiss watch industry almost died as a result, and it had to reinvent itself as a luxury industry. Think of it in real tool terms: if you need to hammer a nail into a wall, are you going to use a $25 hammer from Stanley, or are you going to spend $5,000 on a Louis Vuitton hammer? Rolex watches aren't really tools any more, no matter how we might like to romanticize them. Name me one situation for which a watch is needed simply to perform a function, and odds are I can come up with an option that is far cheaper, and more effective, than any Rolex.

This are nice points taken to an extreme. The reality is the the old school versions were real tool watches and hold up better than the current versions. As evidenced by the picture, simply not a debatable point.

And sorry I have had cheaper watches fail big when I needed them on my job. There are some of us myself included that still need these to function as tools. I have tried cheaper watches, and no dice for me. If a cheaper watch gets it done for you great and enjoy.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Halitosis]

Thank you for the lesson sir (and also the stiff upper lip in the face of adversity!)

[JacksonStone]

Originally Posted by Chester01

This are nice points taken to an extreme. The reality is the the old school versions were real tool watches and hold up better than the current versions. As evidenced by the picture, simply not a debatable point.

And sorry I have had cheaper watches fail big when I needed them on my job. There are some of us myself included that still need these to function as tools. I have tried cheaper watches, and no dice for me. If a cheaper watch gets it done for you great and enjoy.

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.

[whatsthetime?]

Originally Posted by lightingball2

i'm curious, but why would you want to take a part your watch if you are not a watch maker. I have NO desire to even attempt that......that sounds like an expensive oopsey!

I've always disassembled almost everything I've owned. Just something I enjoy doing, as well as it being a learning experience, either good or bad.

Originally Posted by BisonHead

I take it the Ceramic inserts are quite expensive compared to the old skool ones?

Originally Posted by stylinleems

That's going to be a $800-1000 mistake... Ouch.

The ceramic bezel insert is under $500.00 total from RSC, as was already mentioned.

[stylinleems]

Originally Posted by whatsthetime?

I've always disassembled almost everything I've owned. Just something I enjoy doing, as well as it being a learning experience, either good or bad.



The ceramic bezel insert is under $500.00 total from RSC, as was already mentioned.

Correct however, I did not realize CHF and USD is par or close to (as per Google), so it's $500 as what was quoted. It would be about $700 CDN.

Another member broke his insert last year on the WG Pepsi and I believe it was about $800 or so (but could be wrong).

[Speedbird-1]

Rolex do, market many of their products as 'Professional' timepieces.
Rating them, by inference and implication to be, professional 'tools'.

A glass hammer, would be a delicate fragile 'tool', capable of hammering,
but only very carefully, but a hammer, a 'tool' just the same.
The ceramic insert relegates some of Geneva's tool watches, to
the glass hammer, toolbox.

[MP5]

Sorry man

[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

[Odie-r]

Daaaaaang. Learning hurts.

[Lemonvr6]

Originally Posted by AK797

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

this