Patek stainless steel type?

[walds11]

I read an article "Patek Philippe Nautilus vs Audemars Piguet Royal Oak." by Fratello Watches. The article states that the stainless steel used for the Nautilus and Royal Oak is a scratch magnet. Also the article states that different kind of stainless steel is being used compared to other brand's sports watches...What type of stainless steel does Patek use? 316L? I assume they aren't using 904L, which Rolex uses. Why doesn't Patek use the higher quality stainless steel, especially in a sports watch that is supposed to take a beating?

[Cru Jones]

It's not the steel of the RO & Nautilus that is inherently more prone to scratches, it's the finely finished flat surfaces that show marks more easily.

As for 904L steel, it is more corrosion resistant and can be polished very well on an industrial scale, but it's not more scratch resistant. Some even think it scratches more easily than 316L. Anyway, it's supposed advantages are largely marketing driven....Otherwise, AP, PP and other high-end brands surely would have adopted it long ago.

[locutus49]

If you are OCD about scratches you may want to buy a cheaper brand. Scratches are a fact of life and most wearers just live with it.

[KarlS]

https://www.quora.com/904l-steel-versus-316l-steel

I understand that 904 is more expensive but that's probably down to smaller market Redha the more popular 316 which is used in marine and surgical instruments. Hardness seems to be the same and I guess Rockwell test should reflect this.

[walds11]

Originally Posted by Cru Jones

It's not the steel of the RO & Nautilus that is inherently more prone to scratches, it's the finely finished flat surfaces that show marks more easily.

As for 904L steel, it is more corrosion resistant and can be polished very well on an industrial scale, but it's not more scratch resistant. Some even think it scratches more easily than 316L. Anyway, it's supposed advantages are largely marketing driven....Otherwise, AP, PP and other high-end brands surely would have adopted it long ago.

Great info, thanks for sharing It totally make sense that the finely finished/polished flat surfaces show marks more easily.

Originally Posted by locutus49

If you are OCD about scratches you may want to buy a cheaper brand. Scratches are a fact of life and most wearers just live with it.

Nah, not OCD about scratches at all, just curious about the SS that PP uses. You should see my SubC Date. It's look like someone dropped it through moving lawn mower blades.

Originally Posted by KarlS

https://www.quora.com/904l-steel-versus-316l-steel

I understand that 904 is more expensive but that's probably down to smaller market Redha the more popular 316 which is used in marine and surgical instruments. Hardness seems to be the same and I guess Rockwell test should reflect this.

Thanks for sharing

[PJ S]

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=451126
https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=279245
https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=29629
https://www.rolexforums.com/showthre...=506406&page=3

[realmiti]

Nautilus 5711 is (mainly) 904L.
They don't advertise much about this. Probably because more advanced material like ceramic is far superior.

[KBM]

Originally Posted by Cru Jones

It's not the steel of the RO & Nautilus that is inherently more prone to scratches, it's the finely finished flat surfaces that show marks more easily.

As for 904L steel, it is more corrosion resistant and can be polished very well on an industrial scale, but it's not more scratch resistant. Some even think it scratches more easily than 316L. Anyway, it's supposed advantages are largely marketing driven....Otherwise, AP, PP and other high-end brands surely would have adopted it long ago.

Well said, Cru.