Quote:
Originally Posted by eightbore
There are plenty of stories here on TRF (and other forums) of broken or chipped bezels that are often associated with pricey repairs/replacements. I agree that the ceramic might look better, but it is absolutely "apples to oranges" in terms of "durability" as expressed in cost/benefit terms. In the abstract, I agree that ceramic is surely more difficult to scratch, chip, or crack than the old aluminum inserts. BUT, the old aluminum inserts cost what....$30? Given that, I am now really curious to see what this bezel insert costs to replace given what a show Rolex has made of how difficult/expensive the color combination was to produce. For now, let's be kind to Rolex and say they charge $600 for a new bezel insert (bet it's more). Are you really trying to tell me that the aluminum inserts are/were 20x more likely to need replacement? If they were not, then it seems to me that ceramic is a really poor value proposition....particularly on a watch renowned for its "durability".
 |
The ceramic insert has been a component on a Rolex watch now for around 7-8 years (maybe longer) so given the volume sold I not worried!
There has been a few on here granted but then how many ceramic insert equipped watches are owned on forum!