AP is disappointing in this respect...

[brmeyers]

Hey everyone,

I really want or I should say "wanted" to get an AP sports watch,
but doing research they really do not make many or any durable
and scratch resistant watches anymore especially in 42 or smaller (not including discontinued models).
They discontinued the ceramic divers, discontinued forged carbon and currently
all you can get is steel or rose gold in the 42 or less size (according to guy at the AP boutique).

I just don't get why AP doesn't make a watch that is "Richard Mille-like" in durability,
scratch resistance and shock absorption, considering how closely they work with RM.

Just venting a little, but considering the popularity of RM, you would think AP would make some middle tier priced durable,
light weight and scratch resistant high end sports watches in 42mm (or even 44 for that matter).

I am saving for a RM 055, because their ceramic is 1400 vickers (more scratch resistant than rolex which is 1200),
it's light weight, comfortable (some say most comfortable watch they have ever worn),
and shock resistant, up to 50 G's or something like that so you can play golf or tennis with no worries.

If I am missing something in the AP collection that comes even close to this, I am all ears.

And I am curious what everyone thinks IS the most durable AP watch.
I don't have as much AP knowledge as many of you here which is why I am posting this...
(And no I don't want a G-shock...LOL.. I want something high end.)

Regardless, I will still probably get a 15202OR, for an all gold, and I love the brand,
I just feel there is a big void that AP is missing the boat on for people not wanting to spend $80K and up for a RM.

[BlueIn2Red]

I've never quite understood this - the RO gets a lot of criticism for being a scratch magnet, and fragile, but I don't find that at all. It's more brushed than polished, and my 15400 hides scratches a lot better than my Daytona for example.

[syahriltaher]

Originally Posted by AndyGarton

I've never quite understood this - the RO gets a lot of criticism for being a scratch magnet, and fragile, but I don't find that at all. It's more brushed than polished, and my 15400 hides scratches a lot better than my Daytona for example.

100% Agree....

Been wearing my ROO Chrono for a month now...not a single scratch.....

When I wore my Daytona for a month, all scratches suddenly appeared on polished surface....

[brmeyers]

^^ Thanks, but the 15400 is not exactly fit for sports and activities.
Seems dressier to me. I actually love the watch and almost bought it, but would not go to the gym with it on for example.
RM 55, I can go to the gym, play tennis, go to the beach and play golf...etc.. Be nice if AP had a watch that could do all this and not cost $100K.
Their look is certainly sporty enough.
I had a SS Daytona and perhaps you are right in this scratch comparison.

[BlueIn2Red]

Originally Posted by brmeyers

^^ Thanks, but the 15400 is not exactly fit for sports and activities.
Seems dressier to me. I actually love the watch and almost bought it, but would not go to the gym with it on for example.
RM 55, I can go to the gym, play tennis, go to the beach and play golf...etc.. Be nice if AP had a watch that could do all this and not cost $100K.
Their look is certainly sporty enough.
I had a SS Daytona and perhaps you are right in this scratch comparison.

For sure, I wouldn't wear my RO in the gym (golf is fine!), but nor would I wear a Richard Mille in that scenario. Does anybody really do that? Perhaps they do, I'll never own an RM so don't understand that world ... for me though the gym is the place for no watch, or possibly a dedicated fitness digital type watch.

[brmeyers]

Originally Posted by AndyGarton

For sure, I wouldn't wear my RO in the gym (golf is fine!), but nor would I wear a Richard Mille in that scenario. Does anybody really do that? Perhaps they do, I'll never own an RM so don't understand that world ... for me though the gym is the place for no watch, or possibly a dedicated fitness digital type watch.

Actually RM ceramic is 1400 vickers (making it one of most scratch resistant watches), its light weight and shock resistant.
The gym is easy for a RM to handle. No worries there.

And if i were you I would not play golf in a 15400... just saying.

I understand not everyone plays tennis and golf and wants a watch that can do it all (including beach and gym,etc) AND looks amazing too,
but I do play tennis and golf and DO want such a watch.

[locutus49]

I wear my Platona to the gym all the time and never had a problem. I wear it hiking, running, walking, too.

Originally Posted by AndyGarton

For sure, I wouldn't wear my RO in the gym (golf is fine!), but nor would I wear a Richard Mille in that scenario. Does anybody really do that? Perhaps they do, I'll never own an RM so don't understand that world ... for me though the gym is the place for no watch, or possibly a dedicated fitness digital type watch.

[masterserg]

Use and take care of scratches during service. No big deal.

[brmeyers]

Originally Posted by masterserg

Use and take care of scratches during service. No big deal.

I was considering the diver, as it seemed to be the best option, but the ceramic can chip,
the carbon fiber is susceptible to damage (nothing like the durability of RMs NTPT carbon).

SS diver maybe still an option factoring in what you say about scratches.

Curious how shock resistant it is?

[Le Chef]

These days "Sport" should really be interchangeable with "stylish". Common sense should tell you that doing high impact activities with pretty much any high end sports watch is going to end in tears.

Why not just buy a G-Shock and wear that for serious sporting activity rather than be disappointed that a particular watch can't do what it was never designed to do?

I have a 15300 that gets used as a daily watch with no special treatment and it does just fine. It's due to get a full service next year and will look like new when it comes back. But I'm never going to wear it for tennis or golf, when I could wear something more appropriate for those activities.

[brmeyers]

Originally Posted by Le Chef

These days "Sport" should really be interchangeable with "stylish". Common sense should tell you that doing high impact activities with pretty much any high end sports watch is going to end in tears.

Why not just buy a G-Shock and wear that for serious sporting activity rather than be disappointed that a particular watch can't do what it was never designed to do?

I did say in my post I didn't want a G-shock. Actually would not wear anything electronic on my wrist considering all I know about electrosmog and energy medicine.
Plus its an eyesore, I would rather not wear a watch at all than wear a G-shock.

Actually Richard Mille's won't end in tears, they are built for this. It's the price that ends in tears..LOL.. But I do feel they are worth it.
It would just be nice if AP had something as I really like the way they look.

And sport SHOULD mean sport as well as style. So I disagree in what you say about the two being interchangeable.
It's like a great looking sports car with poor or average performance specs to back up the looks.

[jschmidtdmd]

Well, AP does, they just are larger than what you want. I love the 44's.

I have opted to dump my diver as well.

JPS

[brmeyers]

Originally Posted by jschmidtdmd

Well, AP does, they just are larger than what you want. I love the 44's.

I have opted to dump my diver as well.

JPS

Yes, John that is the problem...

Would have kept my 44 if it wasn't so uncomfortable.
RM being curved vs AP being flat is what will make a difference I think.
Meeting with the guy tomorrow OR driving to Boutique ... So I should get some answers soon.

Just have been searching far and wide if there are any other high
end sports watches that can take a beating for less. I love the way APs
look, it's just unfortunate for me their best looking (and most durable) models don't fit me.

Not even sure about the 44s. I called St Pete and talked to some knowledgeable people and they said not to play gold and tennis.
So even the most rugged 44s are not really built for high impact.

[jschmidtdmd]

Keep in mind that the 55 or 35 is still a large watch, and you could most likely pull off the 44s if you are comfortable in the RM

[SMD]

AP white ceramic is 1850 vickers and black is 1350 vickers. Not smart enough to know whether 50 vickers is meaningful.

RMs are only rated to 50m. For 100K can they not make a watch water resistant to 100m?

[brmeyers]

Originally Posted by SMD

AP white ceramic is 1850 vickers and black is 1350 vickers. Not smart enough to know whether 50 vickers is meaningful.

RMs are only rated to 50m. For 100K can they not make a watch water resistant to 100m?

50 meters is more than enough for me. I am not a diver.

AP ceramic actually WAS the watch I was considering as it seemed to be the best candidate for being light weight, scratch resistance and water resistant.
It is discontinued though and not shock resistant. I called AP headquarters and they explicitly said NOT to play golf or tennis with it (or any ROO for that matter).

But scratch resistant and lightweight yes...
The fact it is brittle and can chip being discontinued now is an issue as is the lack of shock resistance to be capable of tennis and golf.
I am not saying they all chip, but it is an issue even acknowledged by AP

But I do like the watch and have thought long and hard as it is 42mm and meets most criteria I am looking for.
Great watch, It is a shame they are discontinuing all "ceramic" and forged carbon divers.

I read Rolex ceramic is 1200 vickers, so anything above that I am sure will be pretty scratch proof.
All the ceramics much better than SS and PMs and slightly better than Ti.
So on the vicker scale AP white ceramic diver is a win. Main question is the issue of chipping (not scratching).

[BlueIn2Red]

Wow, 50m only? That doesn't mean 50m of course, it means "don't submerge this watch". Seems odd for an otherwise apparently strong watch.

AP told you not to play golf with their watch? Sorry, I find that very hard to believe. They are one of the principle sponsors of professional golf across the world, with the winners of the Masters and Open already this year wearing AP.

[brmeyers]

Originally Posted by AndyGarton

Wow, 50m only? That doesn't mean 50m of course, it means "don't submerge this watch". Seems odd for an otherwise apparently strong watch.

AP told you not to play golf with their watch? Sorry, I find that very hard to believe. They are one of the principle sponsors of professional golf across the world, with the winners of the Masters and Open already this year wearing AP.

I called the headquarters in St Pete and talked to a couple different people all very knowledgeable. Maybe golfers wear it afterwards, but not rated for playing.
Doesn't mean it will break, but when you get to accelerations of driving the ball like Bubba, or shanking a shot by hitting the fairway before the ball to wear even your hand hurts from the shocks, those types of repeated blows the APs are not rated for.

Casual play probably will be ok... Maybe the people I talked to were mistaken, but I called a couple times because when I first got my ROO 44 Anthracite, I wanted to know and talked to a couple people and they all said no go on golf and tennis.

[AshAP]

AP told you not to play golf with their watch? Sorry, I find that very hard to believe. They are one of the principle sponsors of professional golf across the world, with the winners of the Masters and Open already this year wearing AP.[/QUOTE]

Golf is one of the best ways to ruin a good watch.

[goog53]

John... Enable this man with shots of your 35-01. Such a beauty!

[brmeyers]

Originally Posted by goog53

John... Enable this man with shots of your 35-01. Such a beauty!

I have been enabled... Unfortunately for me I have read the ENTIRE RM thread in the other watches forum...
Actually been through most of it twice, certain sequences of posts even more haha...

john, paul, jerry, edo, roger and several others are the KINGS of enabling in that thread...

[SMD]

My ceramic has taken some hard knocks and no issues with chips or anything like that. My diver is almost three years old and but for the ti buckle it is flawless.

[jschmidtdmd]

^ oh I have.

I think the answer here just lies in the larger sized watches.

Bottom line, is once you have that 55, you won't need another sport watch. I don't wear my RM's in the water at all. It's just my rule, so the depth thing is irrelevant to me and I know you have other water capable pieces.

It is unfortunate that AP can't meet your needs in the sized piece that you want, but again, you may not be looking soon ;)

[brmeyers]

^^ According to headquarters, AP doesn't meet my entire spectrum of needs in even the 44s. But than again, I am not most people...LOL...
I really wanted to find a AP for these purposes before jumping into RM, but then again getting RM first is only a good thing
Also just talked to Miami RM boutique and they said watches are fine in the water as long as you don't dive. They have multiple clients
that swim with them in Miami and according to the guy I talked to, no issues with the water as long as you don't dive.

I will circle back around to AP for the all gold 15202OR, just not the ROOs.
Looking like RM is going to be my sports watch.

[brmeyers]

Anyway, no disrespect here to AP... I love the brand. I am just trying to get answers.
But it's hard to be comfortable using an AP for golf and tennis when multiple people at headquarters tell you not to.
Where the RM boutiques all say go out there and play golf and tennis until your heart is content.

[edo]

Even Nadal doesn't play tennis with 720k $ Richard Mille on the "playing hand"... he strap it on the right hand and plays with the left...

Stan Wavrinka plays every match past 3 years with Diver or ROO, and consider than he hit 2-3-4 times harder than any of us, I think that you will not have problems playing tennis with the ROO...

I also hope for a new ceramic/ceremet bezel ROOs line, like Rolex fans hoped for ceramic SS Daytona :)...

[brmeyers]

Originally Posted by edo

Even Nadal doesn't play tennis with 720k $ Richard Mille on the "playing hand"... he strap it on the right hand and plays with the left...

Stan Wavrinka plays every match past 3 years with Diver or ROO, and consider than he hit 2-3-4 times harder than any of us, I think that you will not have problems playing tennis with the ROO...

I also hope for a new ceramic/ceremet bezel ROOs line, like Rolex fans hoped for ceramic SS Daytona :)...

Hi Edo, I appreciate your feedback here.. I wear my watch on my left hand which I only use with two handed backhands..

You are probably correct about the ROOs being ok for my game, but golf is a different story because I do really shank some shots and hit the ground hard.

I wish the ROO 44s fit me better, and hopefully AP will roll out some new ceramic and carbon 42s.

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by brmeyers

Hi Edo, I appreciate your feedback here.. I wear my watch on my left hand which I only use with two handed backhands..

You are probably correct about the ROOs being ok for my game, but golf is a different story because I do really shank some shots and hit the ground hard.

I wish the ROO 44s fit me better, and hopefully AP will roll out some new ceramic and carbon 42s.

in many of your posts you seem to be mixing your need for scratch resistance and your need for durability (shock resistance of the movement) like they are interchangeable when they are not. The ceramic or carbon divers are more scratch resistant, yes. Thats a cosmetic issue and not an issue dealing with the operation of the watch. But you already ruled out using a 15400 for activities such as golf due to durability, but they use the exact same movements and are thus equipped theoretically the same in terms of shock resistance. That is a durability issue of the movement related to use in high impact sports that and different to your cosmetic requirement.

The point i am making isn't SHOULD these watches be used for high impact sports vs COULD they be used for high impact sports. Its most likely possible, but probably not advisable. For example, Serena Williams played all matches at Wimbledon this year in a ROO, but who knows how well it actually functioned or will function long term, probably not great though. Some will push their watches to the max and some won't, to each their own. My point is, functionally (not cosmetically) a 15400 and a ROO diver would give you the same results in golf and tennis in terms of durability. The results would only be different in a diving situation as that is functionally where the design of the two watches is fundamentally different, not in issues of shock resistance as its the same 3120 calibre getting knocked around.

[brmeyers]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

in many of your posts you seem to be mixing your need for scratch resistance and your need for durability (shock resistance of the movement) like they are interchangeable when they are not. The ceramic or carbon divers are more scratch resistant, yes. Thats a cosmetic issue and not an issue dealing with the operation of the watch. But you already ruled out using a 15400 for activities such as golf due to durability, but they use the exact same movements and are thus equipped theoretically the same in terms of shock resistance. That is a durability issue of the movement related to use in high impact sports that and different to your cosmetic requirement.

The point i am making isn't SHOULD these watches be used for high impact sports vs COULD they be used for high impact sports. Its most likely possible, but probably not advisable. For example, Serena Williams played all matches at Wimbledon this year in a ROO, but who knows how well it actually functioned or will function long term, probably not great though. Some will push their watches to the max and some won't, to each their own. My point is, functionally (not cosmetically) a 15400 and a ROO diver would give you the same results in golf and tennis in terms of durability. The results would only be different in a diving situation as that is functionally where the design of the two watches is fundamentally different, not in issues of shock resistance as its the same 3120 calibre getting knocked around.

Let me be clear, I want a watch that is lightweight, scratch resistant and shock absorbing (and NOT QUARTZ - Serena's ROO was a Quartz).
All three. With this criteria, ROO diver > 15400. Even though both have same movement, diver is lighter and more scratch resistant.

Actually the diver was my leading candidate for the best AP sports watch to get meeting these three criteria at 42mm or less size.

Is there an AP that scores better with these three criteria?
That is the question I would like to know...
I am going to look into Neil's suggestions.

This is all helpful, because if I DONT get an RM, I want to most durable, scratch resistant and shock absorbing AP there is. Ideally 42 or less.

The reason posts were mixed and matched was based on comments and addressing different points.

So I am asking the AP experts here, which AP is most durable at 42 or less.
If there is an extraordinary AP at 44, please state too.

Again use these three criteria equally
1) lightweight
2) shock absorbing
3) scratch resistant


But thanks for the feedback.

[anothernewphone]

Originally Posted by brmeyers

But it's hard to be comfortable using an AP for golf and tennis when multiple people at headquarters tell you not to.

Just because they work for "headquarters" doesn't make them an expert, nor the authority. I've had "experts" tell me to make sure my Daytona's pushers stay screwed down, it's not safe to keep them open when washing your hands, etc. Obviously, that's very false.

"I wouldn't swim with a Planet Ocean on, the pressure you generate when your wrist hits the water isn't safe for the watch." This one is a classic.

"You shouldn't wear your watch in the shower, the steam is bad for the seals." I could go on and on.