So have Rolex taken us for a ride with this new Ceramic Bezel?

[RolexPete32]

JJ what is a tosser????? I posted this question on another thread not sure if you will see it. So I know you will check in here. I need to know. thx

Peter.

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=107878

[Safetrends]

Originally Posted by Blendhpi

JJ what is a tosser????? I posted this question on another thread not sure if you will see it. So I know you will check in here. I need to know. thx

Peter.

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=107878

Peter do not loose sleep over this, have some more egg nog and enjoy TRF.

[kkwn98]

Originally Posted by deepsea72

It is no doubt that sticking incongruous PCL on watches that should NEVER have them (SS Daytona/GMT - they better leave the SS SUB alone) is turning the type of buyer that would have previously purchased ROLEX away to either the pre-owned watch market or to other brands: to more subtle and masculine brands who respect their history and don't turn masculine classics into garish pieces of jewelry. They seem to to be going to for the market that would think Dubai is a very tasteful, subtle and understated place.

I can only assume ROLEX have enlisted the services of either...

Marc Jacobs
Thom Browne
Michael Kors
Alber Elbaz
Sir Norman Hartnell
Christian Dior
Rudi Gernreich
Sir Hardy Amies
Yves Saint Laurent
Valentino Garavani
Roy Halston Frowick
Calvin Klein
Gianni Versace
Giorgio Armani
Willi Smith
Jean-Paul Gaultier
Alexandre Herchcovitch
Domenico Dolce
Stefano Gabbana
Tom Ford
Alexander McQueen
Isaac Mizrahi
Cristobal Balenciaga
Leigh Bowery
Ossie Clark
[Perry Ellis
Etre (Romain de Tirtoff)
John Galliano
Jean Paul Gaultier
Karl Lagerfeld
William Ivey Long
Hedi Slimane
Alexander Wang
Richie Rich
Travis Rains

...for new ROLEX design concepts. "Polish those center links boys: a divers watch, a watch about motor sport, how savage, no, it must be shiny and frail".

Do ROLEX actually listen to feedback from the very people that love and more importantly have loved their watches over the years, i wonder.

How on earth does polishing centre links suddenly make a watch frail? This, coupled with the fact a bunch of the designers on your list are dead, I really do wonder if you know what you're talking about.

It really does seem to escape you that the world is a big place, bigger than your neighbourhood, and that your notions of what something should be, or what constitutes a particular thing, aren't necessarily universal.

Then again, from someone who says Rolex has lost a lot of customers to other brands because of the changes they've made, but without offering anything verifiable to substantiate (not that you could), I guess I'm not really surprised.

As for your last question, clearly they're listening; which is why they've done what they've done. It's just that they haven't listened to YOU.

Again, why is Rolex always uppercased in your posts?

[STEELINOX]

Originally Posted by kkwn98

How on earth does polishing centre links suddenly make a watch frail? This, coupled with the fact a bunch of the designers on your list are dead, I really do wonder if you know what you're talking about.

It really does seem to escape you that the world is a big place, bigger than your neighbourhood, and that your notions of what something should be, or what constitutes a particular thing, aren't necessarily universal.

Then again, from someone who says Rolex has lost a lot of customers to other brands because of the changes they've made, but without offering anything verifiable to substantiate (not that you could), I guess I'm not really surprised.

As for your last question, clearly they're listening; which is why they've done what they've done. It's just that they haven't listened to YOU.

Again, why is Rolex always uppercased in your posts?

I always 'uppercase' the word, 'ROLEX' !
Its how it appears on the dial fer 'creyonoutloud' !

[Safetrends]

Originally Posted by STEELINOX

I always 'uppercase' the word, 'ROLEX' !
Its how it appears on the dial fer 'creyonoutloud' !

:r ofl:

[STEELINOX]

[recolimited]

I think that they look REALLY cool. Good marketing and eye appeal.

[DS/B MINI S]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Maybe it's not so brittle after all!!

My thoughts exactly. Never had a problem with the bezel on any of my watches. I've banged a few off walls, doors, etc, but no damage. I did break a crystal on a watch years ago. I was running down a hallway at school and a door knob smacked the crystal. In my book replacing the crystal was my 'stupid tax' payment

I think this thread is much to do about nothing I mean how many broken bezels do we know about vs. THOUASANDS of ceramic bezel watches sold

[republik-of-mancunia]

At the risk of re-opening all this, one of JJ's orignial questions was how much would it cost to replace the ceramic bezel. CK8 was kind enough to post the answer to this (for UK folks, anyway):

Originally Posted by Ck8

Checked out with RSC London.

Ceramic insert £225 plus VAT
Whole SS bezel £668 plus VAT. But strangely the gold one is the same price??

here:
http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=103546

The brittleness of the ceramic bezel certainly made me think twice about getting a GMT-IIc, but ultimately the risks in it breaking/shattering are low (IMHO - and as evidenced by the low frequency of such being reported on this very forum) when compared with the likelihood of scratching an aluminium insert.

Overall, I prefer the risks associated with shattering the ceramic insert (unlikely but expensive if it happens) against the almost certain scratching of an aluminium. But then again, as I own a IIc, I'm bound to justify it to myself somehow!!

[JBat]

Those numbers work out to about $363 and $1077 USD. Not cheap by any stretch, but my GMT has proved to be pretty durable so far, surviving many whacks on various objects.

[VeryDeep]

Originally Posted by republik-of-mancunia

At the risk of re-opening all this, one of JJ's orignial questions was how much would it cost to replace the ceramic bezel. CK8 was kind enough to post the answer to this (for UK folks, anyway):



here:
http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=103546

The brittleness of the ceramic bezel certainly made me think twice about getting a GMT-IIc, but ultimately the risks in it breaking/shattering are low (IMHO - and as evidenced by the low frequency of such being reported on this very forum) when compared with the likelihood of scratching an aluminium insert.

Overall, I prefer the risks associated with shattering the ceramic insert (unlikely but expensive if it happens) against the almost certain scratching of an aluminium. But then again, as I own a IIc, I'm bound to justify it to myself somehow!!

I've just read through this entire thread and I think the above sums it up for me. If my DSSD bezel shatters, I'll replace it. Rather that than put up with dings, dents and scratches. This is obviously a personal issue and individuals' mileage will vary. It's a sort of 'binary' issue. Shatter = replace.

However, scratch, ding and dent = suffer until replace. Not for me.

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by sarkozezette

Yes.

Hi and welcome to TRF.

Can you be a little more specific and elaborate please?

Cheers - JJ

[JBat]

Lol!

[layne]

Well by reading these post one would think that the ceramic bezel insert should be labelled "fragile, handle with care".

If i did not know any better i'd be scared away from ceramic bezels, but 2 weeks ago i had an experience that to me, just reinforces how good the ceramic inserts are. I whacked my GMTIIc ceramic bezel that hard against a metal chair, i thought i had cracked it. The impact was that heavy some paint from the chair implanted itself onto the cyclops and ceramic bezel. I thought the bezel was cracked (& the cyclops damaged) but after a quick clean up, not a mark remained. I was blown away. An Aluminium insert would've been damaged for sure! Needless to say, since this occurred, i have much more confidence with the ceramic insert to take impact knocks.