The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Watch Forum > Rolex & Tudor Watch Topics > Rolex General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 20 August 2010, 01:09 PM   #31
buke45
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Real Name: Juan
Location: Ponce, PR
Watch: Your Butt
Posts: 1,464
I have not even heard of a destroyed aluminum Bezel, let alone seen a picture of one.
buke45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 August 2010, 01:20 PM   #32
mpkRolex
"TRF" Member
 
mpkRolex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Boston USA
Watch: BLRO Jubilee
Posts: 1,774
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil.tf001 View Post
Hi all, I was planning to make my only big watch purchase to be the new TT black sub. However I See again issues with broken bezels on the new models which is making me nervous. The main reason for the new sub is the new clasp but weighing that against a broken bezel and weeks of repair, warrantee or not has me second guessing.
I know I can insure the watch but still weeks or repair?
Thoughts please.
Neil
I think it would take the same force to shatter the sapphire crystal as to break the ceramic bezel..

I wouldnt worry too much.
mpkRolex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 August 2010, 01:26 PM   #33
mpkRolex
"TRF" Member
 
mpkRolex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Boston USA
Watch: BLRO Jubilee
Posts: 1,774
Quote:
Originally Posted by ingoodtime View Post
My GMTIIC bezel has taken some pretty tough hits and no problem whatsoever.
I am not saying none break but that the percentage of damaged bezels VS quanity being worn daily worldwide must be pretyy darn small. Lets talk about everday life and set up an example. Would you not buy a car you love because somebody might door ding it, or back into it? There are always things in life that are beyond our control. Heck, you could buy the watch, walk out of the AD and be killed in a tragic accident. Maybe your bezel will survive, maybe it won't.

If a large number of people were posting that they had bezel damage and it was frequent, well, that would add credence to a thread such as this. But until that happens, I am not wasting energy worrying. If my bezel cracks, I'll pay my repair costs and go on enjoying my watch.

Very well said buddy!!!
mpkRolex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 August 2010, 01:32 PM   #34
mpkRolex
"TRF" Member
 
mpkRolex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Boston USA
Watch: BLRO Jubilee
Posts: 1,774
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zirotti View Post
There is a price to pay when you look this good ;)

Excellent picture buddy!! Gotta love that ceramic..

This is my blackberry shot..
Attached Images
File Type: jpg IMG00358-20100815-1555.jpg (93.2 KB, 178 views)
mpkRolex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 August 2010, 01:34 PM   #35
Tek
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Aus
Watch: ALL
Posts: 318
RE: IOM nothing wrong with the old clasps and nothing wrong with ceramic bezels. What ever you decide, wear the watch and enjoy, if you worry then stay clear
Tek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 August 2010, 01:39 PM   #36
Flyjet601
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Watch: All of them
Posts: 2,789
Only time will tell about ceramics.

Years ago the Rolex engineers didnt think Tritium would turn yellow.......hands would corrode.....dials would crack......bezels would fade.....

the test of time has shown us the results of Rolex R&D.......

so who knows what will happen to a ceramic bezel in 25 years

__________________
I used to be indecisive, now I'm not sure
Flyjet601 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 August 2010, 05:51 PM   #37
Vlad@GKScott
"TRF" Member
 
Vlad@GKScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Real Name: Vlad [Scott]
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 23
Ceramic feels definitely better, just what you would expect from a luxury watch. The old ones were nice, but where getting scratched way too easily.
Just one question though.... why do you think old bezels are made out of aluminum... ?
__________________
I can't help you to buy a watch, but I can help you to make it beautiful (WP).
Vlad@GKScott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 August 2010, 06:02 PM   #38
jdc
"TRF" Member
 
jdc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Real Name: Martin
Location: UK
Posts: 7,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad@GKScott View Post
Ceramic feels definitely better, just what you would expect from a luxury watch. The old ones were nice, but where getting scratched way too easily.
Just one question though.... why do you think old bezels are made out of aluminum... ?
because they are cheap and easy to replace, the new ceramic model is the new Rolex - flashy, non tool watch, babied by 99% of owners and expensive, its a watch made to conquer a new market
jdc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 August 2010, 06:25 PM   #39
padi56
"TRF" Life Patron
 
padi56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Real Name: Peter
Location: Llanfairpwllgwyng
Watch: ing you.
Posts: 52,114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad@GKScott View Post
Ceramic feels definitely better, just what you would expect from a luxury watch. The old ones were nice, but where getting scratched way too easily.
Just one question though.... why do you think old bezels are made out of aluminum... ?
The bezels are made from s.steel its the inserts that was made from aluminium.Well don't know about getting scratched easily mine are now 15/20 years old sure there are a few minor marks.But my watches have done quite a bit of work and had quite a hard life compared to the many pampered Rolex watches today.And yes both have been replaced at very little cost,yes some aliminum inserts do fade. But its mainly the reds and blue on GMT watches,just like the colour red on some cars that fades over the years.While the ceramic looks good its taken Rolex quite a time to jump on the ceramic bandwagon,with brands like Rado having ceramic watches since the 1960s.If ceramic was so wonderful why has the many high brands never used it until the last few years or so.While I agree Rolex must move with the times but at quite a price increase and very expensive to replace the insert if broken up to $900 plus, IMHO this ceramic insert functions the same as the aluminium one and perhaps looks good.Now on some diving forums a few comments that the bezel on the ceramic was far too easy to move while underwater not a good thing in a diving watch if you are just using the time lapse bezel.While I applaud Rolex for the very fine marketing hype I got to ask myself is this a real improvement, if it is its at a very high price.
__________________

ICom Pro3

All posts are my own opinion and my opinion only.

"The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop. Now is the only time you actually own the time, Place no faith in time, for the clock may soon be still for ever."
Good Judgement comes from experience,experience comes from Bad Judgement,.Buy quality, cry once; buy cheap, cry again and again.

www.mc0yad.club

Second in command CEO and left handed watch winder
padi56 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 20 August 2010, 06:56 PM   #40
Bullyterrier
"TRF" Member
 
Bullyterrier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: .
Posts: 1,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by The GMT Master View Post
I disagree. Enough force to break a ceramic bezel will be more than enough to destroy or heavily damage an aluminium one

Chris
Jade is also very hard and scratch resistant, but one day, after years of wearing it, my wife's jade bangle cracked after catching it just right.
__________________
So Mote it be.
Bullyterrier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 August 2010, 07:09 PM   #41
Vlad@GKScott
"TRF" Member
 
Vlad@GKScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Real Name: Vlad [Scott]
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 23
They are aluminum!!! Oh my God, for years I was convinced that they are plastic!!! It is never too late to admit your mistakes :)

As of ceramic bezels. They are too hard to put back on. Maybe I just got used to put old conventional bezels on, but when I got a chance to work on a new GMT it took me awhile to put ceramic bezel back on...
I always favored Yacht-Masters because I never liked the way aluminum bezel inserts looked on Submariners and GMTs, but now Rolex corrected it for me. And came up with something new in decades.
__________________
I can't help you to buy a watch, but I can help you to make it beautiful (WP).
Vlad@GKScott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 August 2010, 08:06 PM   #42
Neil.tf001
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Real Name: Neil
Location: Chicago
Watch: LV SUB
Posts: 65
Does any one know...

If the new broken bezels have been replaced under warentee?
Neil.tf001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 August 2010, 08:22 PM   #43
Brushpup
"TRF" Member
 
Brushpup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Real Name: Patrick
Location: Texas
Watch: what I'm wearing
Posts: 5,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil.tf001 View Post
Hi all, I was planning to make my only big watch purchase to be the new TT black sub. However I See again issues with broken bezels on the new models which is making me nervous. The main reason for the new sub is the new clasp but weighing that against a broken bezel and weeks of repair, warrantee or not has me second guessing.
I know I can insure the watch but still weeks or repair?
Thoughts please.
Neil
If you want my thoughts, aluminum bezels don't crack or shatter.
__________________
TRFs "AFTER DARK" Bar & NightClub Patron-Founding Member


PClub # 10
74,592
The safest place for your watch is on your wrist.
Brushpup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 August 2010, 08:24 PM   #44
Porsche
2024 Pledge Member
 
Porsche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Real Name: John
Location: ɹǝpun
Watch: and learn
Posts: 2,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleddog1000 View Post
Millions of ceramic bezels now out in the wild...
A handfull of broken ones.....Percentage,less than 1% I'm sure...
Try not to worry and just enjoy it!!
+1

I have to agree with Rob... I would say LESS than 0.1%

Quote:
Originally Posted by tgoose1 View Post
Those reporting to this forum on ceramic bezel issues represent an infinitesimally small sampling of all new watches sold.
This forum has over 50,000 members worldwide, so maybe not such a small sample
__________________
Obey Gravity, it's the Law!

ROLEX --- SEIKO --- HEUER

TRF REHAUT
T H E R O L E X F O R U M T H E R O L E X F O R U M T H E R O L E X F O R U M T H E R O L E X F O R U M T H E R O L E X F O R U M T H E R O L E X F O R U M
Porsche is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 August 2010, 10:59 PM   #45
Dr.Brian
2024 Pledge Member
 
Dr.Brian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Real Name: Brian
Location: CA dreamin'
Watch: ing the market.
Posts: 5,895
Quote:
Originally Posted by Porsche View Post
+1

I have to agree with Rob... I would say LESS than 0.1%



This forum has over 50,000 members worldwide, so maybe not such a small sample
Rolex makes less than 1m watches a year by all accounts, only a fraction have ceramic bezels over the last few years. There are probably less than a million out there. And of the 50k members, what % even have a Rolex let alone a newer ceramic one? We don't have a large sample size at all here.

To the warranty question above. Reports here and elsewhere indicate that they are NOT being replaced as a warranty repair.
__________________
-Brian
AUDENTES FORTUNA IUVAT

十人十色
Dr.Brian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 August 2010, 12:03 AM   #46
Porsche
2024 Pledge Member
 
Porsche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Real Name: John
Location: ɹǝpun
Watch: and learn
Posts: 2,983
Good point Brian, but I suspect that if there are any statisticians amongst us, they would say it was a statistically relevant sample size.

I would also guess that the percentage of ceramics sold worlwide would be approximately equal to the percentage of ceramic owners on this forum...

http://www.raosoft.com/samplesize.html this tells me we have a 0.43% chance of error with that sample size.

Then again, as the old saying goes, there are lies, damn lies and statistics!!!
__________________
Obey Gravity, it's the Law!

ROLEX --- SEIKO --- HEUER

TRF REHAUT
T H E R O L E X F O R U M T H E R O L E X F O R U M T H E R O L E X F O R U M T H E R O L E X F O R U M T H E R O L E X F O R U M T H E R O L E X F O R U M
Porsche is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 August 2010, 12:13 AM   #47
Johny
"TRF" Member
 
Johny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Real Name: john
Location: Scotland
Watch: sub 16610Lv
Posts: 13,523
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zirotti View Post
Thanks Chris. Ceramic should be a much more robust material than aluminum and it's a trend a lot of manufacturers have been following the last few years.

I think the real issue that people have and that they don't want to say is that instead of being able to pay $150 for a aluminum bezel insert today, people are concerned that the ceramic will cost multiples more (which is probably true as it's a premium material).
price last week was £26. for aluminium insert for 16610 black.
__________________
"AFTER DARK" BAR AND NIGHT CLUB GM.
Johny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 August 2010, 12:15 AM   #48
Esexx
"TRF" Member
 
Esexx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Real Name: Dean
Location: Redondo Beach, CA
Watch: ing TRF All Day
Posts: 2,105
A ceramic bezel would not stop me from buying on too. Go for it!
__________________
Member Number 34171
"Remember: No matter where you go... there you are." Buckroo Banzai

_________________________________________
Esexx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 August 2010, 12:16 AM   #49
chris russell
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Peterborough, ON
Watch: your mouth.
Posts: 1,023
I was gonna buy a car to get me from point A to point B, but...

I heard those things get bent if they are in a collision. Forget it, I'll just walk everywhere.

I've also heard that houses sometimes burn down. Forget it, I'll just live in a tent.

I've heard that shoes wear out if you walk around in them. Forget it, I'll just go barefoot.

I've heard that clothes need to be laundered all the time. Forget it, I'll just go naked.

chris russell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 August 2010, 12:23 AM   #50
sakuraba
"TRF" Member
 
sakuraba's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Real Name: Jib
Location: SJ, California
Watch: sun dial
Posts: 8,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris russell View Post
I heard those things get bent if they are in a collision. Forget it, I'll just walk everywhere.

I've also heard that houses sometimes burn down. Forget it, I'll just live in a tent.

I've heard that shoes wear out if you walk around in them. Forget it, I'll just go barefoot.

I've heard that clothes need to be laundered all the time. Forget it, I'll just go naked.

I've heard alcohol can get you drunk. Forget it, I'll...
__________________
F 14000 AirKing black
F 16710 GMT Pepsi
F 16570 Explorer II white
T 16600 SD
D 16610 LV

"fine quality is remembered long after the pain of spending money" -Steve Mulholland
sakuraba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 August 2010, 12:28 AM   #51
Porsche
2024 Pledge Member
 
Porsche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Real Name: John
Location: ɹǝpun
Watch: and learn
Posts: 2,983
Hey, the GMT is for pilots, so why don't they make the bezel out of the same indestructible material as the "black box" flight recorders...? Better still, why don't they make the WHOLE PLANE out of that stuff

__________________
Obey Gravity, it's the Law!

ROLEX --- SEIKO --- HEUER

TRF REHAUT
T H E R O L E X F O R U M T H E R O L E X F O R U M T H E R O L E X F O R U M T H E R O L E X F O R U M T H E R O L E X F O R U M T H E R O L E X F O R U M
Porsche is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 August 2010, 12:44 AM   #52
NMS75
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Real Name: Mark
Location: United Kingdom
Watch: 16610 & 116710LN
Posts: 559
Both ceramic and aluminium bezels will have theirown strengths and weaknesses. Both will have their own potential problems and faults as no material is perfect or indestructible. Personally I plan to buy a GMT-Master II for my next watch which has a ceramic bezel. Does it put me off? Simple answer no! My Sub 16610 has an aluminium bezel. Does that worry me? Again the simple answer is no!

M
NMS75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 August 2010, 01:42 AM   #53
austinnh
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philly
Posts: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil.tf001 View Post
If the new broken bezels have been replaced under warentee?
They have not been. They are replaced at the owners expense for about $500 to $1000.
austinnh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 August 2010, 01:57 AM   #54
austinnh
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philly
Posts: 156
accidental double post
austinnh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 August 2010, 02:02 AM   #55
steubi1
"TRF" Member
 
steubi1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Real Name: Tom
Location: Switzerland
Watch: too many
Posts: 1,149
I bought a SubC recently and I am very happy with it.

When I look at the pictures of damaged bezels, I always think: What the hell are these people doing with their watches?

I mean, in the end, you can destroy everything if you only try hard enough. And finally, a fine watch like a Rolex is robust, yes, it may also be considered a "tool watch", yes, but it is a PRECISION INSTRUMENT which deserves a certain care of the owner.

Regards
Tom
steubi1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 August 2010, 02:05 AM   #56
austinnh
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philly
Posts: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Porsche View Post
+1

I have to agree with Rob... I would say LESS than 0.1%
As I said in my first reply to this thread, less than 1% are breaking because less than 1% of new Rolexes see any kind of significant abuse or impact. For more than 1% to break, they would literally have to fall apart for no reason at all! But no, these bezels are so strong that you actually have to hit them to get them to break. (sarcasm)

This is why I said to the OP (well I didn't say it explicitly, I implied it) that if he is in the 99% of Rolex owners who handle their watches with great care, then ceramic would be fine. But if he is in the 1% who lead a rough (or clumsy) lifestyle and want a Rolex that can endure that lifestyle, that may be that same 1% that wind up with broken ceramic bezels, and I would want aluminum, which is clearly much more robust.

Also, less than 1% have broken? But that's just in 5 years or so. If you keep your watch for 50 years, your lifetime probability goes up by a factor of 10...

I'm not suggesting that one should not get ceramic at all because it might break (this in response to chris russell's post). That would be silly because, yes, anything can break.

I'm just saying that the aluminum bezel is much stronger so if robustness is a concern in your watch selection, aluminum is preferable.

[all numbers in this post approximate ]
austinnh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 August 2010, 02:23 AM   #57
rad87gn
"TRF" Member
 
rad87gn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Real Name: Chad
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
Watch: Rolex, PAM, Omega
Posts: 1,607
None of my aluminum inserts are scratched or faded yet.
__________________
Rolex P-Series SS GMT II Black, Rolex Y-Series Sea-Dweller, Rolex F-Series TT Blue Sub, Rolex F-Series Sub LV, Rolex D-Series Ladies SS/WG DJ for wife, Panerai K-Series PAM 112, Omega Speedmaster Pro 3570.50, Omega Seamaster 300M Chrono 2594.52
rad87gn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 August 2010, 03:00 AM   #58
tgoose1
"TRF" Member
 
tgoose1's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Louisiana
Watch: Rolex Submariner
Posts: 666
I don't know of any mainstream US military, Comex, or other heavy duty industrial strength design specification for a ruggedtized mechanical watch, that would deem a "ceramic" bezel insert as superior to a metal application, especially when human life/safety, mission-critical is on the line. Most of us know the proud heritage of the Submariner/Sea-Dweller, and the tasks it was designed for, that made it a true icon. While the new ceramic versions are beautiful watches, it amazes me Rolex used an inferior, but blingy substitute for the insert. I'm personally disappointed because I really like the new subs, but will put off purchase for now. I personally would not buy a ceramic w/o an AD offering me at least one "free" ceramic replacement, no questions asked. Since AD sales market the ceramic as functionally superior to the aluminum insert, a free one-time replacement should be a given, and no risk for the AD, shouldn't it? I think so, especially for a $7K+ watch!
tgoose1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 August 2010, 05:00 AM   #59
FLB03TT
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Real Name: Franz
Location: Colorado/Florida
Watch: PAM, G.O., G.P.
Posts: 174
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgoose1 View Post
I don't know of any mainstream US military, Comex, or other heavy duty industrial strength design specification for a ruggedtized mechanical watch, that would deem a "ceramic" bezel insert as superior to a metal application, especially when human life/safety, mission-critical is on the line. Most of us know the proud heritage of the Submariner/Sea-Dweller, and the tasks it was designed for, that made it a true icon. While the new ceramic versions are beautiful watches, it amazes me Rolex used an inferior, but blingy substitute for the insert. I'm personally disappointed because I really like the new subs, but will put off purchase for now. I personally would not buy a ceramic w/o an AD offering me at least one "free" ceramic replacement, no questions asked. Since AD sales market the ceramic as functionally superior to the aluminum insert, a free one-time replacement should be a given, and no risk for the AD, shouldn't it? I think so, especially for a $7K+ watch!
Absolutely spot on analysis.

Rolex built their storied brand on several virtues:

- Form Following Function (Sport/Tool Watches)
- Ruggedness
- Dependability
- Longevity
- Reasonable Repair Costs

If we do a checklist, using these five criteria, let's see how the 16610 compares to the 116610.

The 16610 has a design where Form Follows Function.
The 116610 has a design where Function Follows Form. I.E. Larger case lugs and Ceramic bezel add no utilitarian value.

The 16610 has proven to be a rugged watch.
the 116610 has proven less rugged based solely on the Ceramic bezel failures. Regardless of what percentage have failed, SO FAR, if your life depended on the proper functioning of the bezel on your watch how could you choose the 116610 over the 16610?

The 16610 & 116610 are dependable.
The 16610 has longevity. The 116610 will probably have longevity.

The 16610 has reasonable repair costs.
The 116610 has unreasonable repair costs based soley on the cost to replace the Ceramic bezel. The complexity of the new bracelet will also lead to higher repair costs for that item. Does the new bracelet Function better or is it's Form more pleasing??

The 16610 possesses all 5 core Rolex virtues.
The 116610 possesses only 2 core Rolex virtues.

Rolex clearly has changed direction in the last several years. Some like the new direction, some don't. However when discussing the virtues of a TOOL WATCH I believe that the original five Core Values should be followed closely.
FLB03TT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 August 2010, 05:07 AM   #60
chris russell
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Peterborough, ON
Watch: your mouth.
Posts: 1,023
I just received my new Sub-c, and to make sure I would not have to lie awake nights..

worrying about whether the bezel might end up broken, I just smashed the damn thing with a hammer. Now I can sleep.



A lotta whining namby-pambies out there.
chris russell is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Takuya Watches

Bobs Watches

Asset Appeal

My Watch LLC

OCWatches

DavidSW Watches

Coronet


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.