Cracked Ceramic Bezel !

[TonyD]

I've heard about the sapphire crystals breaking too! I'm selling my Rolex and Panerai and buying an Omega with a plastic crystal!

[2th Dr]

I think this is probably not going to be a common occurance. That watch probably hit the floor at just the right angle (if indeed that is how it happened) to crack the ceramic. This is certainly not going to deter me from buying one in the near future.

[stender]

my ss gmt ceramic is fine!
i thought this stuff is supossed to be better and stronger than previous.
all the same still think its a great watch

[frostie]

Originally Posted by jets

I read in the new Rolex catalog that the bezel takes 40 hours to make. Looks really cool too.

Yeah that is correct

[STEELINOX]

You drop a ceramic "anything" from 3 feet and its hit and miss as to wether it breaks, shatters, or even survives. But the bottom line is this~ the thing apparently broke, and in breaking probably unseated ball bearings and the holder that holds these in place; to me this is a design error by which they (ROLEX) shuld've designed the thing to take impacts. I mean if the thing had a simple spring mechanism like the Pre-C vn then the bezel at worst might just "pop off" requiring only a re-seating of the spring and press return the bezel back.
This really puts me off on "ceramic" anything ROLEX makes; even a PEPSI-C is no longer on my radar as is the forthcoming SUB-C...
Thanks,
Randy

[STEELINOX]

Originally Posted by joeyk

let see the damaged pic :~(

I bet this casing costs $2 Gs !

[padi56]

Originally Posted by greenfan

That ceramic bezel price is ridiculous high!!! If just the bezel costs 750, this means that the new GMT IIc, should cost at least 2000 more than the older GMT II, taking into consideration that it has a newer and better movement.
For God's shake, I changed my bezel for just 25 pounds......

Newer modded movement perhaps yes, buts its still only a slightly modded 3185, better movement again would doubt it.Both 3185 and 3186 are tested to the same COSC standard, and the 3185 has well proved track record since 1989.So perhaps the only advantage with the 3186 is a sightly more precise time zone adjustment and thats about it.So if its true about the bezel regarding the cost to replace.Then give me the tried and trusted plain easily replaced metal inserts any time or place .

[Parachrom]

Ther are many types of ceramics. Even knife blades can be made of ceramic, and they hold their edge for a long long time. But dont dare drop them on the floor, because they will break.
Ceramics are both hard and brittle. Rolex should have seen this coming. As these are tool watches, they are going to take hits, and probably more than a few bezels are going to break. Manufacturing a bezel out of a ceramic does not mean it is unbreakable, it just means it will have a nice finish, but it will still be brittile. Check out Wikipedia for info on tecnical ceramics. The US shuttle uses ceramic plates, they are alo in Bullet proof vests. They do shater, alhtough those two examples are different type of ceramic than what rolex would use.

perhaps one of our forum readers would care to correspond with Rolex and have them e xplain how it is that such bezels are turning out to be brittle. it may result in recalls or at least acknowledgement that the product is weak.

What sort of tests did Rolex run after coming up with the idea of Ceramic if any. Its nice to have the matrix purified and bombabrded by precious mets atom by atom, and its a great video and voice over, but if the ceramic bezsel sucks, then who wants it. let rolex redesign the material and re issue bezels to those who bought them as a recall.

[Parachrom]

My Sd has been dropped from well over 10 feet, and it never skipped a beat except for the scracthes. These rolex tool wacthes are supposed to be tough. Ceramics are brittle by nature, but huighly heat and scracgh resitant. I think Rolex dropped the ball on this no pun intended. Did they do a drop bearing test on teh insert to see what sort of impact it will take to break one?

Who knows Only rolex does.

[touchdowntodd]

i would have to believe with all the R&D and marketing cash spent, someone dropped one a few times to see what would happen.. Rolex knows we wear these watches daily..

i think im gonna give up on these topics until i see a pic... its like fighting a battle that no one knows if it ever existed

[SLS]

Well, one of the members from TZ just called the Dallas RSC and was quoted $240 for replacing the bezel, a far cry from the $1500 initially reported! Seems like the AD is gouging the customer
~Scott

[kokovovoru]

Hopefully, the op can post pics of the shattered ceramic bezel.

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by kokovovoru

Hopefully, the op can post pics of the shattered ceramic bezel.

Yeah.....was wondering when the proof of the pudding was turning up?

JJ

[frostie]

Originally Posted by SLS

Well, one of the members from TZ just called the Dallas RSC and was quoted $240 for replacing the bezel, a far cry from the $1500 initially reported! Seems like the AD is gouging the customer
~Scott

This is getting better and better

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by frostie

This is getting better and better

....and even more confusing!!

[frostie]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

....and even more confusing!!

[DSJ]

The INSERT is cerachrome/ceramic. The rest is metal.

Bo's old review has a diagram of the bezel:
http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=27897

[miked]

Originally Posted by sbakar

...and so we enter the POISON phase.

SNB

Oh man dead on prediction On tz some of those who thought this watch was the greatest ever are all now claiming "I told you so"

For the record I have a C, love it. It is my daily so if the news is true that sucks but I still think it is an awesome watch.

[Flaxmoore]

Originally Posted by sbakar

Your stone is considerably thicker and has fewer stress propagators milled into it. Not to mention, you wouldn't notice minor scratches and dings in a rough stone anyway.

SNB

Thicker I'll give. Rougher? Unless the bezel is more precise than 3000 grit, I doubt it. It also has one giant groove down the backside as a stress riser.

[mike]

I read that post as well. I'm sorry for the user, however James Dowling may have shed light on the cost if the whole bezel assembly was damaged. Gold isn't cheap. An insert is about $240. Add the whole works and things get expensive.

Is this a problem with ceramic? I don't know. As has been stated I've not had a problem with either of mine, but strange things happen. The early bakelites were known to crack as well.

Time will tell, but I think they're awfully good.

[Perdu]

I don't know why so many people disbelieve that you can crack or shatter a ceramic bezel. You can break enything if you try, or are just plain unlucky.

[sbakar]

Originally Posted by miked

Oh man dead on prediction On tz some of those who thought this watch was the greatest ever are all now claiming "I told you so"

For the record I have a C, love it. It is my daily so if the news is true that sucks but I still think it is an awesome watch.

Enjoy your watch, as always!!

As I mentioned before, this is a very predictable pattern.

SNB

[sbakar]

Originally Posted by Perdu

I don't know why so many people disbelieve that you can crack or shatter a ceramic bezel. You can break enything if you try, or are just plain unlucky.

Marketing hype works very well on some people! Sorry, you cannot break the laws of physics or violate material properties without paying for it...

SNB

[sbakar]

Originally Posted by Flaxmoore

Thicker I'll give. Rougher? Unless the bezel is more precise than 3000 grit, I doubt it. It also has one giant groove down the backside as a stress riser.

Fair enough

But the two items differ considerably, so I still don't think it's entirely fair to compare them.

SNB

[sbakar]

If the insert costs only $240, it's a remarkable deal for such a cool bit of manufacturing.

SNB