Ceramic vs non ceramic

[Mike perazzi]

Non -ceramic as I like my watch to "age" with me .
My watch unlike my car is something I would like to show patina and character over time .
That said I love the newer bezel colours Rolex are introducing but for the moment not for me .


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[whizz]

I like ceramic sub or SD but prefer pre-ceramic daytonas

[Torque Time]

Great and very impressive pic! Love them all!

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by thomaspp

Pre-ceramic is horrendous :)




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Exactly. It doesn’t get any better than that. In this day and age, I struggle with the idea of buying a mechanical watch based on modern features, but I guess Rolex has to string us along with overbuilding things, so they can keep raising prices. To me, it’s like buying the most technologically advanced typewriter.

[SeaAndSky]

Originally Posted by tkerrmd

I prefer ceramic...it is an upgrade in material in every way....looks, color, and durability ...IMHO....(I also own both)

Tom, I've said it before and will again, that's a fantastic and well balanced collection.

I like both as well but prefer the looks and improvements of the ceramic bezel. The way they capture light and reflect light is really beautiful to my eyes. And ceramic is a better material in my opinion. They did use it to protect the space shuttle after all. That said, there was plenty of aluminum in those spaceships as well. So you can't go wrong with either!

[5253Reynolds]

Never understood buying vintage anything unless it's cheaper, IMHO if your buying in today's market ceramic is the only way to go.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by 5253Reynolds

Never understood buying vintage anything unless it's cheaper, IMHO if your buying in today's market ceramic is the only way to go.

You'd think with the name Reynolds, you'd be all about aluminum!




To answer seriously, the older models are lighter weight, just as durable (aluminum is a bend-don't-break solution) and arguably better looking, since they were designed at a time when mechanical watches were actually necessary. It's like picking Chuck Taylor IIs over the original Chuck Taylors, despite the Chuck Taylor IIs being "technically" better.

[Beowulf]

4x harder than steel, at half the weight. No scratches, no fade, no corrosion.

Great material, Rolex should start using it on the dials soon. Other manufacturers already use ZrO2 on dials, cases, bracelets, clasps, etc.

[mps354]

I prefer the pre ceramic pieces, but I think it has more to do with the cases

[HogwldFLTR]

Don't like ceramic on Subs and that's about it. Not too fond of two tone inserts in either Al or ceramic. Subs have too much open space making the ceramic too shiny.

[tomchicago]

Ceramic = brittle. It shatters. Should have stayed on Rado.

[dob1]

Love the ceramic models so far and the new models of today will be the vintage of tomorrow. Yes, ceramic won't age like the steel models did but maybe that will also be a desired look in future.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by dob1

Love the ceramic models so far and the new models of today will be the vintage of tomorrow. Yes, ceramic won't age like the steel models did but maybe that will also be a desired look in future.

It’s impossible to predict whether the mechanical watch collector wave of the last decade or so will even be relevant in another 30 years.

[RamyAshour]

Originally Posted by thomaspp

Pre-ceramic is horrendous :)




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Damn!! Thats 3 perfect watches


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mystro]

I am a ceramic believer now. Not that the aluminum doesn’t have its advantages with cheaper to replace inserts, but the ceramic looks sooo much more upscale and matches the new Rolex design with a much more solid over all package. Ceramic is also a better material for normal wear and tear. I use a all ceramic Bell & Ross as my outdoor and work/tactical watch. It still looks new after many tactical training events that can be brutal on a watch. The ceramic is almost magical with being scratch resistant.

[gabegd]

I like both new and old... don't really have a preference

[ryanm]

Have both, no complaints about either

[Quicksilver]

I love them both. Aluminium has an old school charm but ceramic looks super sleek. There’s a place for both in my collection.

IMG_2728.JPG

IMG_2753.JPG


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[douglasf13]

I guess it's time I do the requisite comparison. If forced to pick, which would you choose?

[sunnyd]

I love vintage everything (Rolexes, Porsches, etc.), but just not at today's prices. For the money, I'd buy modern every time.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by sunnyd

I love vintage everything (Rolexes, Porsches, etc.), but just not at today's prices. For the money, I'd buy modern every time.

To me, that's the beauty of the 5-digit series, at the moment. It's a bit of the "993" of the Rolex world (sorry, I know these Porsche comparisons get out of control around here,) but the prices are still sane.

[Blansky]

I actually prefer the older version to the ceramic.