ROO 44mm Forged Carbon VS Ceramic

[ackevinb]

I'm deciding between the ROO 44mm Forged Carbon or the Ceramic
can you guys give me some suggestions to the pros and cons and also the differences between these watch

also i have seen the Team Alinghi and Grand Prix in Forged Carbon, the edge wears off significantly, straight edges became smooth and looks terrible. is this normal and happens to all carbon forged watches

thx for the input

[benlee]

Ceramic for me by a country mile.

[AK797]

Anthracite on ceramic ideally, otherwise FC with black dial for a less monochromatic look. Most owners here haven't reported a problem with FC.

[VICI]

The ceramic you have pictured is with the anthracite dial. Harder to come by but doable.

Just take a look at it in the sun. Case closed 👍

[goog53]

Ceramic plus Anthracite Dial looks amazing

[conkers]

My recent incoming thread gives you my answer！

[AMCK87]

Ceramic all the way!

[masterserg]

The anthracite ceramic is hard to beat.

[mikeceee]

I like the ceramic more. But both nice watches.

[subtona]

you have a better personal experience than most… we should be asking you.

the wear on the used piece you're showing is very surprising.

[s14roller]

Ceramic. For what it's worth, the finishing on the 44FC must be different than on the GP and Alinghi (and also, it's a newer case than either of them) as I haven't seen one that has worn like the other 2.

I remember the 44FC almost has this shine to it (maybe some sort of layer over the FC material) whereabouts my GP was more matte.

[singe89]

I would get the anthracite ceramic over the FC but only because of the dial. I would get the FC over the all black ceramic.

The Alinghi was on of APs first FC watches and Ive heard the process has been tweaked since the earlier watches. Newer forged carbon cases have a gloss to them and stand up really really well to daily use. My FC diver still looks new after 2 years as a daily beater. I also have a couple FC cases that I did a few drop/scratch tests on and wasn't any noticeable damage.

I still think FC is a great material for watches. I think AP agrees or they wouldn't be using it on newer high end watches like the schumi or chrono tourb.

[ackevinb]

Originally Posted by benlee

Ceramic for me by a country mile.

thx

[ackevinb]

Originally Posted by AK797

Anthracite on ceramic ideally, otherwise FC with black dial for a less monochromatic look. Most owners here haven't reported a problem with FC.

i like the anthracite also，but its very difficult to find

[ackevinb]

Originally Posted by singe89

I would get the anthracite ceramic over the FC but only because of the dial. I would get the FC over the all black ceramic.

The Alinghi was on of APs first FC watches and Ive heard the process has been tweaked since the earlier watches. Newer forged carbon cases have a gloss to them and stand up really really well to daily use. My FC diver still looks new after 2 years as a daily beater. I also have a couple FC cases that I did a few drop/scratch tests on and wasn't any noticeable damage.

I still think FC is a great material for watches. I think AP agrees or they wouldn't be using it on newer high end watches like the schumi or chrono tourb.

how does FC compare to ceremic in terms of scratch resistant, i have a ceremic panerai its almost scratch proof, is the FC similar?

[ackevinb]

Originally Posted by s14roller

Ceramic. For what it's worth, the finishing on the 44FC must be different than on the GP and Alinghi (and also, it's a newer case than either of them) as I haven't seen one that has worn like the other 2.

I remember the 44FC almost has this shine to it (maybe some sort of layer over the FC material) whereabouts my GP was more matte.

thx, how does FC resist to scratches?

[ackevinb]

Originally Posted by singe89

I would get the anthracite ceramic over the FC but only because of the dial. I would get the FC over the all black ceramic.

The Alinghi was on of APs first FC watches and Ive heard the process has been tweaked since the earlier watches. Newer forged carbon cases have a gloss to them and stand up really really well to daily use. My FC diver still looks new after 2 years as a daily beater. I also have a couple FC cases that I did a few drop/scratch tests on and wasn't any noticeable damage.

I still think FC is a great material for watches. I think AP agrees or they wouldn't be using it on newer high end watches like the schumi or chrono tourb.

thx, how does FC compare to ceremic interms of scratch resistant

[yjfang]

Ceramic. Especially with the heavier brushed finish! Superb!

[singe89]

Originally Posted by ackevinb

thx, how does FC compare to ceremic interms of scratch resistant

Ceramic will be far more scratch resistant but more brittle when it comes to hard knocks. FC can scratch but the marbling tends to hide them.

[lapince]

ceramic by a mile, wether this dial or all black dial, I tend to prefer the black dial, I like totally black watches when the case and bezel are black, but both awesome

[el1125]

Ceramic without question

[redsubby]

For me ceramic everyday. Just not into FC.....
The finish on AP ceramic is second to none.

[kilyung]

Ceramic with those choices.

[mspeed76]

i really like the dial of the anthracite model

there is a huge price difference between these two models...

[HL65]

Ceramic not even a contest!

[lapince]

About the carbon the models where it's used as bezel are terrible are some even say by just rubbing with your finger the edge small bits come off, so that makes it a big NO NO for me, the only watches with carbon I would consider is the ones which use the same carbon as RM watches, the color and surface is even, no color differences, and I don't think it chips off. Ok for the AP's I heard that the FC now used resists much better to the first ones, but still not great IMO, there's even a model with FC bezel for which they made ceramic bezels available, for me there's really no comparison, ceramic is way more sexy and practical than FC.

Here's the RM with carbon, looks like ceramic, at first I even thought it was but they say it's carbon… When I see the pic of the used FC you posted I wonder how after seeing that you can think of taking a FC model, or if it's only the case ok, but bezel needs to be ceramic, don't know if it's the case on the new one you posted, I still say go all ceramic but if at least the bezel is, and if you just LOVE the look of FC, I don't, then why not… But when I see how crappy the used one in FC looks it would immediately make me go for the ceramic...

1891147gross.jpg

[eonflux]

I voted for FC w/ my wallet (my watch on right), but I'm apparently in the minority here.



Considering that AP uses FC w/ their latest tourbillon chrono and the new Schumacher, they must think the material is decently durable, though those watches are not likely to be subjected to much wear and tear.

Not sure what is different between the current FC used by AP vs in the past. From what I understand about composites (carbon fiber and forged carbon), there can be significant differences in their characteristics based on how they are made and with what materials. My carbon road and mountain bike frames are carbon fiber (the mtn bike even has CF wheels) and they have been quite durable, including some minor crashes on the mtn bike. The mtn bike frame and wheels are subjected to a significant number of rock strikes, and I assume the surface coating/layer is critical to how well they survive such trauma.

My 44mm FC has been my main daily since Oct. I'm reasonably careful, but don't baby it. The case looks pristine. The ceramic bezel also looks brand new, so my guess is that the ceramic 44mm will also be good for daily wear.

Both 44mm's look great to me, but I prefer the FC look. You'll need to try both. On my wrist, the ceramic 44mm overall looked too monochromatic--I like the contrast between the bezel and case on the FC 44mm.
Of note, I've only seen the black dial ceramic. The anthracite dial is unique, as are the tachymeter bezel and subdial borders on the ceramic 44mm. Such esthetic differences, are, of course, personal preferences.
I think you'll be quite pleased with either.

[ackevinb]

Originally Posted by eonflux

I voted for FC w/ my wallet (my watch on right), but I'm apparently in the minority here.



Considering that AP uses FC w/ their latest tourbillon chrono and the new Schumacher, they must think the material is decently durable, though those watches are not likely to be subjected to much wear and tear.

Not sure what is different between the current FC used by AP vs in the past. From what I understand about composites (carbon fiber and forged carbon), there can be significant differences in their characteristics based on how they are made and with what materials. My carbon road and mountain bike frames are carbon fiber (the mtn bike even has CF wheels) and they have been quite durable, including some minor crashes on the mtn bike. The mtn bike frame and wheels are subjected to a significant number of rock strikes, and I assume the surface coating/layer is critical to how well they survive such trauma.

My 44mm FC has been my main daily since Oct. I'm reasonably careful, but don't baby it. The case looks pristine. The ceramic bezel also looks brand new, so my guess is that the ceramic 44mm will also be good for daily wear.

Both 44mm's look great to me, but I prefer the FC look. You'll need to try both. On my wrist, the ceramic 44mm overall looked too monochromatic--I like the contrast between the bezel and case on the FC 44mm.
Of note, I've only seen the black dial ceramic. The anthracite dial is unique, as are the tachymeter bezel and subdial borders on the ceramic 44mm. Such esthetic differences, are, of course, personal preferences.
I think you'll be quite pleased with either.

thx for the input I like the marbling of the FC but also worried abt the wear after couple years.

[DR.Golf]

I too am in the minority. To me the FC is the most interesting of the two. As above this is coming from someone who has spent the time and voted with their wallet. I love mine, of all the pieces I own it is one of the very few that have a no trade clause! I believe if you spend the time and hold both you will be tortured but make the right decision for you. There isn't a wrong answer but please don't decide just by online pics and opinions of those who haven't done the due diligence. Both are special pieces but keep in mind the FC is now the case they have chosen for the tourbillion, why?

Good luck

[ackevinb]

Originally Posted by lapince

About the carbon the models where it's used as bezel are terrible are some even say by just rubbing with your finger the edge small bits come off, so that makes it a big NO NO for me, the only watches with carbon I would consider is the ones which use the same carbon as RM watches, the color and surface is even, no color differences, and I don't think it chips off. Ok for the AP's I heard that the FC now used resists much better to the first ones, but still not great IMO, there's even a model with FC bezel for which they made ceramic bezels available, for me there's really no comparison, ceramic is way more sexy and practical than FC.

Here's the RM with carbon, looks like ceramic, at first I even thought it was but they say it's carbon… When I see the pic of the used FC you posted I wonder how after seeing that you can think of taking a FC model, or if it's only the case ok, but bezel needs to be ceramic, don't know if it's the case on the new one you posted, I still say go all ceramic but if at least the bezel is, and if you just LOVE the look of FC, I don't, then why not… But when I see how crappy the used one in FC looks it would immediately make me go for the ceramic...

Attachment 626765

People say they improved on the process don't know how that turns out