904L Steel non Rolex

[yoniman]

Fellow WISdom,

Alas another watch will be using the 904L steel.

http://www.ballwatch.com/global/en/c...bk---2303.html

Sent from my TRT-LX2 using Tapatalk

[tyler1980]

thats why Rolex calls it oystersteel now so no one will notice

[CNDguy]

Even has a cyclops

[Cru Jones]

Yes, more and more companies have adopted it.

[cruise_bone]

I've got a bunch of Balls and love them.

[Icehockeyboy]

Originally Posted by cruise_bone

I've got a bunch of Balls and love them.

I have two, and would hopefully never be parted from them!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[PJ S]

^
A rugby ball and a football ball?

[kunlun]

Originally Posted by cruise_bone

I've got a bunch of Balls and love them.

See a doctor immediately!

[yoniman]

Originally Posted by cruise_bone

I've got a bunch of Balls and love them.

The watches? Let's see some photos of those tritium tubes shall we...

Sent from my TRT-LX2 using Tapatalk

[J!m]

Pffffttt. Wanna impress me? Make a watch out of Inconel 718!

[PJ S]

^
725 – best of both worlds (625 & 718)

[belligero]

That’s one seriously ugly watch.

[Burlington]

Interesting - almost Explorer esque with a date. £1800 puts it into Tudor range too.

[Paul7]

Not sure what the hype is with the 904L steel, my wife has a newer Rolex DJ 31mm with PCL that scratches when you look at it.

[antbkny]

Originally Posted by kunlun

See a doctor immediately!

[Mad Hatter]

Originally Posted by Icehockeyboy

I have two, and would hopefully never be parted from them!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Shoot! You beat me to it!

[DLRIDES]

Originally Posted by Paul7

Not sure what the hype is with the 904L steel, my wife has a newer Rolex DJ 31mm with PCL that scratches when you look at it.

In a nutshell, 904 is slightly softer than 316, but 904 has more NI for better corrosion resistance.

[yoniman]

Originally Posted by Paul7

Not sure what the hype is with the 904L steel, my wife has a newer Rolex DJ 31mm with PCL that scratches when you look at it.

[Paul7]

Originally Posted by DLRIDES

In a nutshell, 904 is slightly softer than 316, but 904 has more NI for better corrosion resistance.

Thanks, I didn't know that. Living in the desert SW corrosion is a non-issue. It is my understanding Rolex uses 904 for the watch body, but their internal steel is the same as what other watchmakers use.

They use 316 steel for the outside of buildings, so not sure I need anything more in a watch.

[the_natural]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

thats why Rolex calls it oystersteel now so no one will notice

This.

[belligero]

Originally Posted by Paul7

Thanks, I didn't know that. Living in the desert SW corrosion is a non-issue. It is my understanding Rolex uses 904 for the watch body, but their internal steel is the same as what other watchmakers use.

They use 316 steel for the outside of buildings, so not sure I need anything more in a watch.

Wrist cheese isn't a factor on building exteriors, though. The combination of salt and bacteria that builds up on a caseback is nasty stuff; 904L resists the pitting corrosion that lower-grade stainless alloys don't, which is why the entire case and bracelet of a modern steel Rolex is made of this material.

Here are some examples of what well-aged wrist cheese can do to a watch case:

[Paul7]

Originally Posted by belligero

Wrist cheese isn't a factor on building exteriors, though. The combination of salt and bacteria that builds up on a caseback is nasty stuff; 904L resists the pitting corrosion that lower-grade stainless alloys don't, which is why the entire case and bracelet of a modern steel Rolex is made of this material.

Here are some examples of what well-aged wrist cheese can do to a watch case:

I doubt that would happen in my climate, and if it did it wouldn't impact the function, appearance, or probably even value. Meanwhile with the slightly softer 904 steel you'd have scratches that ARE visible.

[belligero]

Originally Posted by Paul7

I doubt that would happen in my climate, and if it did it wouldn't impact the function, appearance, or probably even value. Meanwhile with the slightly softer 904 steel you'd have scratches that ARE visible.

The problem isn’t that the exterior climate that causes corrosion, but that being worn on a human wrist does. And those pits destroy the sealing surface and therefore the water resistance, so functionality is most definitely affected.

[yoniman]

Originally Posted by belligero

The problem isn’t that the exterior climate that causes corrosion, but that being worn on a human wrist does. And those pits destroy the sealing surface and therefore the water resistance, so functionality is most definitely affected.

This is so interesting.
Reminds me of a WIS wanabee imbecile in FB arguing all stainless steel are the same.

Anyway, tried to order this particular Ball watch but it is not yet available in AUS -NZ.

It is just so woefully frustrating to be a WIS in this part of the world.

I ended up buying online a SEIKO ICE MONSTER instead as a palliative measure while currently enduring a 2.5 year waiting list for a Rolex...

Sent from my TRT-LX2 using Tapatalk

[Paul7]

Originally Posted by belligero

The problem isn’t that the exterior climate that causes corrosion, but that being worn on a human wrist does. And those pits destroy the sealing surface and therefore the water resistance, so functionality is most definitely affected.

So that was a big problem before 904L came out, huh? All those decades old Subs being worn must be ticking time bombs. Would love to hear from forum members who've had their Rolex ruined by this threat.

[belligero]

Originally Posted by yoniman

This is so interesting.
Reminds me of a WIS wanabee imbecile in FB arguing all stainless steel are the same.

Anyway, tried to order this particular Ball watch but it is not yet available in AUS -NZ.

It is just so woefully frustrating to be a WIS in this part of the world.

I ended up buying online a SEIKO ICE MONSTER instead as a palliative measure while currently enduring a 2.5 year waiting list for a Rolex...

Yeah, the internet expertise in corrosion-resistant alloys that comes out with this stuff is pretty astounding. ;)

Good call on the Seiko; they make quality watches, and it'll definitely do the job until your Rolex comes up. Personally, I'd just keep that and skip the Ball.

Originally Posted by Paul7

So that was a big problem before 904L came out, huh? All those decades old Subs being worn must be ticking time bombs. Would love to hear from forum members who've had their Rolex ruined by this threat.

Who claimed that it was a "big" problem? The point is that it can and does happen, particularly when a watch has been used for decades by a less-than-meticulous wearer. Ask any experienced watchmaker if you don't believe me.

And it's not a "ticking time bomb", either. If the owner takes proper care of the watch by cleaning and rinsing it often enough that it doesn't get a buildup of salty wrist cheese on the caseback, then microbially-induced corrosion is simply never going to be an issue. But not everybody does that, so Rolex upgraded their steel.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by belligero

Wrist cheese isn't a factor on building exteriors, though. The combination of salt and bacteria that builds up on a caseback is nasty stuff; 904L resists the pitting corrosion that lower-grade stainless alloys don't, which is why the entire case and bracelet of a modern steel Rolex is made of this material.

Here are some examples of what well-aged wrist cheese can do to a watch case:

“Wrist cheese” that sure paints a picture

[belligero]

Originally Posted by brandrea

“Wrist cheese” that sure paints a picture

Yep, it truly adds another meaning to the term "vintage" when it comes to watches.

[Paul7]

Originally Posted by belligero

Yeah, the internet expertise in corrosion-resistant alloys that comes out with this stuff is pretty fucking astounding. ;)

Good call on the Seiko; they make quality watches, and it'll definitely do the job until your Rolex comes up. Personally, I'd just keep that and skip the Ball.


Who claimed that it was a "big" problem? The point is that it can and does happen, particularly when a watch has been used for decades by a less-than-meticulous wearer. Ask any experienced watchmaker if you don't believe me.

And it's not a "ticking time bomb", either. If the owner takes proper care of the watch by cleaning and rinsing it often enough that it doesn't get a buildup of salty wrist cheese on the caseback, then microbially-induced corrosion is simply never going to be an issue. But not everybody does that, so Rolex upgraded their steel.

So if you take proper care of your watch 904L 'advantages' are a non issue, yet you still have a watch that scratches easier and shows those scratches more than 316 steel, I should post some pictures of my wife's 6 month DJ illustrating this. IMO this is simply Rolex marketing hype, 904L will have zero positive advantages for the vast majority of Rolex owners with their pampered watches, so not really sure how that's an upgrade. As the OP says, 904L isn't really unique anymore, you can even get fake Rolexes made with it.

[belligero]

Any polished steel surface will show scratches easily. If you think your wife’s DJ is bad, then you should try my Reverso, which uses plain ol’ 316L and gets scratches if you even look at it.

Funny how these “pampered” watches are so infrequently cleaned, by the way. The pitting corrosion would barely exist if some owners weren’t so afraid of getting their watches wet.

Regardless, there’s no downside to using the better grade of steel, so I don’t know what you’re complaining about.