Ceramic did NOT even last a year

[TurboWatch]

Originally Posted by scl6118

Do you really think a ceramic bezel, or any bezel, should not have any damage after hitting it with a "swinging necklace of keys"? Seriously, that's like whipping a hammer at it and acting shocked when the bezel breaks! The ceramic is made to be scratch resistant, fade resistant, and durable, WHICH IT IS! That doesn't mean it's impervious to major blunt force with metal objects! Blaming Rolex is totally ridiculous!

x 2

[padi56]

[QUOTE=Dan Pierce;1534227]

The old cheap aluminium bezel/QUOTE]

I prefer classic, inexpensive aluminum bezel.
dP

Have to agree Dan and has a track record of 50 plus years without any problems and very inexpencive to replace.

[kkwn98]

Originally Posted by petespendthrift

It may not be Rolex's problem but it is their fault. They "improved" the design and charged a lot more for it so they should be honourable enough to stand by their premium priced product.

The reason there are relatively few instances of this is because most owners treat DSSDs and the new GMTs like they would a gold dress watch (ie. very carefully).

Rolex should show good will to those that still use them as a steel sports watch or make it clear they are actually now dress watches in their advertising and in their dealer to customer advice. If they sell the watch for $2000 more than they used to, they have to meet much higher expectations from their customers.

The old cheap aluminium bezel, if given the same treatment, might be scratched but would easily still be useable until the next service and then only cost $50 to replace.

The crystal did not shatter because it is much thicker - the ceramic insert is not much thicker than an egg shell where this one has chipped. The action that cause the damage does not sound like it involved excessive force and its not the result of a defect either.

Not sure how you can gauge this from the OP's post?

Also, if I damage my Rolex because I or someone else whacks it, then Rolex should be "honourable" and fix it? Sure they'll fix it; not so sure if they'll do it gratis. Would be nice if they did, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

[flyinbrian]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

I'm pretty sure the DSSD bezel is NOT Ceramic........it's called CERACHROME, a bit different from the GMT-IIC bezel.

JJ

They are both the same according to Rolex's website.

[STEELINOX]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

WHOA!!

After reading all of the above, I wonder how many of you are still looking forward to Rolex rejuvenating the famous Sub-date 16610 to a Ceramic bezel?

I dont, and would never buy one, however if I were to receive one, I would bastardo it and retro an ALL aluminum setup !

[Playdrv4me]

Originally Posted by kkwn98

Not sure how you can gauge this from the OP's post?

Also, if I damage my Rolex because I or someone else whacks it, then Rolex should be "honourable" and fix it? Sure they'll fix it; not so sure if they'll do it gratis. Would be nice if they did, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

I agree, a METAL key hitting a CERAMIC surface at just the right angle/force seems to me like it could resonate enough to cause various levels of damage.

Seems similar to how it sometimes doesn't take any force at all to accidentally break a glass decanter.

[SDDS]

Originally Posted by flyinbrian

They are both the same according to Rolex's website.

thats also what i have read on the Rolex catalog.. its called CERACHROM for both GMT and DSSD.. and to be more specific its called the Cerachrom Disc

[Playdrv4me]

Originally Posted by flyinbrian

They are both the same according to Rolex's website.

That's right. Cerachrom is their generic name for a Ceramic bezel with a Chromed finish. It is the same thing.

[flyinbrian]

I am curious if the OP is for sure certain that the key caused the damage. As stated he wears his watch doing everything and in some harsh environments and also said he did not notice it right away. Who's to say for sure if the key was the cause.

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by SDDS

thats also what i have read on the Rolex catalog.. its called CERACHROM for both GMT and DSSD..

Yes, you are right......I just checked my latest 2009 Rolex catalogue.......but when you hold them side by side, they look different.

The new Subs seem to have the same Cerachrom disc as the DSSD, but looks different from the Ceramic bezel of the GMT-IIC. Wonder why?

[SDDS]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Yes, you are right......I just checked my latest 2009 Rolex catalogue.......but when you hold them side by side, they look different.

The new Subs seem to have the same Cerachrom disc as the DSSD, but looks different from the Ceramic bezel of the GMT-IIC. Wonder why?

maybe u r right when comparing the sub with the gmt but the dssd and gmt is exactly the same..

[Fiery]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Yes, you are right......I just checked my latest 2009 Rolex catalogue.......but when you hold them side by side, they look different.

The new Subs seem to have the same Cerachrom disc as the DSSD, but looks different from the Ceramic bezel of the GMT-IIC. Wonder why?

That's an interesting topic. Has someone tried to compare the DSSD or GMT IIC bezel colour and characteristics against e.g. a black Rado? I will do it myself when I get my first Rolex in 2010, so if noone has done it yet, I'll post a topic then.

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by SDDS

maybe u r right when comparing the sub with the gmt but the dssd and gmt is exactly the same..

Is it? I thought the DSSD and the new Subs look the same.

The GMT-IIC looks more like the real Ceramic, whereas the DSSD and Subs look more like metal.

I wish someone would clear this up.

Thanks - JJ

[SDDS]

here is a pic to compare...l

[STEELINOX]

Originally Posted by SDDS

here is a pic to compare...l

Those all look like fine china !

[Playdrv4me]

Originally Posted by STEELINOX

Those all look like fine china !

Ok THAT was pretty funny.

[STEELINOX]

Originally Posted by Playdrv4me

Ok THAT was pretty funny.

Allright, thats it for me - You've been great !

[RolexPete32]

Wow well thank you for sharing. This is good for me to know. Being a former Chef. I was always told the ceramic knives are great but never got one myself as I heard that if you drop a ceramic knife that was it and your $250.00 knife would be laying in pieces. This left me concerned when Rolex jumped on ship with all this ceramic business I saw other watch makers doing.

On another note I think Rolex has changed alot over the last few years. If you read the book Rolex best of time an unarouthized history. You will know what I am talking about or you may know from your own experence.

[scl6118]

Originally Posted by flyinbrian

I am curious if the OP is for sure certain that the key caused the damage. As stated he wears his watch doing everything and in some harsh environments and also said he did not notice it right away. Who's to say for sure if the key was the cause.

That's a good point! When I read the post I found it odd that he stated that he inspected the watch after the key hit and didn't see any damage. Several days later, he then noticed the damage. It seems very plausible that he may have damaged it another way and didn't realize it.

[rolexnovice]

LOL! This thread is great. I told myself to save and wait till 2010 SS Ceramic Sub but after reading this post, the ceramic sounds like its more vulnerable that the steel bezel (even if a sharp object struck the watch that started this thread, the keys).

If the SS Sub C is going to be 41mm and as vulnerable as the steel, I may as well get the 40mm Steel Sub out now, instead of waiting. I think I will watch the conversations as we get closer to the release date (if it even comes out in Sept of 2010).

[rolexnovice]

Originally Posted by jj irani

is it? I thought the dssd and the new subs look the same.

The gmt-iic looks more like the real ceramic, whereas the dssd and subs look more like metal.

I wish someone would clear this up.

Thanks - jj

x 2

[sheldonsmith]

I believe Cerachrome and ceramic are the same thing....

-Sheldon

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

I'm pretty sure the DSSD bezel is NOT Ceramic........it's called CERACHROME, a bit different from the GMT-IIC bezel.

JJ

[ingoodtime]

The gmt has a shiny bezel and dial. The comparison to the
DSSD makes it appear the dial is not as shiny. However, the
bezel is comparible with the shine on the gmt. What say
you?

[Sonny Crockett]

Originally Posted by SDDS

here is a pic to compare...l

They all look shiny but on the GMT on the bezel top were the triangle is that's were it makes it look more like ceramic and I think it is because on the Sub and DSSD the triangle on the bezel is smaller with the pearl on it.

[WJGESQ]

Thats a pretty routine incident you described. Not exactly like you dropped it off the Empire State Building. I would try Rolex for a warranty repair.

[watchmaker]

From a business perspective they may wish to repair the bezel free of charge, a the watch is only 1 year old, and you do expect it to last. However, if they did this, I imagine there would be a letter accompanying the watch on return saying it was a gesture of goodwill, and not a repair under warranty. As many people have said, the damage is not covered by them, it is not a fault in manufacture (if it hit the crystal and it cracked, would anyone still think it was a warranty job? Probably not) I am truely sorry to hear of this situation, but the damage was caused by a person, not a failing on rolex's part. It is important that they make people aware of that.

Like i said, they could, and maybe should do it FOC put of goodwill, it costs them next to nothing. But they need to stand by their product and say we did not fail here, this is accidental damage.

Hope you get everything sorted though mate. I feel for you.
Scott

[yemenmocha]

Incredibly disappointing.

[postiff]

I did not think that this would get up to 5 pages.

I noticed it at around 10pm on the 26th and it happened on the 25th around 1pm I do not remember doing anything in between those hours that would have caused the damage. Honestly I looked at the crystal assuming it hit that and did not look at the insert. The scary thing is I had a dream about 3 days before that the crystal shattered.

But you never know one of the 20 plus times it has hit a door jamb maybe cracked it and this was the key that broke the ceramic disc…

Let me please clarify I am in no way blaming Rolex. I am not saying they are selling a sub par product. I did not mean for my post to sound like I was plotting some elaborate scam to get it replaced on their dime. If I happen to write them a letter quoting some of their video and get it replaced as a courtesy then wonderful. If I have to pay, oh well no hard feelings. It is just a part of owning a piece like this and maybe I will be more careful now that I now the limits of the infamous ceramic.


Straight from their video on their website.

“Some may call it an obsession but at Rolex however, the pursuit of excellence is a passion. Finding the MOST DURABLE material for its bezels was just one more challenge, the answer, Ceramic”. Towards the end they say “Virtually indestructible and impervious to scratches the ceramic bezel HAS to withstand more abrasion than any other part of the watch”

Virtually in know, I know it says virtually.

http://www.rolex.com/en/index.jsp#/e...rfection/index

Postiff

[STEELINOX]

Originally Posted by postiff

Let me please clarify I am in no way blaming Rolex. I am not saying they are selling a sub par product.
Postiff

I didnt think you were.

[watchmaker]

Like I said buddy, good business practises say they should help you out. It's pennies to them. I like your chances with your plan to tell the truth, and quote their own marketing. The people that decide whethe or not jobs are done for free or not can tell when someone is telling the truth or lying, and they are genuinly there to help. Honesty usually gets you what you want with watch houses.

Hope things go well
Scott