So have Rolex taken us for a ride with this new Ceramic Bezel?

[JJ Irani]

Hi guys,

After reading some of the HORROR stories on TRF about the new CERAMIC bezel and how easily it can either break or be dislodged, I'm now starting to wonder (especially since I do own a TT GMT-IIC) whether this was a good idea on Rolex's part or not?

Question is.......how much would it cost to replace a Ceramic bezel.....as opposed to the much cheaper anodized aluminium insert of the older sports models?

All this talk about pre-heating it to 1500ºC and then bombarding it with pure gold particles is all very nice...............but, at the end of the day, we have something that is HARD, SCRATCH-PROOF, but very, very BRITTLE!! Now what good is that in a sports watch??

Have we been taken for a ride?

[DanP]

Yes but that is true for all marketing.
Mines fine and not pampered.

[DanP]

Remember the immortal words of one Pt Barnum.
"A sucker is born every minute"

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by DanP

Yes but that is true for all marketing.
Mines fine and not pampered.

Until you accidentally smack it real hard against some solid object or it gets dislodged in a crowded mall!!

[looking to buy]

Good point. But I think we need more time to see. Maybe there are just a few with the problem. Let's give it a year and then see.

[Andad]

You will be just fine JJ. Your ceramic bezel will last for a long time.
Choose an item that you currently own - a watch, a mobile phone, a pair of glasses even a diamond ring - and drop it onto tiles, concrete or even a wooden floor and eventually it will break. I have seen diamonds break across their 'cut' line.
Treat your GMT TTc fairly and it will be just fine.

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by looking to buy

Good point. But I think we need more time to see. Maybe there are just a few with the problem. Let's give it a year and then see.

The Ceramic full gold version was introduced in 2005, the TT in 2006 and the SS in 2007.

How many more poor customers have to undergo losses before we wake up to the reality of the situation?

The new Subs and the DSSD are supposed to be rough & tumble dive watches with BRITTLE bezels. Imagine a professional diver down to some great depth and then accidentally smacking his bezel against a coral outcrop or some such similar hard object!!

I leave the rest to your imagination.

JJ

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by directioneng

You will be just fine JJ. Your ceramic bezel will last for a long time.
Choose an item that you currently own - a watch, a mobile phone, a pair of glasses even a diamond ring - and drop it onto tiles, concrete or even a wooden floor and eventually it will break. I have seen diamonds break across their 'cut' line.
Treat your GMT TTc fairly and it will be just fine.

Yes, I know, Eddie......I was referring in general. Why would ROLEX come up with a BRITTLE bezel?

[DanP]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Until you accidentally smack it real hard against some solid object or it gets dislodged in a crowded mall!!

Oh its been smacked JJ thats for sure. Im not worried in the least about it.

[Watch Professor]

Hasn't the ceramic bezel been out for several years? This should be enough time to give an unbiased account of its qualities, good or bad

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by Watch Professor

Hasn't the ceramic bezel been out for several years? This should be enough time to give an unbiased account of its qualities, good or bad

Irrespective of how long it's been out, why did Rolex come up with something so BRITTLE? That's my argument!!

[STEELINOX]

The thing is "JUNK" imho !
It looks good and thats where it ends. If you bust it, or it ejects itself, its a costly piece to replace. ROLEX went the wrong direction with this.

[moviefreak]

Just like diamonds... Hard to scratch easy to break..

[DanP]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Irrespective of how long it's been out, why did Rolex come up with something so BRITTLE? That's my argument!!

Jeez your the CEO! Why dont you tell us

Oh just a quick question JJ
I know you have had many a rolex and have known their qualities throughout the years. My question is:
In the past few yeast (my rolex knowledge) have you noticed that there has been certain modifications that have changed a rolex from what it was into what it is today? have these mods made it for better or for worse? Is it just a gimmick to get us to buy buy buy? I must admit I was sold on the new GMTIIC the second I first set eyes on her. where does fashion meet function here? should fashion and function exist /co exist for it? Your thoughts JJ

Thank you Happy New years You ol Kiwi you

Much Love
Dan

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by STEELINOX

The thing is "JUNK" imho !
It looks good and thats where it ends. If you bust it, or it ejects itself, its a costly piece to replace. ROLEX went the wrong direction with this.

You're right, buddy........it does look terrific and adds a lot of "flavour" to the watch......just gotta be careful at all times.

Nothing like the SS Sub-date 16610 for total peace of mind and a give-a-damn, carefree attitude when you are out and about!!

[sub99]

I agree. The ceramic bezel is a step backwards and an example of Rolex moving further away from the "tool watch" product direction that they used to become the company they are today.

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by DanP

Jeez your the CEO! Why dont you tell us

Oh just a quick question JJ
I know you have had many a rolex and have known their qualities throughout the years. My question is:
In the past few yeast (my rolex knowledge) have you noticed that there has been certain modifications that have changed a rolex from what it was into what it is today? have these mods made it for better or for worse? Is it just a gimmick to get us to buy buy buy? I must admit I was sold on the new GMTIIC the second I first set eyes on her. where does fashion meet function here? should fashion and function exist /co exist for it? Your thoughts JJ

Thank you Happy New years You ol Kiwi you

Much Love
Dan

Fashion or Function you ask, Dan?

Well, I say let's leave the fashion in those blinged-up models for the likes of Paris Hilton, Tara Reid and the Beckhams......

And give us poor souls something more functional, dependable and SOLID!! The Ceramic bezel looks beautiful, but not sure how functional it is after readig about its BRITTLE property.

JJ

[moviefreak]

JJ are you about to flip the ex-genius???

[DanP]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Fashion or Function you ask, Dan?

Well, I say let's leave the fashion in those blinged-up models for the likes of Paris Hilton, Tara Reid and the Beckhams......

And give us poor souls something more functional, dependable and SOLID!! The Ceramic bezel looks beautiful, but not sure how functional it is after readig about its BRITTLE property.

JJ

I think my question runs a little deeper than your reply JJ. Cmon dig deep

[STEELINOX]

What ROLEX shuld do is come up with an alternate Bezel system, and offer it as an option. But that wont happen, cause then they cant get the prices they get for ceramic insert replacement; its all designed to "attract" and "maximize return" (justifying price increases) AND "maximize future return" for 'chipped' or slightly damaged; imagine ROLEX saying that they cant just replace the insert b/c the reason the thing is chipped is the bezel seat has been dinged and wont seat the thing properly !

[jimbones43]

I remember Montblancs' "precious resin" had a bad batch run in the early 90's when the pens were very brittle and cracked or chipped easily. Is it possible that there can be a "bad" run of ceramic from time to time?? I don't know just thinking out loud.

I have heard they are very expensive to replace. I guess I don't have to worry since my 3 have old standard bezels.

Jimbones

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by moviefreak

JJ are you about to flip the ex-genius???

No bloody way, buddy..............but just wondering if my future Rolexes (if and when) should be with the Ceramic bezels or the age old trusted and proven ones?

[DanP]

Originally Posted by STEELINOX

What ROLEX shuld do is come up with an alternate Bezel system, and offer it as an option. But that wont happen, cause then they cant get the prices they get for ceramic insert replacement; its all designed to "attract" and "maximize return" (justifying price increases) AND "maximize future return" for 'chipped' or slightly damaged; imagine ROLEX saying that they cant just replace the insert b/c the reason the thing is chipped is the bezel seat has been dinged and wont seat the thing properly !

Good point.

[Singslinger]

I don't think Rolex has taken us for a ride JJ, more like the company maybe hasn't done enough testing/quality control/consistency checks before placing the ceramic bezel into mass production.

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by DanP

I think my question runs a little deeper than your reply JJ. Cmon dig deep

Yes, you also asked if fashion and function should co-exist?

Well, to a certain extent, YES......why the hell not? Classic example is the GMT-IIC itself - a very functional watch with a brittle bezel, polished centre links and a very scratch magnet like clasp!!

Question is: How alert does the wearer have to be at all times when he's sporting such a watch?

JJ

[Speed]

Do I smell a recall? Has this EVER happened with Rolex before?

Let's see some 3d / photoshop mockups with an Aluminum bezel the size and shape of the ceramic!

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by Speed

Do I smell a recall? Has this EVER happened with Rolex before?

Let's see some 3d / photoshop mockups with an Aluminum bezel the size and shape of the ceramic!

This is the best I can come up with.......if anyone else has better pics, please feel free to chime in.

[SLS]

JJ, 99%, if not more! LOL, of Rolex watches are babied. Sadly the era of the "real" tool watch have been replaced by a computer and Rolex knows this. The "brittle bezel" may pose a probelm for some, but IMHO Rolex is happier to charge $500 to replace a ceramic insert than $65 for an aluminum insert. The 116710 is the last modern Rolex I buy...Hello vintage!
Scott

[rockyn]

I have to disagree...if the ceramic bezel was brittle, we would be seeing a lot more broken inserts. Just because we see a few broken inserts does not all of a sudden make them brittle. If they were brittle, we would certainly see a lot more. To say that the ceramic insert is brittle is unfair imo. I own a ss GMT II C and I have banged it on more than one occasion. They aren't indestructible

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by rockyn

I have to disagree...if the ceramic bezel was brittle, we would be seeing a lot more broken inserts. Just because we see a few broken inserts does not all of a sudden make them brittle. If they were brittle, we would certainly see a lot more. To say that the ceramic insert is brittle is unfair imo. I own a ss GMT II C and I have banged it on more than one occasion. They aren't indestructible

That's reassuring and good to know, Robyn.......thanks.

Wonder if someone here knows exactly what kind of pressure it takes to break a Ceramic bezel.

And while we are on the topic of Ceramics, how do RADOs (heaven forbid) some of which are entirely made of Ceramics, stand up to knocks and bumps?

JJ