Durability of the Royal Oak SS

[Noxa]

I went to try on a Royal Oak today in Stainless, black face and loved the watch for its comfort, by far the best lugs and bracelet on a watch I've ever felt but all the guy kept saying is how fragile the watch was and how easily it scratches and marks, how it's not an everyday wear and more a piece for a collection.

Thoughts and opinions on this?

[tyler1980]

sounds like a bad salesman?

I wear an AP almost every day. I rotate them, but any one could be worn daily. Its not a tool watch like a Rolex, but that is not really the point of AP. They are more like wearing a piece of art on your wrist.

Unless you are planning on doing home renovations or something like that while wearing it, you should be fine. I am usually a bit more careful with my AP's vs my Rolex but only because i don't want to scratch it not because it is exceedingly delicate.

[Tomas Eriksson]

It can be worn daily, no problem. I have a 15400 that at periods is used as daily beater and no issues. Traveling, swimming, partying, etc.. Still looks great

[Noxa]

Well this is what I thought, the AP certainly isn't a tool watch but I just don't get why not only him may I add calls it so delicate, yeah it felt daintier than my Sub c but certainly not fragile. This scratching issue, if it is such a thing, why is it stated as such a point when it come to the Royal Oak?

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by Noxa

Well this is what I thought, the AP certainly isn't a tool watch but I just don't get why not only him may I add calls it so delicate, yeah it felt daintier than my Sub c but certainly not fragile. This scratching issue, if it is such a thing, why is it stated as such a point when it come to the Royal Oak?

its steel so it is the same as other watches, even rolex's 904L steel. None of them are functionally different in terms of case strength. With AP its the finally brushed vertical lines and mirror polish on alternating surfaces. Its easier to scratch the finish. That is cosmetic and nothing to do with the watch breaking though.

Other watches don't have the same level of detail in finishing which is why people mention it. I can see the scratches on my RO because I know where they are, no one else can see them. It doesn't bother me all that much though. Id rather have a scratched RO than a non scratched watch from another brand.

Its no different than the Rolex debate between brushed links and PCL. The reason some don't like PCL (on a GMT) is that they show scratches more than a brushed bracelet (on a sub). So if you are OK with PCL on a Rolex getting scratches you should be ok with a AP too.

[lapince]

Originally Posted by Noxa

Well this is what I thought, the AP certainly isn't a tool watch but I just don't get why not only him may I add calls it so delicate, yeah it felt daintier than my Sub c but certainly not fragile. This scratching issue, if it is such a thing, why is it stated as such a point when it come to the Royal Oak?

Not sure, it is also very cited on the Patek Nautilus and Aquanaut models, but I wear them 80% of the time, and the only hairlines I have are from my dogs teeth or claws, he is only 12 months old, and liked to play a lot, especially bite, when he was smaller, other than these marks mine are pristine, and same as RO's the bezels are flat brushed, but many do say RO bezels scratch easier then Patek bezels, hard to find an explination for that...

[mrenvy]

If a 40 years old 5402 can keep running until today, I don't see why the current RO models cannot be the same.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by mrenvy

If a 40 years old 5402 can keep running until today, I don't see why the current RO models cannot be the same.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

well there you have it, the definitive answer

would love to see pics of that one.

[mrenvy]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

well there you have it, the definitive answer



would love to see pics of that one.

https://youtu.be/LE_HaSMPEo4



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mineral]

. I have the 5402 and still running well till today.

Originally Posted by mrenvy

If a 40 years old 5402 can keep running until today, I don't see why the current RO models cannot be the same.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rachdanon]

Originally Posted by mrenvy

If a 40 years old 5402 can keep running until today, I don't see why the current RO models cannot be the same.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Would be great to know what parts have been replaced over the 40 years.

[BlueIn2Red]

I see this "RO is fragile and scratches easily" thing a lot, and in my experience at least, it isn't true. I wear my 15400 most days, and it's still in fantastic condition. A few hairline marks, as on all my watches, but nothing out of the ordinary at all. In fact the RO does a great job of looking "brand new" because of the amazing way it reflects light.

[bobernet]

I don't think they scratch any easier, and on much of the watch they're not any more obvious, but imagine a bezel ding on the coin edge of your sub. No one would even notice. A ding on the edges of a royal oak bezel, though, painfully obvious and likely only fixed with a bezel replacement.

Mine is gold, new, and I'm cautious. But, that wouldn't keep me from wearing every day if it was my only watch.

[BawlaDK]

I recently acquired the new 15202 RO with cal 2121...And that cal is the same as in a 5402 so tried and tested for MANY years. I would think that whatever errors og common flaws AP has seen over the years have been corrected by now. I dont baby mine and plan on wearing it daily as it is easily the most comfortable watch I own. That said I will of course excercise wrist awareness to a certain extent when wearing it because as others have pointed ou, the only delicate part of the watch is the finishing... And although i dont mind small scratches and signs of everday wear and tear, i dont want it dented or with massive and deep scratches... So for everuday normal waear you should be fine...