Steel Bezel vs Ceramic Bezel

[keshaandrea]

After I touched and touched this new Rolex production with ceramic bezel and compare it to the steel bezel, I found itis as a boring thing with this ceramic, I am thinking of the fading color fun etc in the future that it will never happen with this ceramic bezel.
And for stonger, I think steel bezel is much much much stronger than this boring ceramic.
In my opinion also, steel bezel is more macho, not like ceramic thingy that is more fragile, I found in the other forum that someone had to buy new ceramic bezel for his new Rolex because of falling Rolex and cracked ceramic bezel, that this is never happen in the past day, we lost of the "goliath" watch in this era.

"Posted this on another forum and now it is on all forums so I thought I might as well tell you all what happened.

My new 4moth old GMTII Ceramic bezel slipped out of my hands at waist height and fell to the floor. The ceramic bezel cracked into pieces and came off the bezel. My Rolex dealer sent the watch off to Rolex and the ceramic bezel cost $1500!!!! YIKES! Makes me miss my old style GMTII. "



Maybe I am old now.

Any chance to make a polling to Rolex to set back the steel bezel?
What do you think?

[Chadridv]

Are you talking about only the Daytona? All the other watches previously used aluminum inserts.

[SC11]

I'm the complete opposite and find the ceramic an improvement.

Each to their own I guess, in an ideal world we would have the choice.

[Thuilln]

I suppose you meant aluminium instead of steel...
I would never consider a ceramic bezel, especially when it costs 1500$ to replace!
I changed mine (aluminium) on my 14060M for 80$.

[chong2k]

Looking at my DSSD Blue right now. Loving the beautiful shiny bezel with the 3D Style lettering. Love it and find it much better than the old one but each to their own.


Guys.... the expansive replacement story is getting old. You're probably more likely to win the lottery than to break the bezel.

[lhawli]

Ceramic > Aluminum any day!

If you drop your watch don't blame the bezel! Stories of ceramic bezel problems are far and few between!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[AK797]

Ceramics are the business, and the more marks my SS and PM bezels get the more I appreciate the durable worry-free ceramic.

[Cru Jones]

This topic is new to this forum!

Anyway, ceramic over aluminum any day every day. Unless your main concern is nostalgia for a bygone era.

Unless you were a Comex diver, Rolex has always been more jewelry/marketing than tool (not that there's anything wrong with that).

The ceramic improves pretty much everything (except the capacity to fade or get scratched).

[padi56]

Give me the aluminum inserts any time over ceramic,it's not like ceramic is new in watches its been used in watches since the 1960s.But the so called advantages outweigh the many disadvantages of ceramic, replacement cost and not DIY change.A few of my watches were used as working tools yet in over 30 years of quite hard use just one insert change cost back then just £25.With today's mainly pampered Rolex watches they could make the inserts and cases out of glass, so no real need for ceramic. But since one major brand started ceramic inserts the rest had to follow the ceramic fashion.

[Robbyman]

DaytonaC aside, which is my favourite watch and just downright amazing, I find the Ceramic watches just not as nice as the pre Ceramic. Hear me out.

I have a BLNR and had a SubC. The SubC was sold and replaced by a 16610 nos.

The Ceramic bezel has too much reflection that the aluminium does not - here is the BIG thing for me - because the Ceramic flashes so much the bezel coin edge on the Ceramic Sub is not polished as much and does not catch the light. I love that on the 16610. The coin edged bezel is much better on the pre Ceramic sub.

I also wear my 16610 more than the Ceramics, it feels much more like a tool watch. I almost want some battle scares on it because it is a Rolex and doing what is was built for! The Ceramic is jewellery, the pre Ceramic is a tool watch - I keep my DaytonaC for the flashy job.

[GB-man]

Originally Posted by Chadridv

Are you talking about only the Daytona? All the other watches previously used aluminum inserts.

+1

[The Libertine]

Steel. Here's why:

I like the fact that steel bezels show patina after a while, whether scratches or fade.

I like the fact that, on the GMT, the steel bezels may be easily swapped.

I like the fact that the steel bezels are much less costly to replace.

I dislike paying significantly extra for a bezel made of ceramic when the steel bezel worked just fine for the intended purpose.

I dislike the fact that the ceramic bezel makes the watch more a piece of fancy jewelry than a tool watch.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by The Libertine

Steel. Here's why:

I like the fact that steel bezels show patina after a while, whether scratches or fade.

I like the fact that, on the GMT, the steel bezels may be easily swapped.

I like the fact that the steel bezels are much less costly to replace.

I dislike paying significantly extra for a bezel made of ceramic when the steel bezel worked just fine for the intended purpose.

I dislike the fact that the ceramic bezel makes the watch more a piece of fancy jewelry than a tool watch.

+ 1,000,000

[brandrea]

Depends on the reference so I can't vote

Ceramic suits the modern line, just as aluminum suits the 4 and 5 digit references

[c41006]

I like both... I can't say that one is "better" than the other.

[incontrol]

I like ceramic. I like the way it looks. Not a fan of the beat up look.

One exception where the aluminum insert was awesome is insert on the GMT and having the ability to swap bezels, otherwise it's ceramic for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[droptopman]

I enjoy both. Ceramics are more durable imo.
I have had to replace several aluminum inserts over the years.
30 years ago you could replace an original aluminum insert easily and cheaply. However, currently if you want to keep a vintage watch original you will pay big money to do so.
The last MKII insert I bought for a vintage Sub was $1800. A decent MKIII insert will run $1000++. A good original Fat font GMT insert is in the same range. Nicely faded are much more. Even for 5 digit watches.
Of course you do have a cheaper option with a service insert.
I do love a insert with natural patina. Gives the watch some individual character.

[keshaandrea]

I am sorry, I mean insert, aluminium insert.

I want to add a brand new rolex in my collection, so I went to AD and they showed me some ceramic rolexes, after touched the green, the black blue, the chocolate, the black and I feel all the same.
I was thinking of my kids Toy Watch, feeling same insert.

Thinking about the new Explorer II will be ceramic also, and make me stop and quit from the shop.

sorry no offense for all member, if this thread is annoying members here, please forgive me.

[keshaandrea]

Originally Posted by Chadridv

Are you talking about only the Daytona? All the other watches previously used aluminum inserts.

All Rolexes with aluminium insert.
Thank for your correction.

[subtona]

The cost of repair/replacement for ceramic is certainly off putting for the ceramic vs the aluminum insert.

The ceramic provides scratch resistance, especially evident and useful in unprotected applications such as the latest Daytonas. The Daytona high polish steel bezel would show wear rather quickly.

Sorry to hear about your GMT.

One thing we do know is it rarely ends well when our watches encounter a hard surface with force.

[keshaandrea]

Originally Posted by Cru Jones

This topic is new to this forum!

Anyway, ceramic over aluminum any day every day. Unless your main concern is nostalgia for a bygone era.

Unless you were a Comex diver, Rolex has always been more jewelry/marketing than tool (not that there's anything wrong with that).

The ceramic improves pretty much everything (except the capacity to fade or get scratched).

I think Ceramic is not a jewelry thing?

If you see Rolex advertisements, there are a lot of sport activities, Rolex went to the highest mountain, dive to the deepest ocean, sponsoring F1, etc

All of them are professionals, I think Rolex wants to show us that they are serious watch maker for unfriendly environment, not only jewelry goods.

And Rolex is an investment also.

[David cote]

Me I love both but for my Daytona ! I feel like these are where it is at for me anyway !








Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[subtona]

Originally Posted by David cote

Me I love both but for my Daytona ! I feel like these are where it is at for me anyway !

The white dial zenith is a most compelling argument for the steel bezel


I also believe the black dial Daytona C is equally compelling for ceramic

[keshaandrea]

If they are coming together with the same time, which one will you pick? The steel bezel or the ceramic bezel?

[sensui]

Originally Posted by The Libertine

Steel. Here's why:

I like the fact that steel bezels show patina after a while, whether scratches or fade.

I like the fact that, on the GMT, the steel bezels may be easily swapped.

I like the fact that the steel bezels are much less costly to replace.

I dislike paying significantly extra for a bezel made of ceramic when the steel bezel worked just fine for the intended purpose.

I dislike the fact that the ceramic bezel makes the watch more a piece of fancy jewelry than a tool watch.

Yep.

[ejvette]

Ceramic for me cuz I like it nice and shiny yes yes!

[watchwatcher]

They both have their merits.

My advice would be to stick with aluminum bezel models if that's what floats your boat.

[Mr. K]

Originally Posted by keshaandrea

And for stonger, I think steel bezel is much much much stronger than this boring ceramic.
In my opinion also, steel bezel is more macho, not like ceramic thingy that is more fragile...

More macho? Interesting take.

[Xerxes77]

Ceramic bezel!

[David cote]

I couldn't do it I bought the ceramic but I found that I would choose the Zenith every day of the week, so I let the Ceramic go to a user that would enjoy it !

What a great watch but just not for me !


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk