I Hate Ceramic Bezels

[Pandacat]

I really dont understand why so many major watch brands are jumping on the ceramic bezel craze.

The bezels can shatter if there is a direct impact. A heavy duty sports watch should be able to take a beating. Take something like the rolex submariner. Some would argue rolex has lost its tool watch roots and is primarily a luxury item, but regardless any rolex watch is designed to take a beating. The additional risk of direct impact to the bezel scares me off of ever owning one. Not that im a navy seal or anything, but i just dont want the additional baggage of “what if.”

Why not use a tungsten bezel? Or something like tegimented steel like sinn does?

[peterpl]

How many ceramic bezels shattering have you seen compared to how many bezels that look like crap that are made from aluminium or steel?

The percentage wise would be tiny. I think more ppl would want a prestine looking bezel over the life of the watch than to have a bezel that looks like its being dinged up.

I love ceramic bezels and have had over 20 watches with ceramic bezels. Its the best thing they have done.

Also I've smashed my ceramic bezel numerous times on several watches. NONE of them cracked. You need to be pissed and off your head and properly smash it into a brick to crack them

[SearChart]

Originally Posted by peterpl

How many ceramic bezels shattering have you seen compared to how many bezels that look like crap that are made from aluminium or steel?

The percentage wise would be tiny. I think more ppl would want a prestine looking bezel over the life of the watch than to have a bezel that looks like its being dinged up.

I love ceramic bezels and have had over 20 watches with ceramic bezels. Its the best thing they have done.

Also I've smashed my ceramic bezel numerous times on several watches. NONE of them cracked. You need to be pissed and off your head and properly smash it into a brick to crack them

Cracked ceramic bezels are pretty common, just like cracked crystals.

[peterpl]

Originally Posted by SearChart

Cracked ceramic bezels are pretty common, just like cracked crystals.

I'm sure they are common no doubt.

However the benefits of ceramic in terms of scratch proof/resistance surely far outweighs the damaged look of dented, cracked and scratched bezels made of aluminium or steel.

I used to own a few APs. Man those things are scratch magnets to the MAX. Thats why I've been looking at AP ROO models now with only ceramic bezels. Steel bezels looks good when new - after 6 months your $30k watch looks like a piece of crap.

[SearChart]

Originally Posted by peterpl

I'm sure they are common no doubt.

However the benefits of ceramic in terms of scratch proof/resistance surely far outweighs the damaged look of dented, cracked and scratched bezels made of aluminium or steel.

I used to own a few APs. Man those things are scratch magnets to the MAX. Thats why I've been looking at AP ROO models now with only ceramic bezels. Steel bezels looks good when new - after 6 months your $30k watch looks like a piece of crap.

I question how well ceramic holds up in the diving environment and walking around in ships, submarines, etc. But then again how many are actually used for that. For daily use ceramic is almost perfect.

Now if someone doesn't like the shiny look, I get that.

[csaltphoto]

Originally Posted by SearChart

I question how well ceramic holds up in the diving environment and walking around in ships, submarines, etc. But then again how many are actually used for that. For daily use ceramic is almost perfect.

Now if someone doesn't like the shiny look, I get that.

Well... I don't like the shiny look much but that is a personal preference. I've spent some time diving and and around marine work and I can speculate they won't hold up well. For example this is the interior of a ship I spend a fair amount of time on. Every surface you see is made of metal. And when the ship is moving around you bang into them quite a bit. Not to mention reaching for stuff. Near as I can remember the only soft surfaces on the entire boat are the bunks and the seats in the galley. You don't see a lot of ceramic on a working boat, at least on contact surfaces.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by SearChart

I question how well ceramic holds up in the diving environment and walking around in ships, submarines, etc. But then again how many are actually used for that. For daily use ceramic is almost perfect

As a Shipwright/Marine Engineer and present owner of my own bay cruiser that's known to muck around an awful lot with boats and yachts up to 52 meters in length.
I can say my DSSD looks pretty battered and scratched after 9 years on the wrist.
Some of the scratches were from enthusiastic/boisterous dog teeth but the rest the worst of it are from sticking my hands into tight places where a normal member of this forum would never ever entertain.
Not to mention doing the washing up
And that is despite being very mindfull of avoiding hazards where possible.
Despite all that, i think my wife's Diamond ring was the only thing to damage the Saphire crystal necessitating a change as a requirement of Rolex at the last service.

The Ceramic bezel insert is still going strong despite being bumped, belted, rubbed and scraped against SS bolts, flanges, couplings and all manner of things one typically finds in machinery spaces in the floating marine environment.

Initially I was sceptical about the Ceramic bezel but over the last 9 years I can categorically state that it has held up better than the rest of the watch without fail with not a mark on it

[Jocke]

Originally Posted by SearChart

I question how well ceramic holds up in the diving environment and walking around in ships, submarines, etc. But then again how many are actually used for that. For daily use ceramic is almost perfect.

Now if someone doesn't like the shiny look, I get that.

The biggest question is: How many dives with their dive watch? Not many IMHO.

[pigman08]

Originally Posted by SearChart

Now if someone doesn't like the shiny look, I get that.

That’s my issue with the ceramic bezels... IMO, shine and sparkle do not properly pay homage to what were once advertised as the watches for the consummate adventurer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[horseShu]

Downside to ceramic bezels is, assuming you didn't break them, they will always look shiny and new. So there will be no "vintage" feel to your watch down the road. Unlike those faded GMT aluminum bezel inserts that are so prized by collectors.

[Rock]

It's a matter of personal preference.
I'm not keen on the coloured ceramic bezels as I don't think they have as attractive colours or the 'presence' of the previous anodised ones, but having said that I prefer the black ceramics on the Sub and GMT. With the exception of the GMT II, I prefer the 5 digit models overall.

[Calatrava r]

Originally Posted by Rock

It's a matter of personal preference.
I'm not keen on the coloured ceramic bezels as I don't think they have as attractive colours or the 'presence' of the previous anodised ones, but having said that I prefer the black ceramics on the Sub and GMT. With the exception of the GMT II, I prefer the 5 digit models overall.

I am also not a fan of colorful bezels on watches. Black is all I will do. Would like to see an all Black GMT come out in the next release.

[AshCashEmAll]

Hmmm I would say being able to pay the price of a car for a wristwatch would be considered a luxury. Ceramic holds up a million times better then aluminum or steel and is scratch resistant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mystro]

Originally Posted by AshCashEmAll

Hmmm I would say being able to pay the price of a car for a wristwatch would be considered a luxury. Ceramic holds up a million times better then aluminum or steel and is scratch resistant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

X2. For most luxury watch owners, the scratch resistance and rich color of ceramic is a huge leap from aluminum. Opinions might change IF Rolex wasn’t limiting their parts and you could still buy cheap aluminum bezels and change them out as we did 2 decades ago then a scratches wouldn’t mean so much.
I would bet most new ceramic Rolex models will look new for decades even with hard use. The bracelets might looked whipped but the bezel and sapphire will be pristine.

The toughest/scratch resistant luxury watch total package is Panerai’s new Carbotech watches. Hands down, I have personally seen how tough these watches are on underwater dives and hitting it against a stone bridge pier. Mine still looks pristine new. My Rolex in the same situation would look dented and scratched up. Carbotech is lighter and stronger than titanium but scratch resistant as ceramic yet not brittle or shatter.
The sapphire crystal is the only weak factor left on the Carbotech watch.

[Showcall]

[QUOTE=AshCashEmAll;10570546]Hmmm I would say being able to pay the price of a car for a wristwatch would be considered a luxury. Ceramic holds up a million times better then aluminum or steel and is scratch resistant.


x 2

[toolr]

There are plenty of watches available without ceramic bezels you can choose from.

[herefortheattachment]

I agree. They are beautiful, but to me, ceramic bezels have shifted the Rolex sports line further away from tool watches towards jewelry. While Rolex’s ceramic bezels are durable and well-constructed, they are impractical in the sense that if they break they are, in comparison to a new aluminum insert, much more expensive to replace (some would argue needlessly so for the simple black inserts) - especially with replacement parts scarce outside of the OEM in comparison to their aluminum bezels. And while I prefer OEM parts, I do appreciate that aftermarket aluminum inserts are available for dirt cheap.

But since the advent of the quartz watch, it’s unlikely that most people use their Rolexes as tool watches, or push them to their limits; us WIS probably baby ours less than most. I imagine the typical Rolex sports watch owner is fairly gentle with their watch and prefers the scratch resistance of the ceramic over the added durability and lower replacement costs of aluminum.

I really admire what Rolex has done with ceramic. I still remember their unveiling of the Pepsi bezel years ago. Their ceramic bezels are beautiful and certainly changed the industry. That said, I don’t baby my sports/tool watches, so the ceramic isn’t for me, either.

[faimag]

I believe ceramic bezels are functional improvements but i just can’t like their shiny “plasticy” look. Nowhere near the warmth of the aluminium ones.

[Pandacat]

I personally like my watches a bit dinged up as long as i was the one to do the damage. I feel it adds character. I recently saw a thread of a seal team 6 member who wore his rolex submariner throughout his tours. He said it never failed him. To my memory i think it was the pre ceramic version. I wonder how well it would’ve done bezel wise if it was the current ceramic sub.

I get it most of us arent navy seals, but i am pretty sure some members here have fairly physical jobs. I would be curious as to hear if their ceramic bezels fair well in their environments.

[Token74]

Originally Posted by Pandacat

I personally like my watches a bit dinged up as long as i was the one to do the damage. I feel it adds character. I recently saw a thread of a seal team 6 member who wore his rolex submariner throughout his tours. He said it never failed him. To my memory i think it was the pre ceramic version. I wonder how well it would’ve done bezel wise if it was the current ceramic sub.

I get it most of us arent navy seals, but i am pretty sure some members here have fairly physical jobs. I would be curious as to hear if their ceramic bezels fair well in their environments.

I don’t have a physical job, and I’m closer to an actual Seal than a Navy Seal!! But, I live on a farm and do hobby farming which is pretty dirty and physical work, and involves mending tractors and other such machinery. I wear my 116600 for this and have done since buying it 2nd May 2014. Bezel is fine.

Sure, a direct hit on the bezel might cause it to shatter, but so might a direct hit on the crystal, and I know which is the bigger target.

My preference would be to not have a ceramic bezel on the Dweller as I like patina, but I’m really not that bothered.

As others have said, if people want a true tool watch, then buy a true tool watch, and not a Rolex (modern or otherwise!). If you go diving, buy a dive computer watch, if you’re a builder, buy a G-Shock, if you’re an accountant, buy a digital watch with a calculator, if you’re a lorry driver then buy an Apple Watch.

The vast majority on here bemoaning Rolex no longer being tool watches and now being luxury jewellery are deluded if they think this has anything to do with ceramic bezels. I grew up in the 80’s and everyone wanted a Rolex because it was a Rolex and stock market dudes had made the cool! It is no more jewellery now than it was then.

I can’t speak for the 60’s and 70’s, but I suspect there were equally robust and useful watches available for most activities at a fraction of the price even then.

If you don’t like ceramic bezels, buy a four or five digit reference, problem solved. Why create a post saying you hate them?

I’m not a big fan of the Day Date. But I wouldn’t start a post saying that I hate DD’s.

Weird.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pandacat]

Originally Posted by Token74

I’m not a big fan of the Day Date. But I wouldn’t start a post saying that I hate DD’s.

Weird.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The main purpose of me starting this thread was expressing my opinion and hoping to hear both sides. What i didn’t expect was perhaps i might offend those who have watches with ceramic bezels. To that i mean no offense.

But to question why i would start this thread when this is a forum and the purpose of a forum is to have open discussion with topics we are interested in is kind puzzling to me.

Weird.

[Explorer2Guy]

Originally Posted by Pandacat

The main purpose of me starting this thread was expressing my opinion and hoping to hear both sides. What i didn’t expect was perhaps i might offend those who have watches with ceramic bezels. To that i mean no offense.

But to question why i would start this thread when this is a forum and the purpose of a forum is to have open discussion with topics we are interested in is kind puzzling to me.

Weird.

I think you’ve struck a nerve which goes to the heart of the psychology behind luxury goods. While there will be many claiming otherwise, people buy outrageously expensive items to flout their wealth/status.

There’s no doubt some insecurity driving these purchases. You’ve questioned the purpose of ceramic bezels and for some with the ceramic bezels, the insecurity to flout status with a $10,000 plus watch leaves them a bit unsettled.

I’m no Sigmund Freud but there’s no logic behind OUR purchases of these watches. How dare you question ceramic bezels! Don’t make some people think too hard about this hobby/affliction.

[Pandacat]

Originally Posted by Explorer2Guy

I think you’ve struck a nerve which goes to the heart of the psychology behind luxury goods. While there will be many claiming otherwise, people buy outrageously expensive items to flout their wealth/status.

There’s no doubt some insecurity driving these purchases. You’ve questioned the purpose of ceramic bezels and for some with the ceramic bezels, the insecurity to flout status with a $10,000 plus watch leaves them a bit unsettled.

I’m no Sigmund Freud but there’s no logic behind OUR purchases of these watches. How dare you question ceramic bezels! Don’t make some people think too hard about this hobby/affliction.

Well put. I don’t think i would be questioning the durability of ceramic bezels if there weren’t any alternatives for it. I have a tungsten ring that i never take off and literally there are zero scratches or dents on them. I know omega’s globemaster has a tungsten bezel, as well as Oris Aquis Source of Life (which is absolutely beautiful).

I thought tegimented steel couldnt be scratched either, but a member commented that it can, so now i am a little confused.

I just don’t understand why Rolex (and other brands) would choose ceramic inserts over tungsten and tegimented steel (questionable).

[Cru Jones]

Originally Posted by Pandacat

The main purpose of me starting this thread was expressing my opinion and hoping to hear both sides. What i didn’t expect was perhaps i might offend those who have watches with ceramic bezels. To that i mean no offense.

But to question why i would start this thread when this is a forum and the purpose of a forum is to have open discussion with topics we are interested in is kind puzzling to me.

Weird.

This topic has been discussed hundreds of times on TRF, so I think people don’t have much filter on this topic anymore.

Also, you using the word “hate” probably brings out stronger reactions....

[Woody]

You can always buy an Explorer II.......but come on, let's not kid ourselves. Rolex stopped producing tool watches in the 00s (some would say the 80s). The ceramic bezels are designed to sparkle in the "mood" lighting of restaurants, up-market bars and Business Class

[subtona]

Just don’t buy a watch w a ceramic bezel.
No reason to hate on them.

Plenty of options.

[Singslinger]

Originally Posted by subtona

Just don’t buy a watch w a ceramic bezel.
No reason to hate on them.

Plenty of options.

This.

Personally, I prefer ceramic bezels - huge improvement over the aluminium versions.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Pandacat

I really dont understand why so many major watch brands are jumping on the ceramic bezel craze.

The bezels can shatter if there is a direct impact. A heavy duty sports watch should be able to take a beating. Take something like the rolex submariner. Some would argue rolex has lost its tool watch roots and is primarily a luxury item, but regardless any rolex watch is designed to take a beating. The additional risk of direct impact to the bezel scares me off of ever owning one. Not that im a navy seal or anything, but i just dont want the additional baggage of “what if.”

Why not use a tungsten bezel? Or something like tegimented steel like sinn does?

Perhaps a simple design change to something like a Seiko Monster would be sufficient?
Then again one would lose the versatile design aesthetics of the classic Rolex diver

[Maxy]

Originally Posted by Pandacat

I A heavy duty sports watch should be able to take a beating.

Yes, agree but you are buying a luxury watch; not a heavy duty sports watch.

[Pandacat]

Originally Posted by Maxy

Yes, agree but you are buying a luxury watch; not a heavy duty sports watch.

Debatable