Is there a brand that makes a tougher mechanical watch ?

[Burlington]

Not including G-Shocks and alike.

Rolex have a reputation for making extremely tough and durable timepieces.

But do they hold the crown in this regard, or can anyone else give them competition for outright resilience to whatever gets thrown at it ?

[iTreelex]

My other guess is Omega but Rolex still comes out on top for their movements imo

[TswaneNguni]

No

[stateman]

Don't know about differences in terms of ability to handle shock to the movement, but my Sinn watches are much tougher than my Rolexes re: the case/bracelets managing daily knocks and dings.

Esp. the submarine steel and tegimented U50 I picked up this year...just don't show any marks from normal use or strap changes at all. 500M water resistance, antimagnetic, seemingly scratch proof so far.

[JodyHighroller]

Originally Posted by iTreelex

My other guess is Omega but Rolex still comes out on top for their movements imo

I agree, Omega has come a long way with their movements. Not to mention most of them are protected against magnetism up to 15,000 gauss. There isn’t a comparable Rolex to my knowledgable.

The Milgauss only goes up to 1,000.

[dchernikoff]

Originally Posted by JodyHighroller

I agree, Omega has come a long way with their movements. Not to mention most of them are protected against magnetism up to 15,000 gauss. There isn’t a comparable Rolex to my knowledgable.

The Milgauss only goes up to 1,000.

There was an article where someone tested a Milgauss and it stands up to much more than 1000 gauss. The name hasn't changed, but the materials and silox mainspring make it able to stand well over 1000 now. I think they got up to 6000 or more before they tester chickened out (it was his personal watch).

-Dan

[csaltphoto]

Originally Posted by dchernikoff

There was an article where someone tested a Milgauss and it stands up to much more than 1000 gauss. The name hasn't changed, but the materials and silox mainspring make it able to stand well over 1000 now. I think they got up to 6000 or more before they tester chickened out (it was his personal watch).

-Dan

Here you go

https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/a-...odymium-magnet

[htrap2294]

The new Omega movements are pretty damn tough. I had a friend drop one of the new Seamasters onto a granite floor. The watch was completely fine and maintained the same level of accuracy.

[planemad]

Sinn are known for being robust.

[owl.]

The Seiko marine master 300 looks pretty darn tough.

But who knows!?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dabbadon8]

Richard Mille for Rafa seems pretty sturdy given he can play with it.

[jcatral14]

Breitling makes some pretty tough watches too

[Vigilance247]

https://youtu.be/dOYe6rLmEZs


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Mystro]

The playing field has changed with ceramics and I dont believe the Rolex movement or watch in general has any real advantage in durability over similar built watches. As much as I love my Rolex watches, I see nothing with them that stands out as being more durable. The days of those advertisements from Rolex have long passed.

That said, my Panerai Carbotech will kick any Rolex down the road and not have a mark on it when its done doing it. Personally have tested the toughness of the Panerai Carbotech off a stone bridge pier underwater on a dive. My DSSD JC would have its ceramic bezel shattered with huge dents on the case with a similar hit. I have taken many dives over the last 30 years with Rolex, Omega, Panerai, etc... I feel I have a real good idea of real world performance and level of abuse a mechanical watch can take. The Panerai Carbotech is next level build material for a luxury watch.

Now if we get into the movements, Rolex amplitude is very weak compared to more advanced mechanical movements with dual barrel mainsprings. In house movements from Omega, Panerai p9010,etc... have significantly stronger amplitude and hold their accuracy longer into their power reserve than Rolex. This matters because accuracy only at the very top of its power reserve means very little in real world application. Ideally you want a accurate watch when you pick it up from a resting position when its mainspring wont be at its very top. I have tested most of them on the scope and in any resting position the amplitude is stronger than the Rolex "31xx" and newest "32xx" series movements.

[Burlington]

Originally Posted by Mystro

The playing field has changed with ceramics and I dont believe the Rolex movement or watch in general has any real advantage in durability over similar built watches. As much as I love my Rolex watches, I see nothing with them that stands out as being more durable. The days of those advertisements from Rolex have long passed.

That said, my Panerai Carbotech will kick any Rolex down the road and not have a mark on it when its done doing it. Personally have tested the toughness of the Panerai Carbotech off a stone bridge pier underwater on a dive. My DSSD JC would have its ceramic bezel shattered with huge dents on the case with a similar hit. I have taken many dives over the last 30 years with Rolex, Omega, Panerai, etc... I feel I have a real good idea of real world performance and level of abuse a mechanical watch can take. The Panerai Carbotech is next level build material for a luxury watch.

Now if we get into the movements, Rolex amplitude is very weak compared to more advanced mechanical movements with dual barrel mainsprings. In house movements from Omega, Panera p9010,etc... have significantly stronger amplitude and hold their accuracy longer into their power reserve than Rolex. This matters because accuracy only at the very top of its power reserve means very little in real world application. Ideally you want a accurate watch when you pick it up from a resting position when its mainspring wont be at its very top. I have tested most of them on the scope and in any resting position the amplitude is stronger than the Rolex "31xx" and newest "32xx" series movements.

Great looking watch, perhaps the best usage of carbon as a material I’ve seen - and seems to solve the brittleness issue of ceramic whilst being lightweight.

[Mystro]

Originally Posted by Burlington

Great looking watch, perhaps the best usage of carbon as a material I’ve seen - and seems to solve the brittleness issue of ceramic whilst being lightweight.

Thank you. That was how I looked at it. I own ceramic watches and loved the scratch resistance. I use a B&R Ceramic military for hunting and tactical work when on call. I have never shattered a ceramic watch and have really abused them in the line of action but know it can happen.
Carbotech is lighter and stronger than titanium with all the benefits of what a ceramic watch brings. It’s also hypoallergenic if your skin is sensitive to certain metals.
It’s kind of the ultimate material for that “luxury black watch” segment in the collection. I still love the shiny watches and they can’t be replaced by anything but that metal.

[Pete26]

While Sinn's EZM series are pretty tough, the Pilots I had not so much and not as accurate. They used ETA movements and now Selitta, so nowhere near Rolex quality and one of the Sinns I owned had the bracelet disengage shortly after I got it home from the AD. The watch flew across my bed thankfully so no damage to case or movement ensued.

Rolex new generation of movements are quite robust.

[jerryguo]

Originally Posted by Mystro

The playing field has changed with ceramics and I dont believe the Rolex movement or watch in general has any real advantage in durability over similar built watches. As much as I love my Rolex watches, I see nothing with them that stands out as being more durable. The days of those advertisements from Rolex have long passed.

That said, my Panerai Carbotech will kick any Rolex down the road and not have a mark on it when its done doing it. Personally have tested the toughness of the Panerai Carbotech off a stone bridge pier underwater on a dive. My DSSD JC would have its ceramic bezel shattered with huge dents on the case with a similar hit. I have taken many dives over the last 30 years with Rolex, Omega, Panerai, etc... I feel I have a real good idea of real world performance and level of abuse a mechanical watch can take. The Panerai Carbotech is next level build material for a luxury watch.

Now if we get into the movements, Rolex amplitude is very weak compared to more advanced mechanical movements with dual barrel mainsprings. In house movements from Omega, Panerai p9010,etc... have significantly stronger amplitude and hold their accuracy longer into their power reserve than Rolex. This matters because accuracy only at the very top of its power reserve means very little in real world application. Ideally you want a accurate watch when you pick it up from a resting position when its mainspring wont be at its very top. I have tested most of them on the scope and in any resting position the amplitude is stronger than the Rolex "31xx" and newest "32xx" series movements.

great post, agree with almost all your points!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[borispolk]

Originally Posted by Mystro

The playing field has changed with ceramics and I dont believe the Rolex movement or watch in general has any real advantage in durability over similar built watches. As much as I love my Rolex watches, I see nothing with them that stands out as being more durable. The days of those advertisements from Rolex have long passed.

That said, my Panerai Carbotech will kick any Rolex down the road and not have a mark on it when its done doing it. Personally have tested the toughness of the Panerai Carbotech off a stone bridge pier underwater on a dive. My DSSD JC would have its ceramic bezel shattered with huge dents on the case with a similar hit. I have taken many dives over the last 30 years with Rolex, Omega, Panerai, etc... I feel I have a real good idea of real world performance and level of abuse a mechanical watch can take. The Panerai Carbotech is next level build material for a luxury watch.

Now if we get into the movements, Rolex amplitude is very weak compared to more advanced mechanical movements with dual barrel mainsprings. In house movements from Omega, Panerai p9010,etc... have significantly stronger amplitude and hold their accuracy longer into their power reserve than Rolex. This matters because accuracy only at the very top of its power reserve means very little in real world application. Ideally you want a accurate watch when you pick it up from a resting position when its mainspring wont be at its very top. I have tested most of them on the scope and in any resting position the amplitude is stronger than the Rolex "31xx" and newest "32xx" series movements.

↑↑↑↑ This. ↑↑↑↑

Rolex built they repututation on being a tool watch. Durable watches for specific use - diving, flying etc. First ones bringing innovations also. That's the reputation they still live off today.

Todays watches are no less durable. Despite Rolex putting emphasis in durable movements and longer service periods, but many manufacturers are close or even surpassed Rolex. Omega most notably, but many others too.

[kieselguhr]

Sinn watches. Particularly the EZM series of watches.

[Singslinger]

Originally Posted by kieselguhr

Sinn watches. Particularly the EZM series of watches.

This. I'm a fan of Sinn, they make solid, rugged watches for reasonable prices.

[Gimoozaabi]

Originally Posted by kieselguhr

Sinn watches. Particularly the EZM series of watches.

Another vote for Sinn. I own 3: U1, EZM3F and 103St. I have nothing bad to say about these watches and I have put the U1 and EZM3F through a lot. I used to visit Frankfurt a lot for work and it was always a pleasure to visit the Sinn store at their central location where I had chat with the current company owner (mr. Lothar Schmidt) once and with their master watch technician at Romemberg plaza. Great company for which I have a soft spot.

[214270Explorer]

I think Damasko and Rolex could run neck and neck on overall toughness.
Just my humble opinion. YMMV.

[Chadridv]

Sinn and damasko! They’re clearly not as refined in the design department, but they look great and are tough as nails! I’ve owned a few (of both brands), more or less beat the shit out of then and seriously not a mark left on the steel.

Sinn uses “tegimented” technology and damasko calls it “ice hardened”. Both come from tech developed to build German submarines. Interesting stuff.

[slopes213]

As a Sinn owner as well, the movement is not necessarily anymore robust, but some of their proprietary technologies to allow them to thrive in austere environments more. My U50 is virtually unscratchable due to the steel and tegiment hardening. Then again, Sinn watches are built for tough activities, while a Rolex is more of rugged jewelry.

Bottom line; I wear my Sinn at work (military), the Rolex is for after hours or weekends.

[waterman1]

Mystro is right on with the Panerai carbotech comments. I love my sea dwellers and I wear them plenty when in the mood for the heft and solid feel and Rolex has made great divers with that line. But I picked up a carbotech and this is one tough material and deadly accurate over 6 months of ownership. Also so light you don’t know you are wearing a watch. I know it is a Rolex forum ....I still love my sea dwellers too!

[Sandpit]

One thing that always drew me to the brand was the robustness and the number of older pieces that, whilst heavily used and abused, we still ticking away.

I do think that amongst the admiration for the glitz and value retention many people have forgotten or ignored the amount of engineering and development that Rolex puts into their pieces. They’re second to none for me.

[jimcameron]

How many broken mainsprings have been reported on TRF over the last 10 yrs? I'd have to say that if you are buying a Rolex based only on how rugged it is, you are waisting a lot of money. If you pay $10K for 1 new Sub, you could buy 100 Invicta's with an NH35A movement. Chances are pretty good about 90 of those Invicta's will still be ticking when your Rolex is at the RSC. Buy a Rolex because it is a fantastic watch, not because it is the watch that will beat out others in longevity.

[VonSomething]

Originally Posted by jimcameron

How many broken mainsprings have been reported on TRF over the last 10 yrs? I'd have to say that if you are buying a Rolex based only on how rugged it is, you are waisting a lot of money. If you pay $10K for 1 new Sub, you could buy 100 Invicta's with an NH35A movement. Chances are pretty good about 90 of those Invicta's will still be ticking when your Rolex is at the RSC. Buy a Rolex because it is a fantastic watch, not because it is the watch that will beat out others in longevity.

I think I had something with an NH35 movement once (Not Invicta. Never had an Invicta).

Took it on one MTB bike ride and after that it gaining like 7 minutes per day. Had friends that broke their ETA movements doing the same. Never had an issue with Rolex movements, and I'm on some bumpy rides.

Can't speak much to other movements but I have heard of some being quite fragile. I certainly wouldn't treat other brands the same way I treat my Rolex.

[bp1000]

Tudor's Titanium Pelagos

Good luck trying to break that thing.