Rolex White Gold Versus Stainless Steel

[swish77]

This topic has been discussed, but I couldn't find any good side-by-side photos comparing Rolex white gold and stainless steel. Here's my steel Sub on the left and new white gold Sub on the right (blue bezel).

There have been so many posts from guys saying white gold is not worth the extra money because it looks too similar to stainless steel. Whether or not it's worth it is a matter of opinion, of course, but one thing is clear: These two metals are very different in appearance and feel.

The Rolex white gold, which the company makes itself in its own foundry, has an incredible creamy warm luster vs. the colder gray of the stainless steel. And then there's the heft and weight of the gold itself versus the much lighter steel.

Not trying to convince anyone of anything other than how different they are in the flesh.

[Seddyspaghetti]

Nice shots.

[j-hill]

That’s very helpful to see them side by side in good, natural lighting. Thanks for taking the time to post them.

[kitbag1984]

Is the middle link only polished on the stainless steel?

[OrangeSport]

Originally Posted by kitbag1984

Is the middle link only polished on the stainless steel?

[Al1969]

Originally Posted by kitbag1984

Is the middle link only polished on the stainless steel?

For the stainless steel sub, the bracelet is brushed.
The WG has polished center links.

[Benzsiam]

SS and WG sure look similar, most of the time only the wearer know the difference or the people that know Rolex very well so they can tell that which dial/bezel that come with WG only.

Many times that I wear my WG GMT Pepsi with Meteorite dial, most people thought it was SS.

[RazorD]

Great post! I have the new WG sub as well as a few of their SS references and agree 100%. There’s a notable difference and I love WG for watches.

[TswaneNguni]

Great pics .

[rambo99]

the two metals look the same to me.

[swish77]

Originally Posted by rambo99

the two metals look the same to me.

Originally Posted by Benzsiam

SS and WG sure look similar, most of the time only the wearer know the difference or the people that know Rolex very well so they can tell that which dial/bezel that come with WG only.

This is just not accurate. Look closely at the photos, especially the last one. The difference is obvious. It's not a matter of opinion. Listen, we watch lovers are all about the little details, right? But the difference here is not even really that subtle. I get it, from across a room, maybe the difference is not that noticeable to someone else, but get any closer, and the difference is very clear.

Originally Posted by kitbag1984

Is the middle link only polished on the stainless steel?

The middle links are polished only on the white gold version of the Submariner, the one with the blue bezel. The stainless steel Sub bracelet is fully brushed.

[al503]

Originally Posted by swish77

This is just not accurate. Look closely at the photos, especially the last one. The difference is obvious. It's not a matter of opinion. Listen, we watch lovers are all about the little details, right? But the difference here is not even really that subtle. I get it, from across a room, maybe the difference is not that noticeable to someone else, but get any closer, and the difference is very clear.

I believe Benz is referring to when one isn't able to compare them side by side at the same time.

[ratty]

Originally Posted by swish77

This is just not accurate. Look closely at the photos, especially the last one. The difference is obvious. It's not a matter of opinion. Listen, we watch lovers are all about the little details, right? But the difference here is not even really that subtle. I get it, from across a room, maybe the difference is not that noticeable to someone else, but get any closer, and the difference is very clear.

.....

If you have to “Look closely” it’s certainly not obvious!

I speak as someone who has had WG and SS watches for years, to the vast majority of people looking at them, they look the same. Lots of people have probably never ever heard of WG let alone be able to tell it from SS!

I am not knocking WG here, as I have said I’ve got WG watches, but I feel we have to be realistic here. Yes WG is heavier and fells a bit different to wear, but then again my 16520s feel different to my 116520 which feels different to my 116509. WG looks a bit different, the same as my brushed 16520 looks a bit different to my 116520 etc etc .....

I have no doubt the differences may be more obvious to some than others. Some people can tell a mk1 bezel or dial from a mk2 version at 10 paces and the differences are life or death, but the vast majority can’t and couldn’t care less.

The difference between SS and WG is not obvious to most people.

[swish77]

Originally Posted by ratty

I have no doubt the differences may be more obvious to some than others.

The difference between SS and WG is not obvious to most people.

Well, yes, and "most people" couldn't tell the difference between a Submariner and Sea-Dweller. The context here is for watch lovers, who usually have an eye for detail. I guess I'm just surprised every time I hear guys on the forum say the two metals look the same.

Perhaps I've been collecting too long (since the 1980s), so I dig really deep into differences, nuances, feel, etc ... of watches. To me stainless steel and white gold are night and day.

[BroncoOne]

Originally Posted by ratty

If you have to “Look closely” it’s certainly not obvious!

I speak as someone who has had WG and SS watches for years, to the vast majority of people looking at them, they look the same. Lots of people have probably never ever heard of WG let alone be able to tell it from SS!

I am not knocking WG here, as I have said I’ve got WG watches, but I feel we have to be realistic here. Yes WG is heavier and fells a bit different to wear, but then again my 16520s feel different to my 116520 which feels different to my 116509. WG looks a bit different, the same as my brushed 16520 looks a bit different to my 116520 etc etc .....

I have no doubt the differences may be more obvious to some than others. Some people can tell a mk1 bezel or dial from a mk2 version at 10 paces and the differences are life or death, but the vast majority can’t and couldn’t care less.

The difference between SS and WG is not obvious to most people.

In person the WG just pops much more and has a luster that the SS doesn’t. Yes, the average person will not know the difference but I don’t care. I wear the watch because I appreciate it. After all, no one look at the watch more than the person wearing it.

[kitbag1984]

Originally Posted by swish77

This is just not accurate. Look closely at the photos, especially the last one. The difference is obvious. It's not a matter of opinion. Listen, we watch lovers are all about the little details, right? But the difference here is not even really that subtle. I get it, from across a room, maybe the difference is not that noticeable to someone else, but get any closer, and the difference is very clear.



The middle links are polished only on the white gold version of the Submariner, the one with the blue bezel. The stainless steel Sub bracelet is fully brushed.

Thanks :)

[Swiss Mad!]

Originally Posted by rambo99

the two metals look the same to me.

Do they look the same in these photos?










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JSolution]

At just the right lighting you can see it.

If I’m honest only us people would notice though, to anyone else though who’s not interested in watches I don’t think anyone would think “that is gold”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[brandrea]

Excellent side by side Aaron and congratulations on a great duo

[bpetty13]

Great comparison shots! Thanks so much for sharing.

[sj24k]

fortunate to own both the SS 114060 and the WG 116619 and completely agree with the OPs assessment.

of course, the casual observer would never notice the differences if just glancing at them on the wrist. nor would they care.

i love them both and each has a special place in my collection. but no doubt WG stands out as more "unique" and "substantial" every time i put it on.

[Jshwarms]

WG is fantastic......class without being super flashy

[HeartRolex]

Originally Posted by Jshwarms

WG is fantastic......class without being super flashy

This is why I love it. Classy and understated.

[Zsprings]

Originally Posted by Jshwarms

WG is fantastic......class without being super flashy

Agree,....The shots in this thread opening, with the watches side by side clearly shows a difference to me, between SS and WG. the WG has a grey tone which is more like platinum. That must be something to do with the other metals in the alloy, perhaps making the alloy more resistant to abrasion? To me the WG looks the bees knees!

[ROLEX*]

Prefer the black elegance and robustness as a matter of fact steel is harder than gold

[Tag_asian]

Which is which? Look wise, it's the same.

[swish77]

Originally Posted by Tag_asian

Which is which? Look wise, it's the same.

Sigh. The one with the blue bezel is white gold. They're definitely not the same. I suggest you adjust your monitor.

The degree of difference is debatable, but especially in person and side by side, the difference is much more striking.

[Fleetlord]

They are different in tone, but VERY different in appearance is a stretch, especially when they are isolated.

In terms of feel...sure the WG is heavier...

[NiJaRo1225]

Nice watches, Aaron!

Originally Posted by Fleetlord

They are different in tone, but VERY different in appearance is a stretch, especially when they are isolated.

This is a good (and obvious) point.

OP, to me the differences are quite clear when compared side-by-side (which I think is your point: direct comparison).

However when isolated, with no ss to compare to, it’s a different story. WIS obviously will know the references by sight and “know”, but the vast majority of people and then some wouldn’t have the slightest clue.

Regardless of who interprets what/why/how, Rolex WG is definitely special.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TunaTuna]

Originally Posted by swish77

This topic has been discussed, but I couldn't find any good side-by-side photos comparing Rolex white gold and stainless steel. Here's my steel Sub on the left and new white gold Sub on the right (blue bezel).

There have been so many posts from guys saying white gold is not worth the extra money because it looks too similar to stainless steel. Whether or not it's worth it is a matter of opinion, of course, but one thing is clear: These two metals are very different in appearance and feel.

The Rolex white gold, which the company makes itself in its own foundry, has an incredible creamy warm luster vs. the colder gray of the stainless steel. And then there's the heft and weight of the gold itself versus the much lighter steel.

Not trying to convince anyone of anything other than how different they are in the flesh.

Looks almost the same to me, just one is blue and one is black