ROLEX steel 904L not the best;(

[Fiery]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

904L also takes a very high polish, which Rolex states in one commercial is just as important as its corrosion resistance.

I don't think Rolex ever stated that 904L is more polishable than 316L or gold or any other material. When it's mirror polished, I can't really tell the difference between 316L and 904L.

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by Fiery

I don't think Rolex ever stated that 904L is more polishable than 316L or gold or any other material. When it's mirror polished, I can't really tell the difference between 316L and 904L.

Well, you're wrong and I'll post the proof when I have a chance.

[AS1]

wow, a 6 year old thread brought back to life!

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by Fiery

I don't think Rolex ever stated that 904L is more polishable than 316L or gold or any other material. When it's mirror polished, I can't really tell the difference between 316L and 904L.

Listen carefully.

[phils]

Although an old thread, it's interesting.

[DPE]

Wow, alot of interest in Stainless Steels. The 904L will be ok, our watches will not fall apart ! 316L would also be ok. As said before the hardness is not really the answer. Stainless Steels have different values. Some better for machining, some better for polishing, some have better anti-magnetic properties, some better for corrostion, some better against nickle allergies on the skin, some better for welding etc...
316 is used in the medical world, in the food industry and most high quality work areas. 904L is the same. I am sure Rolex have done their homework. :-) The harder the material can make it brittle to knocks. A stainless less hard can be of better against knocks in service, a stainless that contains more nickle can have better work hardening properties. The more it is worn or rubbed the harder the surface will become.
I would have thought that Rolex have gone through all of this.

[twoweeled]

Originally Posted by time

Hi all Rollie-lovers!

904L steel from Rolex seems to be the best watch steel ever...however, it is not. The hardness of the Rolex 904L is ~490HV(Vickers) and the "common" watch steel 316L is ~400HV.

But did you know some manufacturers use steel with >700HV, even 1200HV and 1500HV!!!! The 1500HV steel beats the 904L on the DS SD easily... since a 1500HV steel case without the "Rolex SD gas esc. system" can dive to 2000m without any problems!

Sad "news" for Rolex SD!

I'm glad I go no deeper than 12 feet!

[Marrk]

Originally Posted by RollieVerde

If I didn't dive, I wouldn't own a dive watch. The depth rating has more to do with the watch's ability to get bumped at more normal diving depths, like 80ft. A Sea-Dweller is more resistant to impacts when diving at 80 ft. than a Submariner is.

Dude, who told you that?

[Marine1981]

Actually the steel utilized by Damasko watches is the hardest and least likely to scratch. I own a DA 45 and wear it at swat training and have been in a number of fights with it on and you'd never know it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Marrk]

Originally Posted by NitroRacer

Just out of curiosity, how many of you actually scuba-dive to these depths? I went snorkeling of the Grand Cayman islands, once, but that's about it. How many dive at all?

I have never dived beyond non-decompression depths. Nobody dives to 4000 feet. The problem is not that Rolex wants to show off its engineering prowess by making watches that exceed practicality. The problem is that they have deleted the real tool watches from the line. Watches rated at 100-200 meters, like the early Subs, are really comfortable on the wrist, but they don't make them anymore.*




*Tudor may be the exception.

[RollieVerde]

Originally Posted by Marrk

Dude, who told you that?

Dude, it's kind of obvious, isn't it? Do you know anything about how submarines and other submersibles are constructed? Bumping into a rock strata at 1,000 ft. isn't the same as hitting it at 100ft. Anything subjected to pressure becomes more susceptible to impact. Greater ability to withstand depth makes the watch more durable at shallower depths.

[MortgageGuy]

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

The steel that Rolex has chosen to use, 904L, was not chosen just for its hardness... it has superior corrosion resistance and has proven to be ultra durable for its intended purpose. Rolex also likes the 'sheen' and luster properties of 904L.

This ^

[applegrape]

Originally Posted by time

Hi all Rollie-lovers!

904L steel from Rolex seems to be the best watch steel ever...however, it is not. The hardness of the Rolex 904L is ~490HV(Vickers) and the "common" watch steel 316L is ~400HV.

But did you know some manufacturers use steel with >700HV, even 1200HV and 1500HV!!!! The 1500HV steel beats the 904L on the DS SD easily... since a 1500HV steel case without the "Rolex SD gas esc. system" can dive to 2000m without any problems!

Sad "news" for Rolex SD!

Could u give me example what manufacturer use 1500hv?

[Marrk]

Originally Posted by RollieVerde

If I didn't dive, I wouldn't own a dive watch. The depth rating has more to do with the watch's ability to get bumped at more normal diving depths, like 80ft. A Sea-Dweller is more resistant to impacts when diving at 80 ft. than a Submariner is.

Originally Posted by RollieVerde

Dude, it's kind of obvious, isn't it? Do you know anything about how submarines and other submersibles are constructed? Bumping into a rock strata at 1,000 ft. isn't the same as hitting it at 100ft. Anything subjected to pressure becomes more susceptible to impact. Greater ability to withstand depth makes the watch more durable at shallower depths.

And you think that, at 80 ft, the difference in ability to withstand impacts between a Submariner and a Sea-Dweller is significant? Like maybe you are going to strap them to "submarines and other submersibles" and crash them into "rock strata"? What would the difference be if you just wore them scuba diving at 80 ft and had sense enough not to crash them into anything at all?

[Andad]

Originally Posted by RollieVerde

Dude, it's kind of obvious, isn't it? Do you know anything about how submarines and other submersibles are constructed? Bumping into a rock strata at 1,000 ft. isn't the same as hitting it at 100ft. Anything subjected to pressure becomes more susceptible to impact. Greater ability to withstand depth makes the watch more durable at shallower depths.

Hold the phone RV.

What speed were you going at when your submarine hit the rock at 1000ft?

We need this info for our calculations.

[Marrk]

Originally Posted by directioneng

Hold the phone RV.

What speed were you going at when your submarine hit the rock at 1000ft?

We need this info for our calculations.

Eddie, it's kind of obvious, isn't it? Submarines travel at the posted speed limit.

[GradyPhilpott]

I think it's getting a little deep in here.

[RollieVerde]

Originally Posted by Marrk

And you think that, at 80 ft, the difference in ability to withstand impacts between a Submariner and a Sea-Dweller is significant? Like maybe you are going to strap them to "submarines and other submersibles" and crash them into "rock strata"? What would the difference be if you just wore them scuba diving at 80 ft and had sense enough not to crash them into anything at all?

You can wear a Day-date to 80 ft. if "You have sense not to crash anything at all." You can drive a car w/o a seat belt and ride a motorcycle w/o a helmet if you have the sense to never, ever have an accident. The whole point is to have something that is built to take some impact if it happens despite your best efforts to the contrary. The SD is built quite a bit stouter than a Submariner and hence the deeper rating. If you think it's overkill, don't buy one. If you work for a living diving in potentially harsh environments, you might want to use the most durable watch you can afford. So in answer to your equation, I absolutely believe the Sea-Dweller's ability to take impacts at 80 feet is significantly greater than the Sub. Look at the difference in case and crystal.

[onlysteel]

If Rolex chooses bread crumbs from month old bread and decide to make a bracelet or watch out of it, I would buy it. Rolex knows what the heck they are doing. It has worked for them for so many years so just go with it.

But I do agree that Rolex's success is partially, I mean atleast 50% due to their advertizing and PR. If they say 904 is the best, then msot people believe it.
Rolex does not lie about stuff, they just many times do not reveal the whole.

[Marrk]

Originally Posted by RollieVerde

You can wear a Day-date to 80 ft. if "You have sense not to crash anything at all." You can drive a car w/o a seat belt and ride a motorcycle w/o a helmet if you have the sense to never, ever have an accident. The whole point is to have something that is built to take some impact if it happens despite your best efforts to the contrary. The SD is built quite a bit stouter than a Submariner and hence the deeper rating. If you think it's overkill, don't buy one. If you work for a living diving in potentially harsh environments, you might want to use the most durable watch you can afford. So in answer to your equation, I absolutely believe the Sea-Dweller's ability to take impacts at 80 feet is significantly greater than the Sub. Look at the difference in case and crystal.

We agree that Rolex watch cases are over-engineered. It's a cool aspect of the brand, but, practically speaking, it's a little silly. That's all I'm saying.*

Merry Christmas.






*Except my point about the more-than-adequately engineered and much-more-comfortable-to-wear 200m cases, which I dearly miss.

[Dalton]

Haha! I remember this thread!

[Marrk]

^^Hey, Dalton. Merry Christmas. You still in downtown L.A.?

[Dalton]

Hi Marrk! No I'm no longer in Downtown LA. I moved uptown, well made my move up to Seattle for Watchmaker school, and work out of AD in Calabasas, CA. Still in contact with the boys at ABC though. Good to see you're still on the forums after all these years!

[Marrk]

Originally Posted by Dalton

Hi Marrk! No I'm no longer in Downtown LA. I moved uptown, well made my move up to Seattle for Watchmaker school, and work out of AD in Calabasas, CA. Still in contact with the boys at ABC though. Good to see you're still on the forums after all these years!

Calabasas? I'm send you an e-mail.

Merry Christmas!

[padi56]

Originally Posted by AS1

wow, a 6 year old thread brought back to life!

And one that now closed on Christmas day 2014.