ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

faimag · 13 November 2018, 02:36 AM

I don't think the material of the bezel/insert is a determining factor for me. I have predominantly stayed away from the ceramic Sub/GMT mainly because the whole watch just doesn't sing to me. The case and lugs are spoiling it for me; the ceramic bezel looks ok overall, although the numbers look a bit too "tech-like" for my taste.

From the ceramics, I only like the 116655.

For the same exact watch (e.g. 116520 vs 116500), I tend to prefer the metal bezel as opposed to the ceramic one (again, with the exception of the 116519 silver on OF).

envuks · 13 November 2018, 02:54 AM

I’m not sure that we've seen a ceramic Daytona bezel break yet on the forums... I’ve seen some posts about ceramic bezels break

Personally I feel the 500 series Daytona seem very durable. I like that there’s not metal to dent on the face of the watch if I dinged it on something.... a good friend of mine has a 116529 and the bezel is SO dinged up from wear. I can’t imagine wearing a PM Daytona with a PM bezel. I feel like it’s positioned to be a ding magnet

Likestheshiny · 13 November 2018, 03:03 AM

Definitely moving towards. I've come close to picking up a five-digit sub a couple of times, but the bezel seems flat and dull compared to the ceramic bezel's engraved markers.

samson66 · 13 November 2018, 03:27 AM

The ceramic bezels are absolutely gorgeous. I get that for some people they may be too blingy with the shine and all, but for a premium watch at a premium price I really appreciate them. Can't imaging going back to aluminum on a Rolex.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge using Tapatalk

ahlee00023 · 13 November 2018, 09:04 AM

I prefer the ceramic simply for 2 reasons. The way they reflect under different lighting environments and the fact that they're less prone to scratches.

Hodog16 · 13 November 2018, 10:44 AM

Moving towards it actually. Was one of the tipping points in moving from the DD40. Scratches and marks on the bezel just don't look as good to me.

bradyb · 13 November 2018, 11:20 AM

The OP acts like owning a Rolex with a ceramic bezel is now some sort of risk or liability and that people are starting to shy away.

Sam, would you feel the same way if your PM models had ceramic bezels? I doubt it.

jamesbondOO7 · 13 November 2018, 04:04 PM

I stopped at 5 digits.

13 November 2018, 02:54 AM	#32
envuks 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: New England Posts: 3,741	I’m not sure that we've seen a ceramic Daytona bezel break yet on the forums... I’ve seen some posts about ceramic bezels break Personally I feel the 500 series Daytona seem very durable. I like that there’s not metal to dent on the face of the watch if I dinged it on something.... a good friend of mine has a 116529 and the bezel is SO dinged up from wear. I can’t imagine wearing a PM Daytona with a PM bezel. I feel like it’s positioned to be a ding magnet __________________ Current watches: 116718ln, 116500 black dial, 40mm Breitling Chronomat MOP dial “A man with one watch always knows what time it is. A man with two watches is never sure.”

13 November 2018, 09:04 AM	#35
ahlee00023 "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2018 Location: Texas Posts: 462	I prefer the ceramic simply for 2 reasons. The way they reflect under different lighting environments and the fact that they're less prone to scratches. __________________ "The Secret of Life is to Enjoy It"

13 November 2018, 04:04 PM	#38
jamesbondOO7 "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Real Name: BondJamesBond Location: The Algarve Watch: Rolex or nothing Posts: 4,081	I stopped at 5 digits. __________________ ♛ 5-digit Rolex or nothing ♛

13 November 2018, 02:36 AM	#31
faimag "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2016 Location: US, SG, DK, GR Watch: Reverso Posts: 3,089	I don't think the material of the bezel/insert is a determining factor for me. I have predominantly stayed away from the ceramic Sub/GMT mainly because the whole watch just doesn't sing to me. The case and lugs are spoiling it for me; the ceramic bezel looks ok overall, although the numbers look a bit too "tech-like" for my taste. From the ceramics, I only like the 116655. For the same exact watch (e.g. 116520 vs 116500), I tend to prefer the metal bezel as opposed to the ceramic one (again, with the exception of the 116519 silver on OF).

13 November 2018, 03:03 AM	#33
Likestheshiny "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2017 Location: _ Posts: 1,877	Definitely moving towards. I've come close to picking up a five-digit sub a couple of times, but the bezel seems flat and dull compared to the ceramic bezel's engraved markers.

13 November 2018, 03:27 AM	#34
samson66 2024 ROLEX SUBMARINER 41 Pledge Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Real Name: Mike Location: Downy Ocean Hon Watch: my money leaving! Posts: 13,791	The ceramic bezels are absolutely gorgeous. I get that for some people they may be too blingy with the shine and all, but for a premium watch at a premium price I really appreciate them. Can't imaging going back to aluminum on a Rolex. Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge using Tapatalk

13 November 2018, 10:44 AM	#36
Hodog16 "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: NC Watch: RG Olive DD40 Posts: 1,795	Moving towards it actually. Was one of the tipping points in moving from the DD40. Scratches and marks on the bezel just don't look as good to me.

13 November 2018, 11:20 AM	#37
bradyb "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2010 Real Name: Brady Location: Austin, TX Watch: GMT Posts: 979	The OP acts like owning a Rolex with a ceramic bezel is now some sort of risk or liability and that people are starting to shy away. Sam, would you feel the same way if your PM models had ceramic bezels? I doubt it.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)