I Hate Ceramic Bezels

[Thuilln]

I don’t like the prospect of paying several hundred dollars for a new ceramic insert when the former aluminum ones cost barely 60$.
But to start with, I don’t like the newer Sub models, so I’m biased.

[Brny11]

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?

I love ceramic bezels. To each their own.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Avs Fan]

I can't imagine my 126660 JC with an aluminum bezel. The ceramic and thick crystal work well together. Conversely, I wouldn't want ceramic on my 16600.

[Bigblu10]

Originally Posted by padi56

Agree Bas and one thing about the aluminium ones never heard of one of then cracking.Sure they might get scratched wearing over the years but so cheap and easy to replace.And its not like ceramic is new in watches Rado been using it since the 1960s,but once the so called high end brands started using it.They portrayed it as the greatest thing since sliced bread and the latest in fashion.My own working tool 16600 SD used and abused for many years underwater seen more use and scratches than most of today's pampered watches will see in ten lifetimes.Yet over those years just one insert change cost then just £25 and would very much doubt if the ceramic would have lasted as long in a tough working tool underwater environment.

I have seen plenty of cracked/broken aluminum bezel inserts here on TRF in pics. Even corroded ones. Both have their advantage and disadvantages.

[Bigblu10]

Originally Posted by TankTom

Stop moaning and buy a g shock then. Rolex are no longer tool watches - get over it

True. They haven't been tool watches since the 60's before the quartz revolution almost killed them off. They redefined themselves as "luxury " in order to survive. There are plenty of models with metal bezels. The Day Date fluted bezel is a work of art!

[Pandacat]

I’m assuming all the angry comments are people that own watches with ceramic bezels

[Bigblu10]

Originally Posted by Pandacat

I’m assuming all the angry comments are people that own watches with ceramic bezels

Most here will tell you there are plenty of alternatives.

[rcambrid]

“Hate” seems a tad strong for such a trivial topic...

[NachoNeal]

Originally Posted by rcambrid

“Hate” seems a tad strong for such a trivial topic...

The is obviously very serious business.

[Pandacat]

Originally Posted by Bigblu10

Most here will tell you there are plenty of alternatives.

I never said i was looking to buy one. I am perfectly happy with my OP39. I was merely stating my opinion and was also curious what other people might think.

I didnt know rado was the first watch company to use ceramic bezels. Where they the first?

[Jackie Daytona]

I have honestly never owned a watch with a ceramic bezel so I’m not sure how much my opinion counts, but my take on it I feel has been reinforced by some in this thread.

Many state that ceramic bezels do holdup to scuffs and scratches yet admittedly are semi prone to breaking. It can just be replaced and still look great. This kind of comes down to a form over function type of thing in my opinion. Where many prefer the form of watches now over the tool watch origins, form being the ceramic argument.

On the same hand the aluminum ones are more prone to scratching and fading, however in my opinion it costs a couple hundred dollars to replace versus a thousand on a ceramic, and the watch will equally look great after it’s replaced, therefore I feel the aluminum is a better choice if we are truly talking tool watches.

There was another thread somewhere in the forum where a saturation diver mentioned a few that work with him have cracked and worn their ceramic bezels over time and stopped wearing their Rolexes due to replacement costs of the bezel. I feel that helps to support this point.

[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.

[Explorer2Guy]

I like to fly fish. From time to time you slip or trip in the river and your hand can hit a rock or get pushed down in the sand.

I like the way shiny bezels look but don’t want to get sand or grit under a moving bezel. I opted for a 216570 with a black face because of the fixed bezel. I’m really happy with it. I also had a current model Air King and the shiny bezel was banged up badly within a year from nothing.

The only scratch I have in 1.5 years with the Explorer 2 was smashing the watch on a door frame when my hands were full. Caught the bezel on the door frame and it’s barely scratched. Just a really durable watch. I was told by the Panerai dealer in Recoleta when I was en route to a fishing trip on the Rio Gallegos that I shouldn’t wear any watch that looks like a Rolex in Buenos Aires because bandits on scooters will try to use wire cutters to cut the watches off the hands of people wearing the watch. I heeded their advice and put the watch away without testing whether the watch was stronger than wire cutters.

Being used to the more subdued look of the Explorer 2 in black, when my 2 year wait for a SD 43 was over, I put it on and it was so blingy. The bezel was like “LOOK AT THIS HUGE ROLEX.” They would only give me $4,000 for my Explorer 2 when I knew that I could get $5,500 from a more traditional used watch dealer. I owed $30,000 on my mortgage and decided to pay off our house instead of get a 2nd watch. If it was Mark I with a bit more collectability, I might’ve pulled the trigger.

But to the point of this thread, can ceramic bezels crack/shatter? Of course but we read more about damaged crystals than seriously damaged ceramic bezels. To me, they have their place but I don’t think for anything where sand or grit is a normal situation you deal with.

[eonflux]

Originally Posted by Pandacat

Just looking at the picture makes me extremely uncomfortable

This may be make you more so.
Bezel much more exposed.



Rolex, and even less so AP, are not tool watches.
Sure, you can wear them doing whatever you want, then you just have to accept that cheaper and/or more durable options may have been more appropriate.

[Token74]

Originally Posted by crowatch

Rolex submariner has been a luxury item
For ever
Divers use computers to dive not mechanical watches
Sorry to disappoint you

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[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

[ZeGerman11]

Originally Posted by Pandacat

I see your point, but aren’t there alternatives that offer the same benefits with none of the cons? Why not use tungsten or tegimented steel? They dont scratch nor shatter.

Just to clarify, since you’ve said it a couple times, tegimented steel absolutely scratches (and dents, and gets road rash, etc). Ask my Sinn how I know...

I’m not saying anything that hasn’t been said before, but Rolex makes a wide range of watches designed to appeal to the greatest number of potential customers.

I love my Sinn and it is probably the last watch I’d ever sell, but it is not a pretty watch. I don’t mean the overall aesthetics; I mean the look and color of the steel. It’s dull and looks a bit cheap. I don’t even know if you can get the brushed finish or the color of Rolex 904L to match in color or texture to tegimented steel.

In addition, tegimented steel cannot be polished, so anything that happens is permanent. Again, not a concern of mine and not a concern to most on this forum, but I’d bet that would bother a large number of Rolex customers outside this forum.

Tegimented steel definitely has cons. As with all things, it’s a balance of what matters most to each individual buyer.

[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.

[Pandacat]

Originally Posted by ZeGerman11

Just to clarify, since you’ve said it a couple times, tegimented steel absolutely scratches (and dents, and gets road rash, etc). Ask my Sinn how I know...

I’m not saying anything that hasn’t been said before, but Rolex makes a wide range of watches designed to appeal to the greatest number of potential customers.

I love my Sinn and it is probably the last watch I’d ever sell, but it is not a pretty watch. I don’t mean the overall aesthetics; I mean the look and color of the steel. It’s dull and looks a bit cheap. I don’t even know if you can get the brushed finish or the color of Rolex 904L to match in color or texture to tegimented steel.

In addition, tegimented steel cannot be polished, so anything that happens is permanent. Again, not a concern of mine and not a concern to most on this forum, but I’d bet that would bother a large number of Rolex customers outside this forum.

Tegimented steel definitely has cons. As with all things, it’s a balance of what matters most to each individual buyer.

I personally have never owned a sinn. I watch Tim Mosso on Watchbox all the time and according to him he says he bashed his watch into all sorts of things and so far there are no scratches and dents. I was also looking into Sinn watches for a period of time before i settled on my OP.

Can you really scratch and dent tegimented steel?

[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).

[ZeGerman11]

Originally Posted by Pandacat

I personally have never owned a sinn. I watch Tim Mosso on Watchbox all the time and according to him he says he bashed his watch into all sorts of things and so far there are no scratches and dents. I was also looking into Sinn watches for a period of time before i settled on my OP.

Can you really scratch and dent tegimented steel?

Yeah, I basically thought the same before I bought my Sinn. I watched videos/read reviews on tegimented steel and how “even after years it looks brand new.” I’m not going to call anyone a liar, but that is simply not true.

The clasp on my Sinn bracelet looks like someone took steel wool to it, and that was from about two years of hard use...in wealth management. Ha. I have it on an Erika’s Originals strap now.

I have a dent in the steel bezel from hard contact with a beer bottle.

I have road rash on another part of the bezel from, you guessed it, scraping it on concrete.

Again, fantastic watch that has been used in all different types of scenarios and has worked perfectly in each, but it absolutely 100% scratches.

The tegimenting process as I understand it is a surface hardening/coating procedure that is very thin. It does well against minor surface scratches (think hairline scratches on Rolex PCL’s), but harder use or repeated wear on the same spot will get through it. And again, it cannot be polished or recoated to fix it.

[Aplover5]

Originally Posted by eonflux

This may be make you more so.
Bezel much more exposed.



Rolex, and even less so AP, are not tool watches.
Sure, you can wear them doing whatever you want, then you just have to accept that cheaper and/or more durable options may have been more appropriate.

Great pic great watch.

[Pandacat]

Originally Posted by ZeGerman11

Yeah, I basically thought the same before I bought my Sinn. I watched videos/read reviews on tegimented steel and how “even after years it looks brand new.” I’m not going to call anyone a liar, but that is simply not true.

The clasp on my Sinn bracelet looks like someone took steel wool to it, and that was from about two years of hard use...in wealth management. Ha. I have it on an Erika’s Originals strap now.

I have a dent in the steel bezel from hard contact with a beer bottle.

I have road rash on another part of the bezel from, you guessed it, scraping it on concrete.

Again, fantastic watch that has been used in all different types of scenarios and has worked perfectly in each, but it absolutely 100% scratches.

The tegimenting process as I understand it is a surface hardening/coating procedure that is very thin. It does well against minor surface scratches (think hairline scratches on Rolex PCL’s), but harder use or repeated wear on the same spot will get through it. And again, it cannot be polished or recoated to fix it.

Wow, ok i stand corrected then. Glad that you chimed in on the subject.

[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.

[subdateII]

Aesthetically, like with a lot of materials I think it is all about execution. So, on certain models like the GMT C I think it looks great. I am not a fan of the Submariner ceramic. It could be a matter of bezel ratio or the space between the numerals combined with the shiny ceramic being at odds with an all brushed/Matt watches.

Functionally, my ceramic bezel get scratched from my wife’s diamond ring. So yes, it is scratch resistant but not scratch proof.

Finally, I hate the coronavirus but I don’t “hate” any watch/material/brand. Choice of words could be better

[Mr. K]

Found an older thread stating aluminum sub bezels inserts were $75 from Rolex back in 2014. Has anyone replaced an aluminum one recently? Wondering what the current prices are? And out of curiosity, do they charge more for the Kermit or Pepsi bezel?

[Onikage]

The numerals are a bit of a dirt catcher as well..

[Pandacat]

Originally Posted by subdateII

Aesthetically, like with a lot of materials I think it is all about execution. So, on certain models like the GMT C I think it looks great. I am not a fan of the Submariner ceramic. It could be a matter of bezel ratio or the space between the numerals combined with the shiny ceramic being at odds with an all brushed/Matt watches.

Functionally, my ceramic bezel get scratched from my wife’s diamond ring. So yes, it is scratch resistant but not scratch proof.

Finally, I hate the coronavirus but I don’t “hate” any watch/material/brand. Choice of words could be better

Granted i hate the coronavirus more, but ceramic bezels are a close second.

[richard371]

I’m for ceramic all day long esp on the Daytona. Those swirly scratches drive me nuts.