ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

DDG · 9 February 2010, 05:54 AM

I know a little about metals. To me, the Rolex 18k watches seem to hold up pretty well over the years, and don't seem to wear much more than the stainless models. There might be a little difference, but not a whole lot. And, I think the stainless watches & bracelets seem to scratch & dent more than they should. The stainless seems soft. Has anyone seen or done a Brinell hardness test for either? Just how much difference is there?

Randy16V · 10 February 2010, 01:16 AM

Well I'll say this- stainless steel is a lot harder than 18K. I think the only reason why you see gold models in better shape is because they weren't worn as hard or as much, but trust me- there are some pretty banged-out gold DDs out there...

Older gold watches too- used a different casting technique- the links are sold, but not as dense. The newer ones are more "solid."

But I will agree with you- the stainless steel, specifically 904L seems softer (to me anyway) than your typical stainless watch- they do scratch and dent easily.

Not looking for a debate- but if you so much as stare at my 16710 the hard way, it gets damaged.

My cheaper, 316L watches- are much harder...

crushnbugs · 10 February 2010, 01:23 AM

I have to agree on the stainless being soft...

Is there a thread for buffing out the scratches?

bounce · 10 February 2010, 01:35 AM

I have never owned a gold watch, but I can tell you my previous st/steel GMT IIc with the polished links scratched a lot easier than my st/steel Sub does.

Numismatist · 10 February 2010, 01:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crushnbugs

I have to agree on the stainless being soft...

Is there a thread for buffing out the scratches?

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=99142

Jackxv · 10 February 2010, 01:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bounce

I have never owned a gold watch, but I can tell you my previous st/steel GMT IIc with the polished links scratched a lot easier than my st/steel Sub does.

Because the scratches are easier to see in the PCL. They're like scratch magnets.
I used to have the new DJ with PCL oyster, the scratches drove me crazy.

Jack

Watch Fan · 10 February 2010, 02:04 AM

The brush finish is definately easier to live with.
.

Watch Fan · 10 February 2010, 02:04 AM

The brush finish is definately easier to live with.
.

ParisDakarBmw · 10 February 2010, 02:13 AM

Band stretch is worse with gold, and it is much softer than any stainless steel. 18k is a great color metal, but not as durable as others. Platinum, steel, and titanium seem more appropriate for a watch than 18k.

Jackxv · 10 February 2010, 02:38 AM

Whenever there's friction there is wear. With the solid center links there's less play so the wear with be minimal.

All the new bracelet wil not have a fraction of the stretch the older ones had.

Also good sizing will improve durabillity of your bracelet.

Jack

JBat · 10 February 2010, 02:49 AM

I don't know if the stainless is soft, per se. Any watch is put through a lot of day to day abuse, and can encounter all manner of situations whereby it can become scratched. It's not like it's sitting in a drawer ro something. I think it's unreasonable to expect that any watch metal will be highly scratch resistant. They just take too much of a beating.

Just my

rad87gn · 10 February 2010, 03:39 AM

I think people worry to much about scratches. Every single Rolex is made to be worn everyday. Service time takes care of the movement maintenance and removes scratches.

acce1999 · 10 February 2010, 04:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rad87gn

I think people worry to much about scratches. Every single Rolex is made to be worn everyday. Service time takes care of the movement maintenance and removes scratches.

True. And people seems to polish them too often...

snow_rocks · 10 February 2010, 04:55 AM

Scratches are cool, and not for the timid!

brkanand · 10 February 2010, 04:57 AM

Interesting info here. Thanks guys.

eagle_lex · 10 February 2010, 05:01 AM

use a scotch brite pad to rebrush BRUSHED stainless. just brush in a uniform direction. works like a charm!

MagedMS · 10 February 2010, 05:47 AM

Steel is a hard metal, Gold is a soft metal but both can be used separatly or combined to create a watch bracelet.. But do we really need a HARD metal for a watch Bracelet ?
I think the much needed is a CORROSION RESISTANT metal for a watch bracelet.. Gold doesn't corrote and If you refer to the chracteristics of the 904L steel used by Rolex, you will find that it is the highest corrosion resisting alloy because it has a high amount of Nickel..and it is triple times more expensive than 316L steel.. this is partially why is a Rolex an expensive watch !

That's a nice post and I will be searching more in this topic..and post a comparison between both steels later..

galloman · 10 February 2010, 06:28 AM

The most reliable info for this material, alloywise, will be found in Matweb. From an engineering point of view they are pretty much the same and the use of one over the other will not be distinguished from one watch to the other.

Jackxv · 10 February 2010, 08:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MagedMS

Steel is a hard metal, Gold is a soft metal but both can be used separatly or combined to create a watch bracelet.. But do we really need a HARD metal for a watch Bracelet ?
I think the much needed is a CORROSION RESISTANT metal for a watch bracelet.. Gold doesn't corrote and If you refer to the chracteristics of the 904L steel used by Rolex, you will find that it is the highest corrosion resisting alloy because it has a high amount of Nickel..and it is triple times more expensive than 316L steel.. this is partially why is a Rolex an expensive watch !

That's a nice post and I will be searching more in this topic..and post a comparison between both steels later..

But the bracelets of Rolex are not made of 904L , the ammount of nickel would give 30% of wearers a rash.

Jack

mcjp6 · 10 February 2010, 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackxv

But the bracelets of Rolex are not made of 904L , the ammount of nickel would give 30% of wearers a rash.

Jack

do you know what grade of steel the bracelets are??

eagle_lex · 10 February 2010, 10:50 PM

i thought the bracelets were 316 and the watch case itself was 904 but you hear mixed opinions on this.

rolexsubdate · 10 February 2010, 11:54 PM

unless you are towing a car with your bracelet, you will never be able to tell or feel or see the diff ......for every day wear and tear, there is no diff .... but gold does scratch easily ...

rolexsubdate · 10 February 2010, 11:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ParisDakarBmw

Band stretch is worse with gold, and it is much softer than any stainless steel. 18k is a great color metal, but not as durable as others. Platinum, steel, and titanium seem more appropriate for a watch than 18k.

The way Rolex has integrated the 18K with the steel, is totally awesome...when you wipe down the tt bracelet and it starts to shine, I have not seen any watch glitter so mjestically and clasically as the 16613 blue dial...I wear mine probably once a month for a day but when I see it shine & glitter, I say to myself "I will sell myself, but never this watch...."

MagedMS · 11 February 2010, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackxv

But the bracelets of Rolex are not made of 904L , the ammount of nickel would give 30% of wearers a rash.

Jack

Thank you Jack for this info, I thought the bracelet is also made of 904L steel !
So what kind of steel is the Rolex bracelet made of ?

Jackxv · 11 February 2010, 09:29 PM

It's made of 316.

Jack

Mxf255 · 12 February 2010, 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackxv

It's made of 316.

Jack

Except for the Deepsea which has a 904 bracelet.

9 February 2010, 05:54 AM	#1
DDG Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Real Name: Dennis Garrett Location: Land of Oz Watch: Rolex Explorer II Posts: 405	Stainless, 18k...How hard are they? I know a little about metals. To me, the Rolex 18k watches seem to hold up pretty well over the years, and don't seem to wear much more than the stainless models. There might be a little difference, but not a whole lot. And, I think the stainless watches & bracelets seem to scratch & dent more than they should. The stainless seems soft. Has anyone seen or done a Brinell hardness test for either? Just how much difference is there?

10 February 2010, 01:23 AM	#3
crushnbugs Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: New York Posts: 31	Stainless I have to agree on the stainless being soft... Is there a thread for buffing out the scratches?

10 February 2010, 02:38 AM	#10
Jackxv "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Netherlands Posts: 969	Yes but Whenever there's friction there is wear. With the solid center links there's less play so the wear with be minimal. All the new bracelet wil not have a fraction of the stretch the older ones had. Also good sizing will improve durabillity of your bracelet. Jack

10 February 2010, 03:39 AM	#12
rad87gn "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Chad Location: Des Moines, Iowa Watch: Rolex, PAM, Omega Posts: 1,607	I think people worry to much about scratches. Every single Rolex is made to be worn everyday. Service time takes care of the movement maintenance and removes scratches. __________________ Rolex P-Series SS GMT II Black, Rolex Y-Series Sea-Dweller, Rolex F-Series TT Blue Sub, Rolex F-Series Sub LV, Rolex D-Series Ladies SS/WG DJ for wife, Panerai K-Series PAM 112, Omega Speedmaster Pro 3570.50, Omega Seamaster 300M Chrono 2594.52

10 February 2010, 05:47 AM	#17
MagedMS "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Real Name: Maged Location: Egypt Watch: SUBMARINER 114060 Posts: 514	Steel is a hard metal, Gold is a soft metal but both can be used separatly or combined to create a watch bracelet.. But do we really need a HARD metal for a watch Bracelet ? I think the much needed is a CORROSION RESISTANT metal for a watch bracelet.. Gold doesn't corrote and If you refer to the chracteristics of the 904L steel used by Rolex, you will find that it is the highest corrosion resisting alloy because it has a high amount of Nickel..and it is triple times more expensive than 316L steel.. this is partially why is a Rolex an expensive watch ! That's a nice post and I will be searching more in this topic..and post a comparison between both steels later.. __________________ ROLEX SUBMARINER-114060/116610 LN/116613 LB ROLEX DEEPSEA-116660/116660 DBL/SD43-126600 ROLEX GMT II C-116710 LN/EXPLORER II-216570 BK ROLEX DAYTONA-116503 BLABR ROLEX MILLGAUSS-116400 GV

10 February 2010, 01:16 AM	#2
Randy16V Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Real Name: Randy Location: New Jersey Watch: Rolex Posts: 117	Well I'll say this- stainless steel is a lot harder than 18K. I think the only reason why you see gold models in better shape is because they weren't worn as hard or as much, but trust me- there are some pretty banged-out gold DDs out there... Older gold watches too- used a different casting technique- the links are sold, but not as dense. The newer ones are more "solid." But I will agree with you- the stainless steel, specifically 904L seems softer (to me anyway) than your typical stainless watch- they do scratch and dent easily. Not looking for a debate- but if you so much as stare at my 16710 the hard way, it gets damaged. My cheaper, 316L watches- are much harder...

10 February 2010, 01:35 AM	#4
bounce Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: kent Posts: 234	I have never owned a gold watch, but I can tell you my previous st/steel GMT IIc with the polished links scratched a lot easier than my st/steel Sub does.

10 February 2010, 02:04 AM	#7
Watch Fan "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: California Watch: Sea Dweller Posts: 676	The brush finish is definately easier to live with. .

10 February 2010, 02:13 AM	#9
ParisDakarBmw Banned Join Date: Dec 2009 Real Name: Paul Location: New Haven, CT Watch: 116610 Sub-C Posts: 6,552	Band stretch is worse with gold, and it is much softer than any stainless steel. 18k is a great color metal, but not as durable as others. Platinum, steel, and titanium seem more appropriate for a watch than 18k.

10 February 2010, 02:49 AM	#11
JBat "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Real Name: John Location: Washington Watch: 16710, 16610, DJ Posts: 7,329	I don't know if the stainless is soft, per se. Any watch is put through a lot of day to day abuse, and can encounter all manner of situations whereby it can become scratched. It's not like it's sitting in a drawer ro something. I think it's unreasonable to expect that any watch metal will be highly scratch resistant. They just take too much of a beating. Just my

10 February 2010, 04:55 AM	#14
snow_rocks Banned Join Date: Feb 2009 Real Name: Rick Location: At what TIME?!!! Watch: the SKY tonite! Posts: 3,225	Scratches are cool, and not for the timid!

10 February 2010, 04:57 AM	#15
brkanand 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Real Name: DrK Location: India Watch: 4=YMDaytonaGMTHulk Posts: 7,052	Interesting info here. Thanks guys.

10 February 2010, 05:01 AM	#16
eagle_lex "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Real Name: Ed Location: Lexington, Ky Watch: AP and Rolex Posts: 541	use a scotch brite pad to rebrush BRUSHED stainless. just brush in a uniform direction. works like a charm!

10 February 2010, 06:28 AM	#18
galloman "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Real Name: Alejandro Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 185	The most reliable info for this material, alloywise, will be found in Matweb. From an engineering point of view they are pretty much the same and the use of one over the other will not be distinguished from one watch to the other.

10 February 2010, 10:50 PM	#21
eagle_lex "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Real Name: Ed Location: Lexington, Ky Watch: AP and Rolex Posts: 541	i thought the bracelets were 316 and the watch case itself was 904 but you hear mixed opinions on this.

10 February 2010, 11:54 PM	#22
rolexsubdate Banned Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: The Moon Posts: 1,238	unless you are towing a car with your bracelet, you will never be able to tell or feel or see the diff ......for every day wear and tear, there is no diff .... but gold does scratch easily ...

11 February 2010, 09:29 PM	#25
Jackxv "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Netherlands Posts: 969	Made of 316 It's made of 316. Jack

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