From your experience which bracelet stretches the the quickest?

[El Cascarrabias]

Oyster or jubilee?

[sillo]

The old folded link bracelets are probably the most susceptible to wear (excluding rivet bracelets since I don't know too much about those). Between the two probably the jubilee since there's more links for the same length of bracelet.

[77T]

It is wear and tear on the link pins that causes “stretch”, that is, dirt + grime becomes the abrasive material.

In terms of bracelet type, all other factors being the same (dirt, grime and owner motion), the Jubilee has a higher propensity for the appearance of stretch. The gaps between links is more visible. However, that abrasion is spread out over more link pins, so each pin wears out at a more gradual rate than an Oyster bracelet over the years because each Jubilee pin has less torsional stress to deal with.

Over the same number of years, the apparent lesser stretch in an Oyster bracelet belies a greater danger of pin failure. And a pin failure can cause a bracelet to break. Because each pin in an Oyster bracelet degrades faster - all other factors being the same (dirt, grime and owner motion) - the pins display a greater loss of metal and become weaker than their Jubillee siblings. The leverage of a wider Oyster link amplifies the force factors in normal use.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Calatrava r]

The modern bracelets will not stretch for quite a while. The old hollow links ones which were not made by Rolex did tend to stretch over several years.

[sillo]

Originally Posted by Calatrava r

The modern bracelets will not stretch for quite a while. The old hollow links ones which were not made by Rolex did tend to stretch over several years.

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=683017

I post this picture almost every time I see this. The area that is going to wear is essentially the same thickness on the hollow and solid links. If you beat up your watch the bracelet is going to wear.

(link if image isn't working https://imgur.com/a/eCCEYo1)


Also do you have a source on the old bracelets not being made by Rolex? I know way back certain markets had the cracelets made under license, but that was usually explicitly stamped on the bracelet somewhere.

[cop414]

Originally Posted by 77T

It is wear and tear on the link pins that causes “stretch”, that is, dirt + grime becomes the abrasive material.

In terms of bracelet type, all other factors being the same (dirt, grime and owner motion), the Jubilee has a higher propensity for the appearance of stretch. The gaps between links is more visible. However, that abrasion is spread out over more link pins, so each pin wears out at a more gradual rate than an Oyster bracelet over the years because each Jubilee pin has less torsional stress to deal with.

Over the same number of years, the apparent lesser stretch in an Oyster bracelet belies a greater danger of pin failure. And a pin failure can cause a bracelet to break. Because each pin in an Oyster bracelet degrades faster - all other factors being the same (dirt, grime and owner motion) - the pins display a greater loss of metal and become weaker than their Jubillee siblings. The leverage of a wider Oyster link amplifies the force factors in normal use.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

This man knows what he’s talking about, well said Paul.

[El Cascarrabias]

Originally Posted by 77T

It is wear and tear on the link pins that causes “stretch”, that is, dirt + grime becomes the abrasive material. . . .Over the same number of years, the apparent lesser stretch in an Oyster bracelet belies a greater danger of pin failure. . . . the pins display a greater loss of metal and become weaker than their Jubillee siblings. The leverage of a wider Oyster link amplifies the force factors in normal use.

PaulG, would replacing the pins every few years be prudent?

[77T]

I don’t think it’s the years so much as it’s the mileage and how much hard wear a bracelet experienced.

You’ll find that the bracelet becomes more comfortable over the years - but keep an eye on how much the gaps have grown between the links. Especially any gaps that are bigger than their neighboring links.

There is a member here named Rolliworks and they have some good examples.

https://www.rolexforums.com/showpost...&postcount=254


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Bigblu10]

Originally Posted by sillo38

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=683017

I post this picture almost every time I see this. The area that is going to wear is essentially the same thickness on the hollow and solid links. If you beat up your watch the bracelet is going to wear.

(link if image isn't working https://imgur.com/a/eCCEYo1)


Also do you have a source on the old bracelets not being made by Rolex? I know way back certain markets had the cracelets made under license, but that was usually explicitly stamped on the bracelet somewhere.

Biggest difference is the bracelet pin is much more of a machine fit in the solid center link. There is more room in the hollow link for " lateral play" which eventually scallops the metal in the link, leading to pin wear, increased distance between the links and loss of metal. If Rolex did not think the modern design wasn't superior they wouldn't have redesigned it. All ot the improvements they have engineered over the years are just that in a nutshell. Improvements.