The Watch Site banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
105 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I've read so many forums posts around the net where Rolex owners brag about how great the Oyster case design is and what it can handle. I've honestly never had any problems with moisture or any water get into any of my Japanese watches after 4+ years...sure it is time to change the gaskets but they still hold up fine..
 

·
Researcher
Joined
·
5,026 Posts
Is this a Japanese watch forum?? is Rolex Japanese?. Who cares what Rolex owners brag about? Are all your posts going to be about stirring the sh!t?
 

·
Special Member
Joined
·
6,516 Posts
Short answer: Yes.

I've de-rusted many an old Seiko case, few Oyster cases get rusty. Both the Rolex twin-lock or trip-lock screw down crown designs keep water out even when opened (unscrewed from hold down tube) and their water ratings are more "real" than a number (would you dare take a Seiko "50M" case 50 meters down?).

Ultimately it makes no difference to 99.9% of the owners. Rolex is about Marketing par excellance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
I have owned seven or eight Rolex watches and quite a few other Swiss and German made watches and many many Seikos, Casios and Citizens. I have only had two leak and / or corrode after heavily diving quite a few of them. I do not see it as a big issue with any particular brand of watch or country of origin.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,100 Posts
Short answer: Yes.

I've de-rusted many an old Seiko case, few Oyster cases get rusty. Both the Rolex twin-lock or trip-lock screw down crown designs keep water out even when opened (unscrewed from hold down tube) and their water ratings are more "real" than a number (would you dare take a Seiko "50M" case 50 meters down?).

Ultimately it makes no difference to 99.9% of the owners. Rolex is about Marketing par excellance.
I think Rolex uses stainless with a higher nickel content. This reduces the risk of corrosion at the risk of increased irritation among sensitive individuals.

I'm pretty sure the 7S26-0020 (e.g. SKX007) and 8L35-0010 cases will maintain water resistance with the crown unscrewed. The o-ring on the crown post is in contact with the inside of the case tube no matter what position the crown is in. The same might be true of the 6309-7040 case, as the o-ring in the crown is in constant contact with the outside of the case tube.

I swam for years with a watch rated for 50 meters, and it never leaked. It wasn't a Seiko or a Rolex, it was a Guess Waterpro!

Myles
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
530 Posts
I think Rolex uses stainless with a higher nickel content. This reduces the risk of corrosion at the risk of increased irritation among sensitive individuals.

I'm pretty sure the 7S26-0020 (e.g. SKX007) and 8L35-0010 cases will maintain water resistance with the crown unscrewed. The o-ring on the crown post is in contact with the inside of the case tube no matter what position the crown is in. The same might be true of the 6309-7040 case, as the o-ring in the crown is in constant contact with the outside of the case tube.

I swam for years with a watch rated for 50 meters, and it never leaked. It wasn't a Seiko or a Rolex, it was a Guess Waterpro!

Myles
Nickel is the element that causes most metal reactions in people so higher nickel content would make things worse.

316L is plenty corrosion resistant. The increased corrosion resistance Rolex uses has no practical advantage in a watch. What it does do is polish up better which is why I think they use it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,100 Posts
Nickel is the element that causes most metal reactions in people so higher nickel content would make things worse.
That's what I wrote. The SS with higher nickel content is more allergenic and more resistant to corrosion.

I've seen a lot of pitting on "vintage" Seiko cases. I haven't been around any vintage Rolex cases to see if they suffered the same fate. If they haven't, it's due to the steel used or the fact that they were better looked after by their owners.

Myles
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
845 Posts
Short answer with respect to the OP: "No" However, the caveat is, it depends on what you are looking for the case to do "best". That said, Rolex builds an excellent case that delivers on its claims. On the whole, the materials are more tolerant of abuse and the machining is tighter than most. Other brands manufacture equal and in some cases better depending upon what your intended use is. High grade Japanese casings can certainly equal performance...many consumer grade cases are not even close in execution or performance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
530 Posts
I don't think Seiko historically used 316L. I noticed with the GS models starting 5 or 6 years ago they started advertising 316L. I know my GS handwind I bought 15 years ago and my SD GMT have a very different appearance. The Handwind has a much whiter polish to it while the 316L is a duller more metallic look.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
342 Posts
"Back in the day" when the oyster case was being developed there were few makers who could compare to it's structural integrity. Whole lotta "firsts" were recorded with Rollie oysters. That's no accident.

Today, OTOH, with advances in metallurgy and far greater numbers of well financed well engineered competing manufacturers, "Best" would be a tough description to defend, and best value would be laughable.

Rollie puts out great products for sure, but most SCWFers are equally concerned with bang for the buck.

Ya pays yer money, and ya takes yer pick!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
530 Posts
Several years ago I read an article in the NAAWC magazine concerning a long defunct outfit-The N.Y waterproof watch company (or something similar). They had a patent for a waterproof case back in the 1920s that look suspiciously like the oyster case long before Rolex came out with theirs. Of course the outfit went out of business and there was no one to defend the patent.

No accusations here just a tid bit of history. You draw your own conclusions.
 

·
Researcher
Joined
·
5,026 Posts
I don't think Seiko historically used 316L. I noticed with the GS models starting 5 or 6 years ago they started advertising 316L. I know my GS handwind I bought 15 years ago and my SD GMT have a very different appearance. The Handwind has a much whiter polish to it while the 316L is a duller more metallic look.
Pretty sure the SKX007 is 316L, and it started out in 1996, so I think they've used it for a long time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
845 Posts
Funny how this has evolved into the assumption that the "best" stainless = the "best" case. From the watchmakers point of view, the "best" stainless in watchmaking is a compromise between stainless which will not oxidize but cannot be economically machined/refinished and stainless will is easily machined/refinished, but doesn't hold up well to oxidation and impacts. Then there are all those other materials to consder...8KG, 10KG, 14K, 18K, silver, silveroid, platinum, titanium, cermachrome, etc...guess none of those can be the "best". IMHO, questions like these are hopelessly mired in "IMHOs".
 

·
Researcher
Joined
·
5,026 Posts
True, it's a topic that's been rehashed over and over again - hence why I remarked at the beginning, that it's just a prod the hornet's nest post.
Omega uses 316l, so it's good enough for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,767 Posts
Yeap!

Yes, they are.


Hernán
This post is written in perfectly good spanglish
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top