Forums Latest Members

Essay: Your Preference for Steel is Ruining Great Watches

  1. bradurani Mar 10, 2021

    Posts
    743
    Likes
    2,467
    It's 2021. Two weeks ago, a 126 foot long rocket, 330 million miles from home, dropped a rocket-propelled landing capsule at a precise location 7 miles above the surface of Mars. Travelling at twice the speed of sound, the capsule deployed a 70 foot supersonic parachute. At 200 miles per hour, it started a controlled rocket burn, gently lowering an SUV-sized, aluminum rover onto the red planet. Last year, a vaccine that would have taken 10 years to make 20 years ago, was developed in a year.

    It's an indulgent stretch of the imagination to draw parallels between human-kind's greatest achievements and the evolution of luxury mechanical wristwatches. Mechanical watches are, after all, anti-technological by their very existence. That hasn't stopped us, however, from charting a driven and inspired course of slow but steady improvements in these pieces of unnecessary mechanical man-jewelry, nor should it.

    Not everyone is on board with the changes. New styles, new brands and - germane to this article - new materials abound. Meanwhile, many of us - or perhaps most of us - are more drawn to watches that look like our fathers' watches than to something from our own time. Watch design is a rich and rewarding playground for the aesthetic application of material science. Every year, at least 100 watch brands present us with a smorgasbord of mixed materials and we vote for the winners with our dollars. While few give the thumbs-down to a more scratch-resistant ceramic bezel, or an anti-magnetic silicon hairspring, we've been slower to embrace cases made entirely from modern metals. Or perhaps "slower" isn't the right word for it. "Slower" implies we'll get there eventually, but in 2021, the momentum is clearly in the backwards direction.

    Some say it's the weight. Some like it's luster. Most just haven't stopped to consider whether they'd rather have something else. Regardless, steel reigns as the case material of choice in 2021, and we're all the poorer for it. To start with, it scratches. Ask any vintage collector what the bane of their existence is, and they'll usually reply "polished cases" even before waxing angrily about unscrupulous sellers, mismatched bezels and lack of spare movement parts. Yet here we are spending our dollars in a way that ensures this problem will never go away.

    Ceramic and titanium watches are just all around, unequivocally better materials in every aspect of comparison. I don't even have to explain why. You already know why.

    The "I don't like ceramic because it's too light and therefore feels cheap" camp has a valid concern. Perhaps manufacturers could pair scratch-free ceramic cases with tungsten rotors to give us the durability we need with the comforting weight we enjoy? Or perhaps the heavy-weight camp should just give light-weight a try. A light watch feels weird when you're unaccustomed to it, standing in the showroom trying it on. But familiarity breeds comfort, and I'd be willing to bet that most buyers would adjust very quickly, and learn to enjoy and prefer the lighter watch.

    A light watch disappears until you look at it. But when you do look, the beautiful exotic glow of titanium or the dull alien sheen of ceramic reminds you that you're wearing something special. A watch made of advanced materials is the modern man's watch. It's the watch for the Tesla crowd. It's the watch for the Mars Rover crowd. It reminds you that you're a member of the elite fraternity of watch connoisseurs who bought something high-tech, something well-made, and yes… something expensive.

    "So what", you say. "We can have both". "You can have your titanium, and I'll take my steel and we can both be happy", you claim. Sadly, this isn't the case. Great brands making their best watches in steel are depriving us of the even-better watches they could be making in modern metals.

    Consider Grand Seiko. This is a brand that's doing everything right. They're doing things nobody else is doing right now (while still being relatively affordable). Grand Seiko has created a design language that's completely unique. They've incorporated subtle nods to their history in their case design, but the watches are unmistakably 21st century designs. However they've regressed in materials. The SBGA211 Snowflake - the landmark piece that really showed that they'd arrived - is titanium. Two of last year's Four Seasons models - the SBGA413 Spring and SBGA415 Winter are titanium. This year's new Seasons GMTs are steel. The SLGH005 White Birch - Grand Seiko's showpiece model that brings their incredible new 9SA5 dual-impulse high-beat caliber into regular production - is steel. They didn't do this because they wanted it that way, they did it because you wanted it that way.

    Other brands are taking models that started in advanced materials and back-porting them to steel. Take Bulgari's Octo Finissimo. There was no reason for them to make a steel version of that watch. None. Except that some of you will buy it. It's marketed as the sports version, but sports watches are supposed to be tough, and titanium is tougher than steel.

    "Give the people what they want!" they say. "Not if it's a worse product" I reply. I don't care if you want your 60s re-issues and vintage inspired pieces in steel. Put on some crappy rayon bell bottoms and slap on that Black Bay or Speedmaster Professional in good old-fashion steel and have a hootenanny. The White Birch and the Octo Finissimo are modern watches though, and in the modern era, there are better materials than steel. I guarantee the designers of Grand Seiko's new GMTs did not want to make them in steel. The marketing department made them do it. They made a worse watch because of your consumer preferences.

    There's no universe in which the new Rolex Submariner was going to be anything other than steel, but they could have at least taken a page from Sinn's book, and used a hardening process to make it scratch resistant (paging Tim Mosso!). That they didn't makes you wonder if maybe the polishing room in their service center is - *gasp* - a profit center. Perhaps all of these brands are taking advantage of you, charging you for refinishing when you send your watch in for service, when they could easily sell you a watch that doesn't need it.

    Omega should lead the way here by switching its most modern regular production designs - the Seamaster 300s, Planet Oceans and Aqua Terras - to ceramic and titanium across the board. It's too much to ask of them to stop doing vintage reissues in steel, but the regular production Seamasters should all use modern metals... without the insulting price gauge that usually comes with such advances. That would be a killer differentiating feature. It would take what are already the best mid-priced dive watches on the market and make them phenomenal modern marvels of manufacturing.

    If you think price is an issue, consider that Casio makes a Titanium watch with a sapphire crystal for $202.00. I'm assuming that's grade 3, not the tougher grade 5, but it's obvious that pricey Swiss brands making watches for grown-ups could make everything in grade 5 without raising prices and without taking a big hit to their margins. I believe ceramic can be made cheap too. They don't want you to think that, because they charge such a premium for it right now, but I don't buy it. If they invested in the infrastructure to give them economies of scale, they could offer you a ceramic watch without the price gouge. But that would take - you guessed it - YOU to want it in ceramic. It would take you scoffing at expensive steel watches and having a nice belly chuckle about how scratched up they'll look after 5 years of daily wear, and not buying one. It would take you being forward-looking, modern and scientific in your watch desires. It's time to give up the steel, folks, and join the modern era.
     
  2. Duracuir1 Never Used A Kodak Mar 10, 2021

    Posts
    2,695
    Likes
    28,507
    I am among those who like the old watches. I have stainless steel, chrome, silver and gold. But you make excellent points in your sell written Essay.

    I rarely look at new watches because the older ones link me to what I feel were simpler times. A closer look at history would tell me they were not simpler times. It’s a romantic notion brought on by the old (TCM) movies that we watch.

    Oh, and I also cannot afford the new watches, especially the carbon and precious metal ones.

    I enjoyed reading your essay.
     
    Vitezi, cvalue13 and TimeODanaos like this.
  3. Canuck Mar 10, 2021

    Posts
    13,376
    Likes
    37,536
    A friend of mine bought a titanium (IIRC Tudor). He showed it to me one day, at coffee. I took one look at it and asked him “why titanium?” U G L Y! He shouldn’t have to explain titanium to anybody, just like I shouldn’t have to explain steel!
     
    marco, noelekal and DSotW like this.
  4. Duracuir1 Never Used A Kodak Mar 10, 2021

    Posts
    2,695
    Likes
    28,507
    The next Olympic champions are to be awarded Stainless Steel Medals, by the way! Chuckle chuckle!
     
    Deafboy, morethan1 and wristpirate like this.
  5. Dor_42 Mar 10, 2021

    Posts
    439
    Likes
    917
    Great write up!
    I do not agree with all you said but I do with some.

    Also I see a lot of similarity with the world of car enthusiasts.
    When floppy paddles became a thing everyone hated it, even today when it is superior in any way purists will prefer a stick shift.
    The same thing is happening now with EVs, you can't deny that this is the future but people still love V8s (Can you blame them?!).

    I think that heritage will always matter when it comes to hobbies and things we do for fun and entertainment, at least for the romantics.
    This is a classic case of classical understanding vs romantic understanding.
     
    morethan1 and Duracuir1 like this.
  6. Tony C. Ωf Jury member Mar 10, 2021

    Posts
    7,348
    Likes
    24,042
    While your post is thought provoking, the attitude reflected above is – how shall I put it? – unflattering. If you prefer to chop vegetables on a high-tech cutting board made of scratch-proof materials, rather than a wooden one, that's fine. But to blithely judge the former superior to the latter would be dubious at best.

    Has it occurred to you that a meaningful percentage of watch collectors like the feel of a substantial watch? I would never own an ultra-thin watch precisely because they are too light.

    As for being a part of the Tesla crowd, you say that as if it were a desirable goal! :D
     
  7. DSotW Mar 10, 2021

    Posts
    129
    Likes
    141
    ::screwloose::

    I see you posted this on WUS as well. Do you work for some Ceramic lobby or something ?

    As you say: I don't care if you want your 60s re-issues and vintage inspired pieces in steel.

    At the same time, I don't care that your preference is for Ceramic or any other material. It's not for me or you to judge others as to their preference. It's like saying the music someone happens to like is somehow "wrong". Or, by your measuring stick, anyone still eating food made using 100 year old recipes is somehow backwards?

    Each individual in the market will dictate what they personally want. When taken as a group, it so happens that they prefer Stainless. There's nothing wrong with that, nor should you be belittling them as being ignorant, nor insinuating they are somehow backward because they prefer X over Y.
     
    marco, morethan1 and noelekal like this.
  8. Foo2rama Keeps his worms in a ball instead of a can. Mar 10, 2021

    Posts
    17,045
    Likes
    25,211
    “That's how Dad did it, that's how America does it, and it's worked out pretty well so far.” - Tony Stark

    somethings are just done right the first time.

    Let’s replace rubber in our tires, it’s time to update tires. Glass in windows is up for a change.

    carbon fiber and ceramic watches have issues and are not better then steel. Ever seen the number of shattered ceramic cases that have been posted. Titanium scratches and the luster is not for everyone, tantalums too heavy.
     
    Medinatalzahra, Kmart, marco and 6 others like this.
  9. RI Omega Fan Mar 10, 2021

    Posts
    948
    Likes
    5,646
    Guy Clark sums it up in “Stuff That Works” ~

     
    marco likes this.
  10. TimeODanaos Mar 10, 2021

    Posts
    1,557
    Likes
    3,194
    Thanks @bradurani for a really enjoyable, well-written, and thought-provoking read. Like the best polemics, can't agree with you 100%, but that's what makes for interest. A mixed economy is going to be the most fertile, long may that continue. I love my vintage, but I also prefer a tungsten carbide bezel on a Globemaster to a white gold one!
     
  11. Dan S Mar 10, 2021

    Posts
    18,604
    Likes
    42,876
    tl;dr version?
     
    apsm100, Scarecrow Boat and morethan1 like this.
  12. TimeODanaos Mar 10, 2021

    Posts
    1,557
    Likes
    3,194
    Sorry I'm dumb (and rushing), I'll need the decode for that, please :unsure:
     
    morethan1 likes this.
  13. fibonacci Mar 10, 2021

    Posts
    167
    Likes
    369
    Y u no want titanium case??
     
  14. padders Oooo subtitles! Mar 10, 2021

    Posts
    8,931
    Likes
    13,873
    I too found this a little TL;DR but assuming it is suggesting the ceramic is a good choice for a watch case material, I beg to differ. It makes about as much sense as making mobile phones out of glass. I have handled several ceramic cased watches with irrepairable damage. I have handled even more chipped ceramic bezel inserts. These are fit now for the bin and nothing more. Steel or even gold is a far superior material as it can be easily and cheaply repaired. As for titanium, yet is very light but does fade to a rather dull matt grey with time and is also trickier to refinish well than steel. Of the two 'wonder materials' mentioned above, I prefer titanium, ceramic is good only for sanitary ware IMO. Have you noticed that where there are steel and titanium versions of watches available, usually there is initially a premium for titanium but after a few years the prices seem to converge.
     
    Edited Mar 11, 2021
  15. TimeODanaos Mar 10, 2021

    Posts
    1,557
    Likes
    3,194
    With epic bad timing, in late 2019 I had been planning to hit the boutiques and take a serious look at the (then) new Ti-case Defy (not the skeleton versions though). Something unfortunately has been keeping me out of the city ever since... :( Soon be back on it though I hope, thanks Mr Pfizer.l
     
    connieseamaster and Larry S like this.
  16. bradurani Mar 10, 2021

    Posts
    743
    Likes
    2,467
    Thanks everyone! In case you're wondering what prompted this tirade, it's definitely my favorite brand - Grand Seiko - not putting any titanium watches in their new releases. Sorry if I was too harsh on your Speedy Pros. Thank you for reading!
     
  17. DSotW Mar 10, 2021

    Posts
    129
    Likes
    141
    Do you have a personal preference for Stainless cased watches?

    Yes? If so, YOU'RE WRONG! Plus, you are a backward ignoramus.
     
    apsm100, Kmart, morethan1 and 3 others like this.
  18. Archer Omega Qualified Watchmaker Mar 10, 2021

    Posts
    26,343
    Likes
    65,049
    He's not suggesting they are a good choice, but THE BEST CHOICE!!!! :)

    "Ceramic and titanium watches are just all around, unequivocally better materials in every aspect of comparison. I don't even have to explain why. You already know why."

    And the reason he doesn't explain why, is that it's not true...

    The rant is getting about the same level of love over at WUS...not much...
     
    flw, Kmart, marco and 5 others like this.
  19. rcs914 Mar 10, 2021

    Posts
    2,496
    Likes
    3,588
    If anything, titanium develops surface scratches just as easily as steel, so I'm really not getting it being promoted as a superior choice when it comes to that. I prefer it because with a Ti bracelet, a watch isn't a boat anchor, but it's hardly imperceptible. It also wears pretty easily if subjected to any sort of constant movement (think bracelet links moving against each other). Titanium has high tensile strength but not so great wear resistance. The only way in which it is superior to steel is with weight. I like titanium watches, and would definitely be interested in more being offered that way, but let's not kid ourselves that it somehow prevents pretty much any of the OP's issues with steel.
     
    flw and TimeODanaos like this.
  20. Observer I know nothing! Mar 10, 2021

    Posts
    806
    Likes
    1,878
    Your preference for gold is ruining watches even more, and don’t even get me started on those archaic movements that will forever be the victims of friction. Oh, the horror!

    You know what would really be practical? A paper-thin digital made of the latest polymers. Who wants one?
     
    AustinTech and TimeODanaos like this.