To sapphire or not?

Posts
2,586
Likes
2,870
According to Tim from Govberg and watchuwant or whatever his videos are called, the sapphire sandwich is slightly thinner than the hesalite. He says the hesalite is 14mm while the sapphire comes in at 13.7mm.
 
Posts
44
Likes
142
Had both more than once. Every time I got the hesalite, I think I need the sapphire as it’s better suited for everyday use but then once I get it, I don’t like the white ring around the crystal. I go back and forth a lot but in the end, I think the hesalite model is nicer. Just for the fact it doesn’t have the milky white ring around the crystal. As far as scratches, you can polish it back to new in seconds. The hesalite looks better imo. You can’t go wrong either way.
 
Posts
282
Likes
148
I tend to keep whichever is original
 
Posts
18,104
Likes
27,413
I tend to keep whichever is original
You cannot swap back and forth. The cases are slightly different.
 
Posts
220
Likes
93
Hesalite for me. I don't mind about the scratches and prefer the look. Also with polywatch it's fastly repaired.
+1 The Moonwatch was with Hesalite and with steel back. So I prefer the watch that comes nearest to the watch on the moon.
 
Posts
296
Likes
849
Sapphire for me. There's endless debates about the "warmth" of hesalite and the "milky ring" of sapphire. For me, one is not better than the other; it's just different. I could live with either one, looks wise. But I choose the sapphire sandwich because it IS more scratch resistant. Plus, I get to see the movement, and it is better finished than the movement in the hesalite.
Exactly.

It's like if I was buying an old Corvette, and they gave me the option to use a lighter fiberglass material instead of the heavier fiberglass that came on the older models. Of course I would! It makes the car a much more high-performance vehicle.

Same thing with the watch. Sapphire is a much more high-performance crystal, as we all know. None of us are taking it into space, so the fracturing qualities of hesalite don't really mean much to us.

I love my Sapphire sandwich. I never notice the milk ring that others complain about. I guess if you do, and it bugs you, that might be a factor in your decision.
 
Posts
5,501
Likes
9,399
Same thing with the watch. Sapphire is a much more high-performance crystal, as we all know. None of us are taking it into space, so the fracturing qualities of hesalite don't really mean much to us.
What exactly is higher performance? That is can take more force for a given amount of deflection? (although dome shape of hesalite makes it a bit stronger then if it were flat) Or just that sapphire is more scratch-resistant? I am not sure which properties you are referring to.
 
Posts
219
Likes
207
Hesalit because it’s the only original. It’s cheap for replacement. If you catch a scratch just polish by yourself.

On every other watch, crystal because it’s mostly scratch resistant.
 
Posts
296
Likes
849
What exactly is higher performance? That is can take more force for a given amount of deflection? (although dome shape of hesalite makes it a bit stronger then if it were flat) Or just that sapphire is more scratch-resistant? I am not sure which properties you are referring to.
The scratch resistance.

I don't understand why so many people (not saying you) are so quick to dismiss this advantage over Hesalite. It's not a small improvement.
 
Posts
5,501
Likes
9,399
Increased scratch resistance is not high-performance *to me*, as it is just an aesthetic issue. I actually have more issues with the sapphire crystals on some of my watches then I do on the hesalite. Part of that is due to anti-reflective coatings some manufacturers use -- those coating can wind up looking crappy and there isn't anything you can do short of replacing the crystal. But I also don't really have an issue with scratching up my watch crystals; the TinTin that has been my daily wearer for over 2 years only has one or two small marks from me (and a much bigger one from the initial owner). When it comes to specifically talking about Speedmasters, I find the sapphire crystals give the watches a less casual/ everyday look, which is an issue for me as I prefer casual. I make an exception for the #PCA Speedy, but it isn't exactly a Speedmaster pro anyway so I can tolerate it.

Hesalite vs sapphire is definitely a personal decision, and having a mix probably works fine for many people. It took me a little time to come down on one side of the 'debate', and it was purely based on my own personal experiences. You would think as an engineer sapphire would make more sense to me, but a good design needs to have a soul, which I feel more when I look at a Speedmaster that has a hesalite crystal.
 
Posts
29,221
Likes
75,514
The scratch resistance.

I don't understand why so many people (not saying you) are so quick to dismiss this advantage over Hesalite. It's not a small improvement.

I think it’s because when acrylic is scratched it can be fixed so easily that the “advantage” in practice is actually very small. Given the drawbacks of sapphire, having to polish the crystal periodically is a small thing in the big picture.
 
Posts
296
Likes
849
I think it’s because when acrylic is scratched it can be fixed so easily that the “advantage” in practice is actually very small. Given the drawbacks of sapphire, having to polish the crystal periodically is a small thing in the big picture.
I hear you.

For me, not having to polish the crystal is a convenience I value.
 
Posts
10,305
Likes
16,126
It is actually pretty easy to remove external anti glare with a mild abrasive in my experience. Toothpaste will do it is some cases. I think you may have replaced a lot of sapphire crystals unnecessarily. In any case it is rare for Omega to use it but I agree it looks poor when marked up. If the cost of a replacement sapphire Speedy crystal wasn’t stratospheric, I would have it every time, I certainly wouldn’t have acrylic on any other modern watch, but the cost is a worry.


Increased scratch resistance is not high-performance *to me*, as it is just an aesthetic issue. I actually have more issues with the sapphire crystals on some of my watches then I do on the hesalite. Part of that is due to anti-reflective coatings some manufacturers use -- those coating can wind up looking crappy and there isn't anything you can do short of replacing the crystal. But I also don't really have an issue with scratching up my watch crystals; the TinTin that has been my daily wearer for over 2 years only has one or two small marks from me (and a much bigger one from the initial owner). When it comes to specifically talking about Speedmasters, I find the sapphire crystals give the watches a less casual/ everyday look, which is an issue for me as I prefer casual. I make an exception for the #PCA Speedy, but it isn't exactly a Speedmaster pro anyway so I can tolerate it.

Hesalite vs sapphire is definitely a personal decision, and having a mix probably works fine for many people. It took me a little time to come down on one side of the 'debate', and it was purely based on my own personal experiences. You would think as an engineer sapphire would make more sense to me, but a good design needs to have a soul, which I feel more when I look at a Speedmaster that has a hesalite crystal.
Edited:
 
Posts
5,501
Likes
9,399
It is actually pretty easy to remove external anti glare with a mild abrasive in my experience. Toothpaste will do it is some cases. I think you may have replaced a lot of sapphire crystals unnecessarily. In any case it is rare for Omega to use it but I agree it looks poor when marked up. If the cost of a replacement sapphire Speedy crystal wasn’t stratospheric, I would have it every time, I certainly wouldn’t have acrylic on any other modern watch, but the cost is a worry.
The reality is I haven't replaced any sapphire crystals unnecessarily -- they just look a little crappy. But I can still tell the time, which is the reason I have them. (I do not wear them for fashion; I have a couple 'dressy' watches for that, which I only wear once every year or two).

I have a Seiko quartz that was my only watch for almost 30 years. I cracked the sapphire crystal twice climbing around on scaffolding, etc. for work, and also managed to put a few other scrapes on it here and there. I think it was good training for me, as I subconsciously shield my watch these days when I am climbing around.
 
Posts
10,305
Likes
16,126
The reality is I haven't replaced any sapphire crystals unnecessarily -- they just look a little crappy. But I can still tell the time, which is the reason I have them. (I do not wear them for fashion; I have a couple 'dressy' watches for that, which I only wear once every year or two).

I have a Seiko quartz that was my only watch for almost 30 years. I cracked the sapphire crystal twice climbing around on scaffolding, etc. for work, and also managed to put a few other scrapes on it here and there. I think it was good training for me, as I subconsciously shield my watch these days when I am climbing around.

Yes I too have destroyed the sapphire crystal on a Seiko. I was climbing to see a waterfall in Morocco so at least it is a cool story. I share your pain!
 
Posts
5,501
Likes
9,399
Yes I too have destroyed the sapphire crystal on a Seiko. I was climbing to see a waterfall in Morocco so at least it is a cool story. I share your pain!
Your story sounds a little more exotic than "Once I cracked it into a scaffolding pipe, and another time I bounced it off the corner of a brick" 😟