- Posts
- 682
- Likes
- 653
Will Speedmaster Moonwatch co-axial come with ceramic bezel?
- Posts
- 498
- Likes
- 407
- Posts
- 177
- Likes
- 169
- Posts
- 498
- Likes
- 407
- Posts
- 177
- Likes
- 169
dpwaber
·What do you mean?
Dissimilar metals generally not good from a corrosion point of view.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/materials-science/galvanic-corrosion
- Posts
- 498
- Likes
- 407
norb1967
·Dissimilar metals generally not good from a corrosion point of view.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/materials-science/galvanic-corrosion
- Posts
- 177
- Likes
- 169
dpwaber
·Oh of course. Stupid question maybe, but why then did they change to aluminium instead of keeping them as steel..?
It is a mystery to me, particularly as it is relatively soft. Perhaps they wanted to play with anodizing, or use it to sacrificially, to protect the main body from pitting, but only the bit underneath..
- Posts
- 498
- Likes
- 407
- Posts
- 3,979
- Likes
- 8,987
cvalue13
·Would a ceramic bezel pose an issue for NASA flight qualification? I would assume that aluminum would essentially be at zero risk of shattering. Maybe it's more similar to sapphire than hesalite. I don't know enough about the ceramic to anticipate it's mode of failure.
Not that it would necessarily apply to the current hesalite (unless it's actually intended to maintain that standard now or in the future) or sapphire models, but maybe that's a factor?
There’s a pretty thorough thread (or two) that get into this, probably best found by searching OF using google.
But in short: for things used inside the shuttle/suit, NASA blesses shatterable materials (see e.g., the sapphire crystal on the X33); for EVAs, it’s unclear what drugs NASA is on!
- Posts
- 177
- Likes
- 169
dpwaber
·Weight saving…?! But then it would only be a tiny bit.
There might be some good reasons for it, apart from being much easier/cheaper to produce. The paint might stick better, anodizing is preferable to paint IMO, and it can insulate. I chose titanium because I like some of the colours, and it is hard, in more ways than one.
- Posts
- 7
- Likes
- 3
00mega
·I don’t see why they would even consider this. You can’t move too far from the original or it just becomes a blingy caricature. Kind of what happened to the Rolex dive watches. I prefer the basic and less shiny designs. Aluminum was good enough for Buzz Aldrin. It’s good enough for me.
Rolex dive watches just evolved.
Aluminium, hesalite and pressed steel clasps were the best they had then, but sapphire, ceramic, and milled clasps are the best we have now.
They are far from caricatures.
I admire the Moonwatch for having an aluminium/hesalite option, but surely a sapphire/ceramic one is therefore logical?
Ceramic does not have to be gloss.
It’s purely a cost thing.
Omega know that people will put up with aluminium, but not hesalite.
Except in the precious metal variants, where aluminium would quite righty not be acceptable.
- Posts
- 4,879
- Likes
- 21,776
YY77
·There is an after market option;
https://www.spiralwinderwatchparts....ety-tachymetre-bezel-for-the-3861-speedmaster
https://www.spiralwinderwatchparts....ety-tachymetre-bezel-for-the-3861-speedmaster
- Posts
- 7
- Likes
- 3
00mega
·Yep there are plenty of people that prefer this too. Its one of the purported reasons that Omega keeps using aluminum bezels on some watches.
Why prefer aluminium but not hesalite?
Omega do it because there is more profit in aluminium if they can keep everyone happy with the old ‘heritage’ line (which they clearly can on the MW).
Tudor are getting away with it on the Black Bays too.
It’s bizarre they do not make a ceramic bezelled steel dive watch in 2024!
- Posts
- 7
- Likes
- 3
00mega
·H hazeI was hoping the new co-axial speedmaster would have a ceramic bezel. The precious metal moonwatches have the ceramic bezels. How many years will it take for the Stainless Steel ones to have the same?
When people refuse to buy aluminium ones unfortunately I feel.
So don’t hold your breath.
That’s the reason the precious metal variants have ceramic. People would not buy it if aluminium.
- Posts
- 193
- Likes
- 189
7enderbender
·0 00megaRolex dive watches just evolved.
Aluminium, hesalite and pressed steel clasps were the best they had then, but sapphire, ceramic, and milled clasps are the best we have now.
They are far from caricatures.
I admire the Moonwatch for having an aluminium/hesalite option, but surely a sapphire/ceramic one is therefore logical?
Ceramic does not have to be gloss.
It’s purely a cost thing.
Omega know that people will put up with aluminium, but not hesalite.
Except in the precious metal variants, where aluminium would quite righty not be acceptable.
it’s a matter of personal choices, legacy, marketing of course, and fashion trends.
To me the modern Rolex dive watches are indeed caricatures of the originals. In my view they peaked with the 5 digit series. And that’s what I have and would never “upgrade” to a modern version that is big, square and blingy - with tricked out movements that are no longer as reliable as the older ones.
“Omega know that people will put up with aluminium, but not hesalite.” - doesn’t make sense to me. “Hesalite” is not something I just put up with. I preferred it over the sapphire. I don’t think it’s much of a cost thing on a 5 to 8k watch. In fact, Omega could’ve charged me more for the hesalite and solid caseback, but don’t them that.
And if Rolex offered a neo-vintage model recreation of their 4-series with a plexi dome, no cyclops and a smaller yet modern solid clasp, people would be all over this.
It’s like cars. It’s all all gone too far and there isn’t a single current model I’d by interested in or somehow passionate about.
I look at the guitar market where people pay top dollars for older models and faithful recreations of the old ones. This would work also for cars and watches. If I could get a modernized version of 70s or 80s Porsche or BMW 3 series with manual transmission made from more modern materials, it would hit a sweet spot with many people. They can keep their entertainment screens, automatics, ceramic bezels, and 150 hours of power reserve…
Edited:
- Posts
- 27,358
- Likes
- 69,757
Archer
··Omega Qualified Watchmaker0 00megaOmega know that people will put up with aluminium, but not hesalite.
Of the modern Speedmasters that I service, meaning those made after sapphire became an option, I would say the ratio of acrylic crystal Speedmasters I get for service compared to sapphire is 20 to 1. So in my view, people don't just "put up" with acrylic, they actually prefer it by a wide margin.
- Posts
- 682
- Likes
- 653
PandaSPUR
·0 00megaIt’s purely a cost thing.
Omega know that people will put up with aluminium, but not hesalite.
Except in the precious metal variants, where aluminium would quite righty not be acceptable.
Sedna and Canopus 3861s have aluminum bezels.
0 00megaWhy prefer aluminium but not hesalite?
Omega do it because there is more profit in aluminium if they can keep everyone happy with the old ‘heritage’ line (which they clearly can on the MW).
Tudor are getting away with it on the Black Bays too.
It’s bizarre they do not make a ceramic bezelled steel dive watch in 2024!
I don't get it, because people do choose hesalite over sapphire sometimes.
I also don't think the difference in profit Omega can get from an aluminum vs ceramic bezel is really all that significant. They're making a huge margin either way.
- Posts
- 2,439
- Likes
- 3,314
Donn Chambers
·Sedna and Canopus 3861s have aluminum bezels.
I don't get it, because people do choose hesalite over sapphire sometimes.
I also don't think the difference in profit Omega can get from an aluminum vs ceramic bezel is really all that significant. They're making a huge margin either way.
I’ve been following this thread for a bit before responding, and this sums up my thoughts very well. Most <$1000 divers now come with ceramic bezel inserts, so it is hard to consider it a “luxury” material anymore.
It’s just a choice. What makes the item a luxury is how much it costs and the fact that we don’t need it to survive. 😉
- Posts
- 193
- Likes
- 189
7enderbender
·Yeah, I can’t imagine that a piece of aluminum or piece of ceramic is significantly cheaper to make. Both require precision tooling and some people who know what they’re doing. So that should be marginal.
Again, some of us prefer the traditional materials given that this is a watch with a lot of history to it.
I was actually on the list for the 321 initially and turned it down when they had one available - specifically because the use of materials made no sense to me. I would’ve loved to have a new 321 movement in a classic Speedmaster case. Wouldn’t even want a display case.
Again, some of us prefer the traditional materials given that this is a watch with a lot of history to it.
I was actually on the list for the 321 initially and turned it down when they had one available - specifically because the use of materials made no sense to me. I would’ve loved to have a new 321 movement in a classic Speedmaster case. Wouldn’t even want a display case.
- Posts
- 4,936
- Likes
- 17,235
pdxleaf
·There seems to be a lot of information based on marketing that is difficult for me to ferret through.
Aluminum scratches easily but ceramic does not easily scratch.
Aluminum flexes but ceramic cracks.
Which one is better? It seems modern brands chose the material with longer lasting appearance that is less durable?
Surely there are many other types of materials other than ceramic that would have the properties of both hardness and flexibilty.
Regarding the choice of hesalite for NASA over sapphire, did NASA really chose acrylic because it didn't shatter or did they chose acrylic because sapphire wasn't yet available?
Aluminum scratches easily but ceramic does not easily scratch.
Aluminum flexes but ceramic cracks.
Which one is better? It seems modern brands chose the material with longer lasting appearance that is less durable?
Surely there are many other types of materials other than ceramic that would have the properties of both hardness and flexibilty.
Regarding the choice of hesalite for NASA over sapphire, did NASA really chose acrylic because it didn't shatter or did they chose acrylic because sapphire wasn't yet available?
