Reply With QuoteYou doing up nuts with your watch?Originally Posted by Andyg
Sent from my SM-G965F using TZ-UK mobile app
Ceramic is being used I suspect because it a very easy material to make cases from. Design a steel prototype from which to make a mold. Fill said mold with almost dry clay and apply pressure from top of four sides. Leave on conveyor belt to be run through furnace/kiln and collect at other side. Discard imperfect cases and keep those that look good.
A ton of clay will cost less than £1000. Waste can be disposed of. What would a tonne of steel cost and how much for the production and associated waste.
Ceramic cases make sense from a profitability view. I don’t think they make sense from any other perspective.
You doing up nuts with your watch?
Sent from my SM-G965F using TZ-UK mobile app
Quite. I remember taking delivery of my first carbon fibre tripod and my immediate thought was this looks like a bit of plastic with some grain on it.
In the Sotadic Zone, apparently.
No, but they are tools, and as such can be subject to lots of abuse. Perhaps this is why we have "shockproof" movements.
Personally I think the use of ceramic in a cases is because some manufacturers are looking to demonstrate they are "on trend" and utilising the latest technology - not because it's actually better. Who can forget the Tissot Wood watch for example - a pointless piece of tat.
Alas a replacement ceramic insert on a Rolex is about £1k - a replacement Rolex alloy one is about £35. Both do the same job, but the ceramic is more fragile and much more expensive to fix.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
A Dacia is £7k - a Porsche is £100k. Both do the same job, but the fancy one is more fragile and much more expensive to fix".
I am looking forward to a f2f to pick up this beauty tomorrow! I think ceramic suits in this case - scratch proof, much less dense - top quality movement and IMHO aesthetically pleasing - deep black brushed finish case completes the look:
pic from seller (hope you don't mind Andy?)
The ceramic bezel colours are more vibrant and also easier to read and will look nicer for longer.
A G-Shock is a tool, most watches on here are akin to jewellery and statements.
And if it's about being sensible with money, this isn't the best hobby.
Sent from my SM-G965F using TZ-UK mobile app
Ah so you went for it in the end. Very nice. I have a DSOTM coming to me tomorrow before 1pm. Really excited.
I have just been digging around the www for information on the ceramics used by Omega (interesting fact No 345 Sapphire is classed as a ceramic by the way - and has been used with success in the watch industry for many years - how many shattered crystals do we have pictures of - which may happen if you drop face down onto a concrete floor)
https://www.fratellowatches.com/omega-speedmaster-blue-side-moon-52mondayz-week-3/
Some quotes
[Omega uses] ZrO2, Zirconium Dioxide, often seen mentioned as Zirconium Oxide as well. Usually, Zirconium Dioxide is casually referred to as Zirconia, in the watch business it’s most commonly known as just Ceramic.Now all ceramics are harder than steel and/or gold. However, they’re much easier to break or shatter as well. Which you don’t like when constructing a casing for a wristwatch I can imagine. Not ZrO2. Zirconium Dioxide is a ceramic with a strength compared to steel. In fact, Zirconium Dioxide has the highest mechanical strength and fracture toughness of all major fine ceramics. These characteristics result in an extremely high resistance against wear.I am not a material scientist (more a physicist) so would welcome comments.Besides this strength, ZrO2 for a ceramic has a relatively high thermal expansion. As not all components of a wristwatch can be made of ceramics, metals have to be used in the construction as well. Think of the movement, winding shaft, etc. The thermal expansion of ZrO2 is almost equal to that of steel, and therefore often the material of choice for joining these materials.
I’m not sure complex machines made up of hundreds (thousands?) of moving parts can be compared to a circle of pottery vs a circle of aluminium can they? - I mean, a bezel insert, or a whole case, is hardly comparable to a complex machine at all is it?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I would be interested in where that research came from... I suspect a watch manufacturer. In particular the strength being comparable with steel. I would be highly surprised if that was strength as determined such as when the two are dropped.
Last edited by canuck; 12th December 2019 at 03:13.
That ceramics break when dropped is not due to lack of strength. They are strong but not tough.
exactly why ZO2 was chosen apparently as it also has the highest toughness of
the ceramics (according to that article).
....which you don’t like when constructing a casing for a wristwatch I can imagine. Not ZrO2. Zirconium Dioxide is a ceramic with a strength compared to steel. In fact, Zirconium Dioxide has the highest mechanical strength and fracture toughness of all major fine ceramics
Some update.
Luckily my insurance covers the damage.
It’s now been sent to IWC and will know the cost hopefully in January
I heard that the replacement case will be around 2000€, so total cost should stay below 3k€.
Great news, this incident wouldn’t put me off buying another Ceramic cased watch ( they look cool as f**k ) and would definitely make me check I had adequate insurance when I owned another.
2000€ Doesn't sound too bad TBH.
I would have no idea but I certainly would not expect a bit to break off a stainless case if it where dropped, certainly not a material I would look at when buying a watch. Each to their own but when buying in to this material I guess you need to be prepared to fork out should it break or chip
Posting Permissions
