The Breitling Watch Source Forums
https://www.breitlingsource.com/phpBB2/

breitling vs rolex...quality?
https://www.breitlingsource.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=6780		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  gerardo5566 [ Sun Jan 04, 2009 6:11 pm ]
Post subject:  breitling vs rolex...quality?
ok guys i recently got a chronomat for christmas and i have a cousin that bought a rolex deep sea and he is continually bragging that rolex hold more value than breitling and that it has a better movement and use better materials!!! now my questions i know the rolex probably do hold theyre value more but as for the movement and materials is rolex truly better? because in looks breitlings take the award!!!!!
Author:  davo [ Sun Jan 04, 2009 6:46 pm ]
Post subject: 
should've said your friend had a fake too. That usually winds up Rolex owners. Also, size does matter :shock:
Author:  BoneDoc [ Sun Jan 04, 2009 7:06 pm ]
Post subject: 
Oh, the eternal debate!!!
Facts are the following: Rolex does hold value from MRSP better. Value of price PAID is a whole different statement, Breitlings tend to be available in the US for much deeper discounts than Rolex. That is compounded by the fact that Rolex is generally much higher priced in the same categories (I would argue due to name, but again, that is opinion.)
Rolex uses a higher grade of stainless steel (316L for 'Lings and others, 904L in Rollys) in their watches, and I think they are one of only 2 that do, but I am venturing out of my expertise there. Does that matter? I do not know. I am an orthopaedic trauma surgeon and most surgical instruments and implants are made of 316L steel. So we are not talking about tin foil material here.
The movement question becomes one frought with opinion. Breitling uses ETA/Valjoux movements and then fine tunes them. Rolex largely makes their own. That being said, ETA makes movements for many,if not most, automatic watch makers and have some of thje most fine tuned movments, but again, opinions dominate here.
There are no facts in style. Only opinions. I have owned Rolexes (gifts) and do not care for their style. Largely due to the fact that it has never changed. Many find that endearing, to each his own, but not for me.
The analogy of cars to watches was made here a while back. Rolex was the mercedes/cadillac of watches. The standard for luxury brands that needs to do very little to keep going . They put the crown on and people will buy. Breitlings are Bentleys (maybe). Been around for a long time, coming into their own now, maybe just a fashion trend, who knows? But with a devout following who know in their hearts that they are right for them. If mercedes wearers think they are better, let them. But once you DRIVE a Bentley, you no longer have to ask.
The Kings will weigh in shortly in a more complete, and better, way. but this will get the ball rolling. Wow, that was a long damn post for me. I need to drink more, or maybe less. I will start with more and see. Cheers!Image
Author:  Breitling-nutt [ Sun Jan 04, 2009 7:52 pm ]
Post subject: 
Well said Doc!
Author:  Driver8 [ Mon Jan 05, 2009 2:14 am ]
Post subject:  Re: breitling vs rolex...quality?
Well I think Bonedoc did a pretty good job on his answer there! :thumbsup: I heartily agree with the comments (......although I think Rolex are the only manufacturer using 904L steel, but I'm prepared to be corrected on that).

In my opinion it all comes down to personal taste. What I can say is, I've owned a Rolex (a Submariner LV) and I sold it...., while keeping 6 Breitlings. That to me speaks volumes in terms of MY preferences, but while I may bash Rolex for their older style bracelets and clasps (which were frankly poor for a watch of that calibre IMO), I'm not going to suggest that one is necessarily better than the other. I like to think I've always been reasonably objective in my criticism of the things I dislike about Rolex, and I am more than prepared to say that their newer bracelets and clasps are really great (if still not quite wide enough! :wink: )

The 904L steel thing is nothing more than a technicality to my mind, and a masterpiece of Rolex marketing. In the real world it's more about bragging rights than anything you'll actually really notice. 904L is slightly more scratch resistant, but most of the benefits are due to it's resistance to chemical attack - for example it's more resistant to sulphuric acid attack. Well I guess that's a good thing, but my arm is not overly sulphuric acid resistant, so if I dunked my arm in a vat of acid I'd probably be a little more concerned about my arm than my watch! Also it's worth noting that 904L has a higher nickel content which is not great if you have a nickel allergy! It also tends to be more dull in appearance compared to 316L.

The in-house movement thing is always a big discussion point too. However the Daytona was always famous for running a Zenith movement. And the in-house movement Rolex put in their Subbies (while being very quiet, smooth and reliable) is not exactly a complex movement - time and date only. Again, that's not knocking it as ANY in-house movement takes a heck of a lot of R&D, but to make a big deal out of the fact that a time and date movement is in-house is neither here nor there for me. Personally I really love in-house movements that offer something that's not seen elsewhere. The IWC 51111 movement in the Big Pilot with it's 7 day power reserve, the 10 day auto movement in some of the Manifatura Panerai's etc. Even the movement in the Ebel Tekton with it's unique chronograph layout. That kind of innovation makes in-house movements worthwhile IMHO.

So in summary, I'd say that unless resale value is a massive thing for you (in which case you should ALWAYS buy the Rolex), I'd suggest always buying the watch (and brand) that speaks to you the most. Speaking personally, I sometimes find buying a Rolex to be an almost "lazy" choice : it's almost the "default" prestige watch if you can't be bothered to do any research. Yes you could do a lot LOT worse than a Rolex because they are fine watches, but most people could find something far more interesting for similar money from any number of other prestige brands with a bit of research. If, after looking around, you still come back to the Rolie then that's fine, but just buying one "cold", as many people do thinking that it's the absolute peak of watchmaking, is misplaced IMO.

That said, if Rolex ever made something that I liked enough, I'd not hesistate to buy it (provided I could afford it!), but as it stands I infinitely prefer Breitling watches in terms of look, style, size, build....... pretty much everything apart from the resale value (but that's only important if you ever plan to sell). Hence why I have 6 Breitlings and not a single Rolex.

But as I say, it's all just personal choice IMO.
Author:  Spartan [ Mon Jan 05, 2009 5:31 am ]
Post subject:  Re: breitling vs rolex...quality?
well said guys :yeahthat

Lets not forget that Breitling used their own movement in their HERCULES watches.(?)
That was one mean watch and has made an impression on me!

When I first saw the Hercules on someones wrist (back in 2005), I was kinda embarrassed
(I was wearing my SS SUB).
My SUB felt like it was "a boy in a man's world" compared to this Breitling. All of a sudden, I
wasn't in the mood to talk about watches: politics and the weather became more interesting :(
Image
Author:  bnewbie [ Mon Jan 05, 2009 6:31 am ]
Post subject:  Re: breitling vs rolex...quality?
Spartan wrote:
Lets not forget that Breitling used their own movement in their HERCULES watches.(?)

Not quite, Herc uses B39 movement which is modified ETA 2892.
Author:  Driver8 [ Mon Jan 05, 2009 6:38 am ]
Post subject:  Re: breitling vs rolex...quality?
bnewbie wrote:
Spartan wrote:
Lets not forget that Breitling used their own movement in their HERCULES watches.(?)

Not quite, Herc uses B39 movement which is modified ETA 2892.

:yeahthat Breitling currently have no in-house movements. They assemble generally Valjoux and ETA movements from scratch (i.e. they buy in the parts like a kit) modifying them as necessary. The B34 in the very rare and non-current CA Rattrapante auto is Piguet based if I remember correctly.... although I think even that's actually and ETA Piguet. There may be other non-Valjoux or ETA base movements in the Breitling range (in the past especially - Lemania for example) but the B34 is only one from recent years that springs to mind.

Most watch manufacturers do this to a greater or lesser extent : very few are entirely self-sufficient in terms of movement construction.
Author:  Damian [ Mon Jan 05, 2009 9:08 am ]
Post subject:  Re: breitling vs rolex...quality?
D8:
I liked your point about Rolex being a 'lazy' choice, never looked at it that way but I can see exactly where you are coming from
Author:  groucho [ Mon Jan 05, 2009 11:53 am ]
Post subject:  Re: breitling vs rolex...quality?
Being a relatively new member of the Breitling Brotherhood I'll focus on rolex since I am a long time rollie owner.

I have a 5513 late sixties submariner that my dad gave to me when I was about 15 and I wore it every day up until about two or three years ago (I'm 36). For a long time I did not know the difference between a rolex and a timex and man, let me tell you, that poor submariner has been through some things that a wristwatch should not have to go through. But for all the dings, bangs, drops, scrapes and other torment it has seen it has never, not once, stopped or gone awry on me. It has been serviced two times since I got it. Recently I purchased an Explorer II w/white dial so my sub can have a nice long vacation :wink:

For wearability there is nothing quite like a rolex, at least that I've experienced. Very substantial and stury yet light and completely non-obtrusive.

I recently bought a CSO and so far I really, really like it. Nice an chunky but superbly comfortable. Accurate time-keeping. Stunning looks.

However, if I had to choose one of the watches in my humble collection and use it for the rest of my life I think I would have to choose one of my rollies.

But who knows... maybe the secret Breitling gamma-radiation from my CSO hasn't fully set in on my brain yet :)
Author:  drax [ Mon Jan 05, 2009 3:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: breitling vs rolex...quality?
I have to agree with Groucho. I bought my first Submariner in 1979; now,
30 years later, it is still running, keeping excellent time, although a friend
now owns it. That watch has taken more abuse than any single timepiece
should be subjected to. It's been overhauled once and routinely serviced
twice. It has the scrapes, dents and scratches that 30 years of hard living
will produce. But the damn thing will not stop running. I've owned Breitlings
only a few years, so I really don't know how rugged they will be over the long
haul... :? I hope I live long enough to find out. :wink:

But if I could have just one watch to last the rest of my life, it would probably
be...yes, another Sub. :oops: There, I said it.

Steve
Author:  Driver8 [ Tue Jan 06, 2009 1:16 am ]
Post subject:  Re: breitling vs rolex...quality?
Aren't opinions odd things! :) Some guys swear by their Subs to the extent that if they had to choose just one watch, that's what it'd be........ whereas others like me would never own another Sub in our lives.

But it'd be a boring world though if we all liked the same thing. :D
Author:  Stefan Tapp [ Tue Jan 06, 2009 2:20 am ]
Post subject:  Re: breitling vs rolex...quality?
Personally for me Rolex is like smoking, I just don't get it! I've never seen the appeal of either. I wouldn't slag off Rolex in favour of Breitling as having never owned one so I don't know what they are like.

I think for me I like the slight anonymity of Breitling, by no means do I like all of the Breitling models, probably the Windrider being my least favourite range but there is just something about the brand that I like over the others.

Sure, I've experienced a couple of quality issues with my Breitlings, my AS Black steel got exchanged due to a water leak and my SA is currently on its way back to BUK for regulation but it hasn't put me off buying another (when the dealer calls me with a price :roll: ).

Just my penny's worth!

Stef
Author:  groucho [ Tue Jan 06, 2009 3:30 am ]
Post subject:  Re: breitling vs rolex...quality?
Stefan Tapp wrote:
Personally for me Rolex is like smoking, I just don't get it! I've never seen the appeal of either.


Hm, well I happen to be a smoker so maybe that explains it? :wink:

My interest in Breitlings started after I first saw one in person. A friend of mine has a titanium Avenger Seawolf and I remember being impressed when he showed it to me. Breitling watches have a very unique style and prescence, and combined with their robust functionallity and useability they eventually attracted me to purchasing one.

I had a Colt Chrono at first, but I prefer mechanical watches so I replaced it with the CSO I currently own.

I find that the Breitling's strongly pronounced features nicely complement the rolex's more understated style.
Author:  Carlos [ Tue Jan 06, 2009 3:55 am ]
Post subject:  Re: breitling vs rolex...quality?
I have owned a couple of Rolex Daytonas and only one Breitling - my much loved Bentley GT.

Let me start by stating that the only Rolex I like is the Daytona - never been into the Subs, Explorers, Day Dates etc. I don't mind some of the latest Rolex designs, but for the most part, Rolex designs are too simple for me.

That said, Daytonas are awesome, and whether it be an older model with the Zenith movement, or the more recent in-house job - they are equiped with a movement which is like a finely tuned V12 - the ETA 7750s are great too - like a supercharged V8, but most will admit that the Rolex movements are a tad more refined.

As for the other minor aspects of a watch - dial, case & bracelet - Breitling kicks Rolex into next week.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 8 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/