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

Rolex steel
https://www.breitlingsource.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=46859		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Alien [ Mon Apr 15, 2013 4:13 am ]
Post subject:  Rolex steel
First, I have to admit, I hardly have any knowledge about Rolex details, as I have no time to go into those for Brands, I don't sell.
A customer complained, that he had a Seadweller, which he sold within a month, as the steel was so soft, that it was covered with dents within a few days. According to his information, they use a new alloy, which is supposed to be completely resistant to corrosion, but sadly a little bit softer than normal watches.
Does anyone know those facts, or did the customer fantasize?

BG
Thomas
Author:  Roffensian [ Mon Apr 15, 2013 4:38 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rolex steel
904L stainless steel is used by Rolex vs. the 316L used by most brands. The main reason for using 904 (other than arguably marketing) is the increased corrosion resistance. 904L has a corrosion resistance of 35pre (higher is better), above the threshold for being considered salt water resistant which is 32pre. 316L is only 24pre.

For hardness, things can get a little confusing because of slight variations in composition, testing, treating, etc but generally speaking 316L is marginally harder than 904L but it's not dramatic - 904L still comes in above grade 2 titanium for example.
Author:  Driver8 [ Mon Apr 15, 2013 5:11 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rolex steel
Roffensian wrote:
Generally speaking 316L is marginally harder than 904L but it's not dramatic - 904L still comes in above grade 2 titanium for example.

From previous research I've done, I was under the impression that 904L is generally slightly harder than 316L and therefore, by extension, slightly harder to dent. I heard that Rolex even had to develop their own machining and stamping tools to cope with 904L's hardness. Personally I believed the hardness and the chemical resistance to salt water corrosion were the two driving factors behind using it. The corrosion resistance is well known (as 904L is predominantly used in instustries were a high degree of acid resistance is required), but the hardness factor may be a bit of wishful thinking on the part of Rolex owners. :wink:

But either way, 904L isn't exactly marshmallow-soft, so god knows what that guy must've been doing his Seadweller to dent it up within a couple of weeks!
Author:  Roffensian [ Mon Apr 15, 2013 5:15 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rolex steel
Driver8 wrote:
Roffensian wrote:
Generally speaking 316L is marginally harder than 904L but it's not dramatic - 904L still comes in above grade 2 titanium for example.

From previous research I've done, I was under the impression that 904L is generally slightly harder than 316L and therefore, by extension, slightly harder to dent. I heard that Rolex even had to develop their own machining and stamping tools to cope with 904L's hardness. Personally I believed the hardness and the chemical resistance to salt water corrosion were the two driving factors behind using it. The corrosion resistance is well known (as 904L is predominantly used in instustries were a high degree of acid resistance is required), but the hardness factor may be a bit of wishful thinking on the part of Rolex owners. :wink:

But either way, 904L isn't exactly marshmallow-soft, so god knows what that guy must've been doing his Seadweller to dent it up within a couple of weeks!



See now this is where hardness becomes difficult with stainless alloys.

From a pure alloy standpoint I think that the numbers come out at about 150 vickers for 316 and 145 for 904. However, the properties of the alloys can be affected considerably by how they are treated - heat treatment is a frequent example. I have seen reports of 904 in real world applications up to around 500 vickers, but no idea what Rolex actually does to treat it's alloy so no idea what the 'real' Vickers rating of a Rolex watch case would be.
Author:  Driver8 [ Mon Apr 15, 2013 5:18 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rolex steel
I think it's probably fair to say that any difference is negligible either way.......... and I still struggle to see how anyone could beat up an SD that quickly!
Author:  Roffensian [ Mon Apr 15, 2013 5:20 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rolex steel
Driver8 wrote:
I think it's probably fair to say that any difference is negligible either way.......... and I still struggle to see how anyone could beat up an SD that quickly!



Agree completely!
Author:  RJRJRJ [ Mon Apr 15, 2013 2:01 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Rolex steel
I havent noticed any difference in mine. Sounds like a nice watch might not be the best idea for that guy.
Author:  Otto [ Mon Apr 15, 2013 3:34 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Rolex steel
Covered with dents within a few days? What, was he doing some logging while wearing it?

For my part, I've never noticed any difference.
Author:  sracer [ Mon Apr 15, 2013 8:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Rolex steel
if it was covered in dents in a few days, what did his wrist and forearm look like? Ground meat?
Author:  Alien [ Wed Apr 17, 2013 4:07 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rolex steel
Thanks for the info!
BG
Thomas
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 8 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/