A ton of microscrathes on Stainless Steel after only a week!

[bobob]

Love those micro scratches. First few look bad but after awhile it looks nice

I've been wearing stainless steel watches for about 20 years. I think the micro scratches give the item its distinct character.

It's called patina. It gives it character. Don't sweat it, it's not a museum piece, and it's not a negative, unlike a too-long sport coat or wrinkled shirt.

I'm glad to see that some people still get it.

Reminds me of others complaining about the black iPhone 5. The build and finish reminded me for all the world of an old Leica camera - - the gentle wear marks showed me just how much I had loved it.

 

[fs454]

I'm glad to see that some people still get it.

Reminds me of others complaining about the black iPhone 5. The build and finish reminded me for all the world of an old Leica camera - - the gentle wear marks showed me just how much I had loved it.

Although honestly the black iPhone 5's still remaining look like they were pulled straight from a blender at this point.

 

[FrankySavvy]

Why would you expect it to NOT scratch??

All stainless watches will scratch. I have my Breitling bracelets machine polished every year. They come out almost new.

I did, but to look like that so soon....

 

[whatos]

I think this would be a problem for any SS watch....

There are different grades of stainless steel, and different ways it can be finished. Apples watch does seem to be a high maintenance finish. To require even touch up polishing as mine did after just one week is an oversight on Apples part.

I know this report goes against all principles by Apple Faithfuls that will blame others or deny it even exists. SS comprises eight of the watches in my collection. None are as vulnerable to any type of scratch as the Apple Watch.

Given that I'm very careful, as a long time collector of watches far more expensive than the thousand dollar Apple Watch, it speaks volumes as to how far off the mark Apple is.

Those who claim their Apple Watch is fine, I believe you, Apple doesn't seem to be able to maintain the consistency they were once known for.

 

[McPhallus]

I'm glad to see that some people still get it.

Reminds me of others complaining about the black iPhone 5. The build and finish reminded me for all the world of an old Leica camera - - the gentle wear marks showed me just how much I had loved it.

Not everyone subscribes to the aesthetic notion that scratches add character and that patina is something to be envied. While I am highly skilled at removing scratches, I can certainly see how someone with a highly polished watch might be concerned about scratches after two weeks. It's like finding dents on your new car.

 

[mcdj]

I have a 4 year old Rolex Submariner that I wear literally every day that has less scratches on it than your watch. Either Rolex's steel is harder, or you're harder on the Watch. I suspect the latter.

Keeping a wristwatch scratch free involves some level of care and mindfulness.

 

[NT1440]

I did, but to look like that so soon....

The timespan has nothing to do with it. The metal doesn't suddenly become weaker months down the road.

 

[dyt1983]

I have a 4 year old Rolex Submariner that I wear literally every day that has less scratches on it than your watch. Either Rolex's steel is harder, or you're harder on the Watch. I suspect the latter.

Recent Rolexes are 904L steel, the Apple Watch is 316L. Although stronger, I believe 904L isn't inherently harder, but the forging and finishing processes are key to the surface hardness. The 904L does have a MUCH higher nickel and chromium content, I would hate to see the complaints if something like that was used.

----------

The timespan has nothing to do with it. The metal doesn't suddenly become weaker months down the road.

How about gradually?

 

[Glideslope]

I have a 4 year old Rolex Submariner that I wear literally every day that has less scratches on it than your watch. Either Rolex's steel is harder, or you're harder on the Watch. I suspect the latter.

Keeping a wristwatch scratch free involves some level of care and mindfulness.

It's MUCH harder. The Mariner uses 904 SS. Apple considered this, but could not make the margins work. 904 SS would have been overkill in a $600 -$1,200 SS Watch.

This is simply one reason why people who purchase High Quality Mechanical Watches always will.

The quality of an AW even at $10,000 is not even in the same hemisphere as a Mariner. Tim is in for a very tough year. The AW is competing with other Digital Watches costing 1/3 the price.

After the past weeks no one in the Alps is looking to change anything.

 

[KPOM]

It's MUCH harder. The Mariner uses 904 SS. Apple considered this, but could not make the margins work. 904 SS would have been overkill in a $600 -$1,200 SS Watch.

This is simply one reason why people who purchase High Quality Mechanical Watches will always.

The quality of an AW even at $10,000 is not even in the same hemisphere as a Mariner. Tim is in for a very tough year. The AW is competing with other Digital Watches costing 1/3 the price.

After the past weeks no one in the Alps is looking to change anything.

904 is also more allergenic. Apple is competing primarily in the "mall watch" territory against brands like Tissot and Movado, who also use 316L. The bread and butter is the $550-1100 watch, which is fairly priced compared to these brands.

The Edition is mostly for show. Jony Ive was pushing for it.

 

[Glideslope]

Recent Rolexes are 904L steel, the Apple Watch is 316L. Although stronger, I believe 904L isn't inherently harder, but the forging and finishing processes are key to the surface hardness. The 904L does have a MUCH higher nickel and chromium content, I would hate to see the complaints if something like that was used.

----------



How about gradually?

904L is MUCH harder.

----------

904 is also more allergenic. Apple is competing primarily in the "mall watch" territory against brands like Tissot and Movado, who also use 316L. The bread and butter is the $550-1100 watch, which is fairly priced compared to these brands.

The Edition is mostly for show. Jony Ive was pushing for it.

Oh, I see. A 35 Million Dollar Ad Blitzkrieg for a Mall Watch?

Please.

 

[KPOM]

There are different grades of stainless steel, and different ways it can be finished. Apples watch does seem to be a high maintenance finish. To require even touch up polishing as mine did after just one week is an oversight on Apples part.
...
Given that I'm very careful, as a long time collector of watches far more expensive than the thousand dollar Apple Watch, it speaks volumes as to how far off the mark Apple is.

Those who claim their Apple Watch is fine, I believe you, Apple doesn't seem to be able to maintain the consistency they were once known for.

They are making $550-$1100 watches, not ones that cost thousands more (apart from the Edition). Other watches in that price range use the same grade of stainless steel and scratch just as easily. Apple is not far off the mark at all. As for consistency, Apple is doing quite well for a mass market producer.

 

[bidwalj]

It's the microfiber cloth in pretty sure. Best to just use your hands or maybe a cloth you clean sunglasses.

 

[KPOM]

904L is MUCH harder.

----------



Oh, I see. A 35 Million Dollar Ad Blitzkrieg for a Mall Watch?

Please.

$35 million was for the entire campaign. The Sport will sell in the highest volume, and the Watch will bring in the most revenue. The Edition is mostly for show.

 

[DirtySocks85]

I can't really seem to find any microscratches yet on my Watch body, but there are a good number of them on the clasp of the Milanse Loop. It doesn't really bother me though.

 

[Glideslope]

$35 million was for the entire campaign. The Sport will sell in the highest volume, and the Watch will bring in the most revenue. The Edition is mostly for show.

Yes, I was aware it was the entire campaign. Thank you.

I also agree that the Sport will sell in higher volumes. However, Apple needs to see high volumes of both for any longevity. I'm sorry, but to me it's a very distracting device. I see it as nothing other than an iPhone for your wrist.

We have a couple people with them at my place of employment. Let me be clear. They are treated as a cell phone in any meeting, especially teleconferences. You had better have it on DND. Even silenced, you start looking at your wrist 5 every min (yes, it happens.Like a new habit) and scorn will descend upon your flesh.

It's a gadget. Nothing more.

 

[texasstar1981]

It's MUCH harder. The Mariner uses 904 SS. Apple considered this, but could not make the margins work.

are you sure about that?

One FACT we know is that 904 has A LOT more nickel in the alloy (25% !) which triggers nickel allergies and which is above what the European Union recommends.... so yeah... would love to hear the outcry if Apple would use that much nickel in the SS alloy

 

[Newtons Apple]

It's the microfiber cloth in pretty sure. Best to just use your hands or maybe a cloth you clean sunglasses.

The microfiber cloth is not scratching the stainless steel!

 

[MasterRyu2011]

I'm beginning to really not regret my decision to go Sport.

But still guys, what's up with all of these posts crying "what do you expect??". On Apple's website, their description of the Stainless steel they're using makes it seem like it's really resistant to scratches. I recall also back in February prior to people receiving their watches, a number of people on Macrumors are making cases why they are getting SS, citing as a big reason it being more scratch resistant than the Sport version. If you were to browse the forum it's not unlikely that you'd get confused by all the differing opinions that people have on a common material.

Give the OP a break.

 

[KPOM]

Yes, I was aware it was the entire campaign. Thank you.

I also agree that the Sport will sell in higher volumes. However, Apple needs to see high volumes of both for any longevity. I'm sorry, but to me it's a very distracting device. I see it as nothing other than an iPhone for your wrist.

We have a couple people with them at my place of employment. Let me be clear. They are treated as a cell phone in any meeting, especially teleconferences. You had better have it on DND. Even silenced, you start looking at your wrist 5 every min (yes, it happens.Like a new habit) and scorn will descend upon your flesh.

It's a gadget. Nothing more.

It's annoying when someone stares at any watch during a meeting.

For the most part, I keep it under my sleeve during the day. It's less distracting than a phone. It's actually less than a phone for the wrist, since it has a smaller screen and much more limited input. The people who are most disappointed with it seem to want a cell phone for their wrist. They should get the Gear S if they want that.

It's a "watch plus."

 

[makotoisle]

I'm beginning to really not regret my decision to go Sport.

But still guys, what's up with all of these posts crying "what do you expect??". On Apple's website, their description of the Stainless steel they're using makes it seem like it's really resistant to scratches. I recall also back in February prior to people receiving their watches, a number of people on Macrumors are making cases why they are getting SS, citing as a big reason it being more scratch resistant than the Sport version. If you were to browse the forum it's not unlikely that you'd get confused by all the differing opinions that people have on a common material.

Give the OP a break.

My understanding was that most people were referring to the sapphire screen on the stainless steel, not the polished steel itself.

 

[MasterRyu2011]

My understanding was that most people were referring to the sapphire screen on the stainless steel, not the polished steel itself.

That too, but I'm referring to threads about the body of the watch itself and the steel being used. People are saying that it won't scratch like the ipod.

 

[FrankySavvy]

I'm beginning to really not regret my decision to go Sport.

But still guys, what's up with all of these posts crying "what do you expect??". On Apple's website, their description of the Stainless steel they're using makes it seem like it's really resistant to scratches. I recall also back in February prior to people receiving their watches, a number of people on Macrumors are making cases why they are getting SS, citing as a big reason it being more scratch resistant than the Sport version. If you were to browse the forum it's not unlikely that you'd get confused by all the differing opinions that people have on a common material.

Give the OP a break.

Thanks. I believe my constant wiping it down with the microfiber cloth didn't help, but I was so careful with the device, never banged it or put it on a pile of coins or keys. Just surprized thats all.

 

[Glideslope]

are you sure about that?

One FACT we know is that 904 has A LOT more nickel in the alloy (25% !) which triggers nickel allergies and which is above what the European Union recommends.... so yeah... would love to hear the outcry if Apple would use that much nickel in the SS alloy

Yes.

----------

It's annoying when someone stares at any watch during a meeting.

For the most part, I keep it under my sleeve during the day. It's less distracting than a phone. It's actually less than a phone for the wrist, since it has a smaller screen and much more limited input. The people who are most disappointed with it seem to want a cell phone for their wrist. They should get the Gear S if they want that.

It's a "watch plus."

Well, I simply don't see it as a watch plus. But I respect your vision.

It's refreshing to read someone consciously tucking it under their sleeve. You would be welcome at work. (even with a Rolex)

 

[bobob]

On Apple's website, their description of the Stainless steel they're using makes it seem like it's really resistant to scratches.

There's a difference between scratches and microscratches.