316L /316F steel? Most reps have little scratch resistance

[Smab]

After 5 years of collecting, I have purchased some 15 reps. I must honestly say that I do not believe the rep factories use the steel quality they claim they use (mostly 316L, also referred to as  surgical steel).

This issue has been discussed before, but after the rep factories started with the 316F a while back, I feel the discussion is still very present.

 

The resistance to scratches and wear and tear of 316L is not very high, but still not too bad.

Rolex uses 904 steel, a harder alloy, but much more expensive. It is also harder to work with, thus they must spend more time when making the finish (polishing, or brushing).

 

So I own a GEN SOSF (Breitling SuperOcean Steelfish, for those that are not acustomed to the board jargon) A17390. This is a watch made of 316L steel, brushed/satin finished, with some parts polished.

The bracelet is all brushed/satin finished. I also own the rep of this model.

 

The first signs of wear and tear of the rep bracelet started showing after quite a short time. No abusive use or rough handing what-so-ever, it just started to show signs of wear and tear almost by just beeing weared. Marks and scratches that make it look cheap.

I cannot say the same has happened to the GEN bracelet. It shows almost no signs of wear and tear, expect some minor scratches on the clasp.

 

I also own a few full polished reps (PAM359, Super Avenger). They scratch very easily. Even when I clean them with the softest of the soft cloths (i.e. non-reusable wet cloths used to clean LCD screens and plastic lenses), they scratch. The SA bracelet in full sunshine looks almost like a map of the Chile Nasca-lines!

 

I am under the impression that most of the reps we buy today, are made of softer steel alloys.

Thus the finish of these reps are very little resistant to daily wear and tear, and quickly show signs of less favourable appearance.

 

Of course, on polished surfaces, it is possible to refinish the surface with cape cod or similar, but for those polished bezels, it is sometimes hard to reach all the small angles and avoid polishing hear the AR coated crystals. As most of you know, one does not want to touch the AR coating with a cape cod, if one does not have the intension of removing the AR!

 

If some of you have good tips on how to clean polished surfaces without scratching, please let me know. I only know one method, that involves cleaning with soap and water, that is not something I want to try with my not-so-waterproof reps. But with the GEN SOSF with 2000m/6600ft waterresistance rating, that is a whole different story.

[bamcky2k]

ive used 0.5 micron diamond paste and a buffing wheel on a rotary tool to get steel to a mirror finish again...avoid contact with any brushed areas though as they will turn mirror finish too...finish off with some silvo wadding and a micro fibre cloth to complete. gives a smooth finish and removes any scratches. others will probs chime in too with other suggestions.

[Smab]

I've also found that 316F steel is softer than 316L, 149 on the Vickers scale, while 316L is 155 on Vickers scale. Because of the lower contenct of Molybdenium in 316F, it supposedly is a tad whiter than 316L, so the intention was to get it to look more like the Rolex 904 steel, that has a higher content of nickle (almost twice that of 316L) and a bit copper. The sheen of a GEN Rolex is however never rivaled by the finish of a rep Rolex, as I come to understand it will still not look the same, even with 316F.

 

Since a modern Rolex made of 904L steel has about 23 % nickle, and the 316L only have about 12 %, one can clearly see that these alloys will look and behave differently.

 

So when it comes to hardness, I would prefer 316L, and problably have a longer lasting finish to the watch.

 

But then again, I doubt they use either of the two, easiest way is to remove the bracelet from your watch, then test it with a magnet, if it is 316L (or 316F) it should not be magnetic. Do not do this test while the bracelet is attached to your watch, as the magnetism can harm the movement, since magnetic resistance to these reps are highly questionable.

 

If the bracelet however, is clearly magnetic, it may perhaps be some knife blade steel of some sort, like 440. One clearly does not want any magnetic material in a mechanical watch, all the parts should be as little magnetic as possible.

Edited March 1, 2013 by Smab

[w0lf]

It's really doubtful that anything coming out of China is 316L, most likely sintered 304.

[Watchmeister]

It's really doubtful that anything coming out of China is 316L, most likely sintered 304.

Gotta agree. But I also have to say that I don't find the gen cases or bezels on the Panerai models particularly less susceptible to scratches than the rep. By the way, half the time Chinese steel is not accurately labeled in the real world.

[automatico]

Here is some short and sweet SS etc info:

 

http://www.ssisintered.com/high-temperature-metal-materials.html

 

My guess is many replicas are made out of the same stuff as cheap stainless flat washers etc.

[ryaku]

I am under the impression that most of the reps we buy today, are made of softer steel alloys.

Thus the finish of these reps are very little resistant to daily wear and tear, and quickly show signs of less favourable appearance.

 

I have exactly the same impression and it starts to annoy me a lot

[Watchmeister]

We are never going to know.  Over the years I have found the quality of the steel all over the map. Improper sintering of lower quality stuff and you we are not talking about scratches. I have seen reps where a chunk of metal falls out.

[w0lf]

From what I know about metal fab in China, AISI/SUS316 stock is very hard to get for small runs production. What we get in reps and most designer watch brands with extremely rare exceptions (that are more of an idiosyncrasy than a rule) is 304 powder steels that are very common in China. They are sintered into intermediate blanks and then machined and finished to spec. It's a very advanced process by now and has low rejection rates; it allows for very quick production set up and enormous cost savings vs. the traditional megaton stamping from billet. As an aside, it's shown to increase the mtbf cycle of the machinery because the initial blanks can be sintered with good precision requiring less milling. Sintered steels are also easier on the tooling, specifically the cutters.

As far as I'm concerned, the dealers can write whatever they want on their sites because every refinisher worth their salt knows how to work cutting and finishing compounds to give you close to any luster you want with a 304. They can certainly make it look a little "whiter" like a 316F alloy. Until there's a metal spectrometer report from an independent source, I simply disregard whatever they have to say about any technical characteristics of the steel used in reps.

[smc]

I completely agree.  My gen sub barely ever gets a mark on it.  I probably wear it 30% of the time as a daily beater.  My reps used to look beat up by the time I got a dress shirt on. (ok i'm exaggerating).  The only gen watches that are an exception are a couple of seikos I own.  They seem to scratch at least as easily as the reps.