what do you guys think, is the sapphire display alone worth the premium over the sport model? (I don't really care about the whole stainless steel vs aluminum thing).
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Is sapphire worth the $250 premium?
- Thread starter Bigboiiiii
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Only you can decide that 
I think the stainless is reason enough, I personally don't care about the glass. Though have you tried them out for yourself in a store? It is a bratty great experience to try them in person.
I think the stainless is reason enough, I personally don't care about the glass. Though have you tried them out for yourself in a store? It is a bratty great experience to try them in person.Not sure why going to SS would require you to go from the 38mm to 42mm size, unless you are just inflating the $200 difference to $250 to prove your point.
It really just depends. It's obviously stronger than any glass. But what got me to change to SS was trying them on. The SS model just looked awesome. I also at some point want one of the fancier bands like the Milanese or leather loop, so I wanted it all to match. I'm going to be in a job that involves outdoors stuff, so I figured more rugged materials would be worth it.
Are you talking about Canadian money or something? In the US the difference is $200. I think it's a pretty high price to pay, but I preferred the look of the stainless, so getting the sapphire crystal along with it pushed me over the edge. That and the better compatibility (looks-wise) with a variety of bands.
Yes, I should have mentioned that I'm in Canada. The 42 SS with sport band is $250 more than the 42 aluminum sport.
Not worth it to me. Not even close. I'm a techie, so this watch is replacing my $25 timex expedition from target. I don't care what it looks like - it is still vastly more functional than a gold, diamond-encrusted Rolex.
I could never imagine paying $150+ for a watch band. That's just ridiculous to me.
I could never imagine paying $150+ for a watch band. That's just ridiculous to me.
I probably won't be wearing my Apple Watch in 15 years but I've got a TAG with a sapphire crystal face that I've worn daily for 15 years that is as clear and scratch free as the day I got it...so its a safe bet my Apple Watch will be after 2 years.
Right, certainly no one would choose the Sport for any other reason than to 'look cool!' /s
I can think of plenty of reasons to choose the Sport over the SS. Maybe you're really active and want something lighter. Maybe you like the way the aluminum finish matches your iPhone 6/6+. Maybe you spend a lot of time outdoors and want the anti-reflective qualities of the Ion-X glass. Maybe you're anticipating Apple Watch 2 being released soon, and don't see the point of spending so much money on a watch that will essentially be obsolete in 12 months.
Choice is a beautiful thing. I prefer the SS look but also really love the SG aluminum. Ended up with SS for more band versatility for my tastes.
Last edited:
Do you care about the Ceramic coating on the underside of the SS that the sport doesn't have?
I went sport because of the weight, I'm more into fitness tracking.
I wish there was a best of both worlds, a light, shiny watch with a sapphire screen but weight of the aluminum. Also with some kind of shatter protection.
Sometimes I slip or fall or run into things.
I wish there was a best of both worlds, a light, shiny watch with a sapphire screen but weight of the aluminum. Also with some kind of shatter protection.
Sometimes I slip or fall or run into things.
Ceramic is better against wear/tear on the sensor side of the watch compared to the plastic (composite) the sport watch comes with.
To me the SS looked a lot better than the sport when I tried it, I think it's worth maybe $100-$150 more but you know apple and their prices....
No, that doesn't really matter to me either.
I am currently using a 38 mm white sport (going to be my wife's when mine arrives), and have a 42 space grey on order. I just find myself constantly worrying about scratching the glass (like its always on my mind), and I'm thinking of canceling my space grey and ordering the SS. $250 for the piece of mind of knowing the glass won't scratch, some of which I'll probably be able to recoup in resale value anyway, may be worth it..... But then I start thinking that $779 (Canadian price) is so expensive...
I know that ceramic is stronger than plastic, but I just don't see the bottom of the watch getting much wear.
To me it was a combination of the sapphire, ceramic back and the SS. I tried both on and I wanted the Milanese for a more upscale look.
I tend to milk my 'i' devices for several years, so I figured this would be good for me for at least three years and I can always get additional bands (waiting for black basic for everyday use)
I tend to milk my 'i' devices for several years, so I figured this would be good for me for at least three years and I can always get additional bands (waiting for black basic for everyday use)
Well for me, yes. I inherited my moms Rolex 16 months ago. It has a sapphire crystal over the face. The watch is about 17 years old and there is NOT A SCRATCH ON IT. Not even hairline. The gold I will have polished every few years but the crystal is as pristine as the day my dad bought it.
Well, also remember with the SS you can buff out scratches as the entire casing is SS it's not a coating.
I got the Sport version on the first day. After the try-on appointment on 4/13/15, I placed an order for SS, but it will not come till June. I am hoping I will get the SS by next Friday so I can just return the sport. I am loving the sport more and more though. I think I will end up keeping this and canceling the SS order since there is no way my June order will ship within the 14 day return period.
The sapphire screen is worth the extra money. Take a look at the consumer reports video on youtube!