Sport vs. regular Watch

Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by Luba, Sep 14, 2014.

  1. Luba macrumors 6502a

    Luba

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2009
    #1
    We're not sure on pricing, seems like the Sport will be the least expensive. But which one to get? Sport has lightweight aluminum, but the ion glass. The regular has sapphire glass, but stainless steel. Sapphire is better than ion glass, but isn't aluminum better than stainless steel in a watch? Lighter weight, just as strong, or strong enough for a watch? Airplanes use aluminum.

    I doubt if the solid gold is only $1k, but if it is, then maybe it'll be worth it for the jewelry box and for the gold.
     
  2. Julien macrumors G3

    Julien

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #2
    Sapphire may not be better than glass for Sports. It is much more scratch resistant but it seems to shatter easer. As a runner/athlete I could write a book about falling. I fell on a concert sidewalk on july 2 and shattered my iPhone 5S. The Home button (Sapphire) also shattered.

    Stainless Steel has the premium look/reputation and is generally more durable than aluminum (easy to dent).
     
  3. Luba thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Luba

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2009
    #3
    Feature-wise they're all the same, same chip inside. But I am also interested in the "best" materials used. So ion glass less scratch resistant (bad), but more shatter-proof (good). Aluminum lighter in weight (good), but takes on more dents (bad).

    And well, the gold version is more about fashion. The Apple Watch is a functional device, but also jewelry especially the gold version.
     
  4. Luba thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Luba

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2009
    #4
    I can't recall how aluminum looks. I can picture stainless steel with its grayish color, silver with its white grayish color. I think aluminum looks more like stainless steel than silver. Picturing an American Airlines airplane that's made from aluminum.

    Of course, then there's Titanium which has a dark gray look? Or are watches made in Titanium colored to be that dark gray color. It doesn't seem like a metal would have such a dark color. Wonder why the Apple Watch doesn't come in Titanium . . . probably too expensive. For the expensive version they went with gold.

     
  5. Wishbrah macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2013
    #5
    They both will scratch and look like chit in a year, but maybe more so with the aluminum. If the stainless can be had at a decent price, I'm going for that and will use the watch in any scenario. Since it's tech, I'm gonna treat it nicely but ultimately it's likely disposable.
     
  6. gadgetguy11 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2010
    Location:
    Kentucky
    #6
    Since Titanium is not offered :mad: (at least initially...), I will probably choose Stainless Steel :(. It appears to offer a polished finish & looks great; the Aluminum appeared dull in some photos.

    If pricing is not "crazy", I would LOVE to actually buy 2: one for work (interacting with fellow engineers) & one for casual knock-about. This would also alleviate the daily charge concerns. It all depends on the $$ of each model... :confused:
     
  7. blasto2236 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2012
    #7
    I would picture an iPhone 5/5s or a Macbook, or an iPad, which are all Apple devices made from aluminum. The sport editions they showed look like the aluminum they use for iPads and Macs.
     
  8. ElectronGuru macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2013
    Location:
    Oregon, USA
    #8
    Normal aluminum is 6 series (6xxx), the kind found in most products. The watch is said to be 7 series (7xxx). Twice the cost of 6 series, 7 series is as strong as some grades of titanium and nearly as strong as premium stainless.

    Heres a small article I wrote introducing 7075 aluminum to my customers:

    http://www.oveready.com/insiders/53/


    7 series + sapphire would be awesome!
     
  9. gadgetguy11 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2010
    Location:
    Kentucky
    #9
    Convincing article! (I am interested in looking into Surefire Flashlights after reading your article!)
     
  10. ElectronGuru macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2013
    Location:
    Oregon, USA
    #10
    Sure thing! But to be clear, even Surefire lights are 6061. Very very few flashlights, even high end / custom are 7xxx. I'm hoping to change that this year. :)
     
  11. gadgetguy11 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2010
    Location:
    Kentucky
    #11
    Good information!

    I hope to buy an Edition AND either a Sport or a Standard, and will watch your recommendation between Sport & Standard for your preference, based on your background on various materials and manufacturing.
     
  12. QuarterSwede macrumors G3

    QuarterSwede

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado Springs, CO
    #12
    I was wondering what the "7000" meant on the bottom of the watch seen in some shots. Thanks! That does help a ton.
     
  13. srsub3 macrumors 6502

    srsub3

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2013
    Location:
    NYC
    #13
    If I had to choose one, I would buy the steel one.... materials seem to be premium... and steel is tougher. Moreover, sapphire is potentially scratch less....I used to wear a nano as a watch in the gym and I can say that it scratched and dented a lot, so maybe steel would be better.... but this is just my opinion
     
  14. Luba thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Luba

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2009
    #14
    Hmmm, so it seems the basic Apple Watch, the one costing $349 will the stainless steel with sport band. I like the look of polished stainless steel better than aluminum, hopefully it won't be too heavy.

    Would 7 series aluminum cost more than stainless steel? I believe Apple will be using a higher grade stainless steel as well? 316L stainless steel.



    ----------

    When aluminum is anodized is the color just on the surface, or is it inside and outside that color? Just wondering if anodized aluminum got scratched would we see a silver color underneath?

     
  15. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #15
    That's not what the article says. The Sport is 7000 Series Silver Aluminum.

    Aluminum is anodized but underneath is the same color so it won't look like an eyesore like the slate iPhone 5 with the anodized coating rubbing off.
     
  16. Piggie macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #16
    Were I work, we work mostly with Titanium and Stainless Steel every day.

    We also work with other Steels, and on occasion Aluminium.

    I have to be honest with you all. When it comes down to raw material costs, for a piece of metal the size of an Apple watch is does not matter a stuff

    Even if you were looking at say 1 dollar for Aluminium, vs 4 dollars for Titanium, so what, when the end product is $350+

    Cost of raw material is a zero issue.

    Machining time will be up. Depending on the grades. Stainless can be much worse than Titanium to machine, so we could class them on a par machining time and tool life.

    Aluminium is as cheap as chips, and soft as putty in comparison.
    Even weight wise. the amount of metal in the actual case is probably not much of an issue when compared to what's in the case and the strap.

    Certainly not enough to notice when it's on your wrist.

    A lot of the 'oooooh it's fancy metal' is just fashion marketing junk to justify a far higher price for something that costs only a few dollars more to make.

    Unless you are into precious metals of course. But then we don't know, but we are assuming Apple mean solid sold.
    But again, unless you have stripped an Apple watch apart and weighed the case we don't know. It's not going to be very thick metal
     
  17. kdarling macrumors demi-god

    kdarling

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    Location:
    First university coding class = 46 years ago
    #17
    I thought that the Sport watch will be the cheapest because it has different materials (no sapphire, no ceramic) from both the regular and the Edition(*) models, but...

    This _IS_ Apple we're talking about, and they might spin it as more expensive because it's lighter or more fracture resistant on its face.

    Guess we'll find out soon.

    (*) If they were better materials, wouldn't the Edition have them?
     
  18. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #18
    It already has sapphire display and what's better than solid 18K gold in terms of charging $1200-4000 for it?
     
  19. ElectronGuru macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2013
    Location:
    Oregon, USA
    #19
    7 series aluminum is more expensive than normal stainless. But premium stainless can cost more. Not sure about 316, but sapphire is way more expensive than any other glass. So any model with sapphire standard will not be entry level.

    Anodize is not like other coatings. Technically a form of rust, its not applied by grown. And it grows down from the surface simultaneously while growing up. Type II anodize is thinner and softer but allows bright colors (think Maglite). Type III anodize (aka HA or hard anodize) is thicker and harder but (depending on thickness) is limited to dark colors, usually black and gray. One way to tell them apart is shininess. Type III tends to be more matte in appearance.

    In all cases, the aluminum underneath remains bright silver. If the anodize is scratched off, it can be seen. One strategy is to use thin silver anodize so scratches are easy but difficult to see. Another is to go full thickness and risk the contrast. Its my opinion that the slate gray on the back of iPads and the new iPhones is type III. Its durable stuff and probably 6061. Type III 7xxx would be even more so.
     
  20. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #20
    Interesting, as people were speculating Apple was using regular Aluminum 6061 and type II anodizing on the iPhone 5 which is why it was prone to bending and susceptible to scuffgate. Maybe they changed to the stronger 6061-T6 (tempered) and type III anodizing (hard anodizing) for the newer iPhones but this is speculation.
     
  21. SHNXX macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2013
    #21
    i wonder how much heavier the stainless one will be.

    i would prefer the stainless one but since I will probably only wear the apple watch while working out or when i'm dressed very comfortably, I would prefer it to be lightweight.
     
  22. Piggie macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #22
    I do wish people would stop fantasizing about material cost differences.
    For the most part we'd taking about the raw material differences and a little different 'feeds and speeds' of cutting cycle time on a CNC mill.

    A few dollars here and there is negligible.

    Like when they say ohhh, sapphire is 4x the price of normal glass.
    so 4 dollars and not 1 dollar then. whoop dee doo.

    Stainless, Aluminium, Titanium, Mild Steel, Brass, Copper, normal glass, gorilla glass, sapphire it's all a bit here a bit there.

    On a 400+ dollar item it's all soaked up really.

    Only when you get onto precious metals of course is there going to be a large spike any any real cost at the manufacturing end.
    And then it's only the raw material cost, it's still machined the same.
     
  23. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #23
    John Gruber wrote in his article that the stainless steel one is noticeably heavier than the Sport version and the gold versions are even heavier.
     
  24. Julien macrumors G3

    Julien

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #24
    ...and equity if not more important. Benjamin Clymer says "...It feels expensive..." and you can take it to the bank. This guy has reviewed and played with more $50,000 watches than most have played with smart phones.
     
  25. bounou macrumors 6502

    bounou

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    #25
    My preference is definitely torwards the Watch over the Sports watch.

    Having said that I am not going to get this thing if it starts at 999$ like Gruber said, by the time you pay for upgrades and a couple of decent bands your probably at around 1500$ for a watch you will use 2 years? No thanks.

    This is the 1st generation of this thing, I am not going to pay 1500$ for something that will be completely obsolete in 2-3 years.

    If I can get the stainless steel model for under 1000$ then maybe, if not I'll pick up a sports model in space grey with the black sports band for what I assume will be around 500$
     

Share This Page