what is this galvanic corrosion i'm hearing?

Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by Appl3FTW, Apr 1, 2015.

  1. Appl3FTW macrumors 603

    Appl3FTW

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2012
    #1
    sounds like the apocalypse or something.. isn't stainless steel corrosion proof? well at least a long time for corrosion like 10 yrs or so?
     
  2. cmChimera macrumors 68040

    cmChimera

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    #2
    Nothing to worry about in the case of the Watch.
     
  3. Appl3FTW thread starter macrumors 603

    Appl3FTW

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2012
    #3
    why is everyone talking about SS getting it then? weird
     
  4. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #4
    It's only if you pair the aluminum Sport case with one of the SS bands (with SS connectors) in the presence of sweat (salt) from working out and maybe even wearing the watch on a hot day.

    However, most people won't wear a fancy SS band (especially the leather bands which aren't water resistant) for working out so it shouldn't be a common problem.

    ----------

    Nobody has claimed such a thing. You read wrong.
     
  5. hemolyzer macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2015
    Location:
    ONTARIO CANADA
    #5
    Basically Apple gave a hidden disclaimer that if you don't pay for AppleCare+ the watch will degrade over time until it literally disintegrates.
     
  6. DeltaMac macrumors 604

    DeltaMac

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2003
    Location:
    Delaware
    #6
    You are forgetting the "other" metal. Galvanic corrosion is also known as dissimilar metal corrosion. The stainless steel, in contact with a dissimilar metal (remember the aluminum now?) can cause corrosion. There has to be some kind of electrolyte, too, before corrosion can start. I think that sweat would qualify as an electrolyte.
    Damage from corrosion is simply a possible outcome, as it will also be affected by the quality of the alloys being used - plus, disassembling and cleaning (maybe once a month, depending on use ?? ) would only take a few seconds, and likely prevent long-term damage for that corrosion.
     
  7. cmChimera macrumors 68040

    cmChimera

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    #7
    They're claiming the Sport mixed with the SS bands will cause it. Apple seems to disagree.
     
  8. zacheryjensen macrumors 6502a

    zacheryjensen

    Joined:
    May 11, 2009
    #8
    It's just baseless typical pre-launch FUD that blankets this forum currently. Ignore it.

    The aluminum watch is not *bare* aluminum, it's coated in both colors. So even if the (typically very very slow) galvanic corrosion issue was relevant, which it isn't, unless you literally never care for your watch, then it wouldn't happen anyway, because there is no contact between the two metals.

    I would be far more concerned by how stupid your watch will look if you put a stainless steel connector into that aluminum body, honestly :p
     
  9. Defender2010 macrumors 68030

    Defender2010

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2010
    Location:
    England
    #9
    Agreed...it was started by post number 4 forum member here, and at every opportunity he/she has added it to any body/band choice thread there is here. Ignore it!
     
  10. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #10
    We don't know if they've disagreed.

    From http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1857267

    "Bands work with all collections but may not match the finish or be optimal for use with that specific collection."

    They can't simply mean aesthetically in the bold part because they've already covered that in the first part of the statement.

    Aluminum can't be bare anyway because if left uncoated, the outer layer will oxidize to form its own anodized coating. Moreover, anyone with the aluminum iPhone (especially the black and slate iPhone 5) knows how easily the added anodized coating can be scrapped off over time, and there's no indication Apple is using a stronger Type II anodization (hard anodizing) on the aluminum models. The known bi-metallic corrosion risk is between anodized aluminum and stainless steel.
     
  11. cmChimera macrumors 68040

    cmChimera

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    #11
    No. They clearly disagree. I have no idea why you feel the need to spread this.
     
  12. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #12
    "Work with all collections" means they'll fit all collections. Nothing more than that.
     
  13. cmChimera macrumors 68040

    cmChimera

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    #13
    Apple would not endorse use of a band that would cause some sort of damage to their product, and their engineers are likely to be more informed than a macrumors member that read a wikipedia article.
     
  14. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #14
    That's why they have the disclaimer. They're not endorsing mixing aluminum and SS and even took the effort to make them aesthetically incompatible to boot.
     
  15. cmChimera macrumors 68040

    cmChimera

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    #15
    They are endorsing it, as they explicitly state that all bands are compatible with the sport model. There is no other way to read that. You're trying too hard.
     
  16. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #16
    Compatible with the explicit disclaimer that they may not match the finish of or be optimal for use with that specific collection.
     
  17. cmChimera macrumors 68040

    cmChimera

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    #17
    Saying "not optimal for use" is the exact opposite of an explicit disclaimer.


    ^ That's explicit
     
  18. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #18
    Not really explicit/specific. Define "work." Work as in fit? Work as in match the finish of? Work as in be optimal for use with? Work as in being bimetallic compatible? Work as in being suitable for exercising? Work as in being appropriate for formal wear? Many, many other possibilities.
     
  19. cmChimera macrumors 68040

    cmChimera

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    #19
    Work as in, functions properly. As I said, you're trying very hard, but Apple has explicitly stated that any band can be worn with any watch.
     
  20. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #20
    I have to laugh at this. You might want to hit the dictionary for how vague/broad the definitions of "work" can be.
     
  21. cmChimera macrumors 68040

    cmChimera

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    #21
    You may want to look up the word "context."
     
  22. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #22
    Right, so how do you know Apple didn't mean "Bands fit all collections"?
     
  23. deckard666 macrumors 6502

    deckard666

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2007
    Location:
    Bristol
    #23
    give it up bud this really isn't going to be an issue or come back in a month and I'll eat humble pie if it is
     
  24. cmChimera macrumors 68040

    cmChimera

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    #24
    Because context. We know what Apple meant, and you're looking anywhere for some different meaning. Give it up.
     
  25. virginblue4 macrumors 68000

    virginblue4

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2012
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #25
    I have to say, I think that it is you who is trying too hard. To me, Apples wording makes it clear that there is some sort of issue, outside of aesthetics.

    But, we will find out soon enough!
     

Share This Page