zOwie Omega Discussion Forum

: The steel used by Omega and Rolex have
: the EXACT same hardness. See the link below
: for the specifics.

Sorry, but that link doesn't support that claim. Can you refer to something which gives the HRC values?

Nor is hardness necessarily tied to the steel composition.

: The only difference in the steels used are that
: Rolex choses a mix that is slightly more
: long-term corrosion resistant, while Omega
: chooses one that is slightly more
: non-allergenic.

I've several things I'd like to comment on regarding that document.

While both 1.4435 and 1.4404 can be 316L, it doesn't seem like 1.4439 is the equivalent of 904L, instead it seems like it's 1.4539. Since 1.4539 and 1.4439 are quite different I think it needs to be clarified which is the steel used.

The differences between 1.4435 and 1.4439 are indeed minor when it comes to nickel content, the 12% vs 13% difference is insignificant compared to the usually allowed range of up to 2% difference in a certain steel quality. But there's a quite noticable difference in molybdenium content which makes them different both as regards properties and price.

904L on the other hand has about twice as much nickel and noticably more chromium than 316L and about as much molybdenium as 1.4439.

: I also have owned and worn a Rolex for years
: and find it scratches and scars like
: anything else.

This, and the rest you write, I do agree with.