Thick bracelets = strength? I think not. What do you think?

Here is a topic that I always see the TV personalities talking about and it bothers me. I want to get some opinions on this. I always see wang ling talking about how he has made watches with a thick strong bracelet and it got me thinking. Yes thicker bracelets may increase the strength of the individual links but from what I can see they are still using the same thin cotter pins to hold that really thick, ultra strong bracelet together.

This in my logical thinking would equal a weaker bracelet as more weight is being applied to the same standard method of linkage. I really wonder how many get duped into this. Now if these super thick bracelets were being connected by hardened hollow stainless tubing with screws then yes I would say you have increased the strength of the unit. But in most cases with the T.V. brands they are selling a featureless feature. And despite the claims is actually again contrary to the claims. Not only this but it also begs the question, how strong does the bracelet need to be in the first place. What do you all think?

I'm just happy you didn't call them "bands". As far as the actual topic or question? I do not have an opinion.

Aqua Homer wrote:I'm just happy you didn't call them "bands". As far as the actual topic or question? I do not have an opinion.

Nope I didn't call them bands but thanks to you I noticed that my 3rd grade grammar skills did me no good as I misspelled bracelet 3 separate times.

The only ones you ever hear about falling apart are Invictas.

I don't think thickness matters insofar as strength as we are talking about steel. The real weak points that normally create issues are the pins, screws and springbars.

A bracelet is a chain and most everyone knows the saying about the strength of the chain being it's weakest link.

A given sized cotter pin that holds a given sized bracelet together will fail with the same shear force regarless of the thickness of the bracelet being held together by that cotter pin.

bc

Bourbon City wrote:A bracelet is a chain and most everyone knows the saying about the strength of the chain being it's weakest link.

A given sized cotter pin that holds a given sized bracelet together will fail with the same shear force regarless of the thickness of the bracelet being held together by that cotter pin.

bc

Thank you for a common sense answer. Marketing is everything to these guys and if anyone would stop and think for just a second, you'd know they are full of shit. Change the Screw, Pins, collars to titanium and you have a clearly stronger bracelet thereby you could use links at half the thickness and save money.

Just yesterday, I was in a local store in Queens, NY that primarily repairs jewelry and watches; the proprietor had a handful of new and used watches to sell. I saw he had a new Renato Vulcan (a quartz chronograph) on display for some reason. While I somewhat liked the styling, the ridiculous, utterly clownish 29mm stainless steel bracelet screamed "TV" from 50 paces, and even the (very cool older) guy showing it to me kind of rolled his eyes at the ungodly heft of the bracelet ("I could never pull that off"). I don't even have to say how crazy heavy the thing was; as a watch, I found it to be the type of thing a guy that would buy a toupee from a pulp magazine would wear - sublimate, substitute, and pray. Crazy stuff. There's no earthly reason for a bracelet that large, IM meaningless O.

One positive though: The vast majority of Renato bracelets are screw construction rather than friction pins. I'll take them over the ginormous Invicta bracelets held together by string any day of the week.

dorks,

To be fair, the Renato, overall, looked like it was built to last. Not cheap looking in the least and it would take Steve Reeves to pull that bracelet apart.

Cripes, did I date myself with that reference....

"Re: Thick bracelets" = suck for the most part, adding unnecessary weight and bulk.

A thick bracelet is needed for the proper fit of those 20 mm thick watches.
If thickness were indicitave of strength all of the hosts at SNBC would have very strong heads.

Thick bracelets are a meaningless distinction of marginal watches sold to a deluded audience.

Bracelets as thick as the people wearing them?

...as a brick.

Falstaff wrote:Thick bracelets are a meaningless distinction of marginal watches sold to a deluded audience.

What he said.

A bracelet is only as strong as it's weakest link . . .

Does everyone here write with a lisp?

It's sick! Repeat sick.

sweetb wrote:A bracelet is only as strong as it's weakest link . . .

...pin or screw.

Case In Point: The tiny screw that holds the massive bracelet on the monolithic SAS.

Even Roosevelt is amused.

foghorn wrote:
If thickness were indicitave of strength all of the hosts at SNBC would have very strong heads.

That's funny.