Stainless vs. Aluminum watch

Comparing online, the stainless watch is shinier.
Is that worth $350 more?
Did I miss something?

Those who love it; mainly prefer this shiny look of it. Plus the glass used for the screen is more durable.
Personally, I think it’s overpriced for a gadget that you are probably upgrading each other year.
I see that @katiefloyd & @MacSparky both prefer the Stainless version while @RosemaryOrchard uses the Aluminum one.
I used Aluminum for Watch Series 2, it’s been fine, and I did not miss anything.

Cellular. Series 3 and 4 stainless steel are LTE only.

This is another point to consider, you can’t compare it to Aluminum GPS only.

The killer feature for me is that the stainless comes with a sapphire crystal instead of glass. My Series 3 stainless’ display is completely pristine, despite being banged around quite a bit in the year that I’ve had it. Contrast that to my Series 0 which picked up a fairly big scratch early on which annoyed me every single time I saw it. More than worth the extra cost.

2 Likes

Aluminum cellular is 499, stainless cellular is 749.
250 difference, compared Al to Milanese before.

I agree with @ChrisUpchurch’s assessment. Materials quality is better and more durable. For a device I wear nearly round the clock, the extra price was worth it.

1 Like

Stainless steel for me. The weight on the stainless steel just feels better than the aluminum. My first Apple Watch was aluminum which was nice, just too lightweight.

Also you have a greater variety of bands that go with stainless steel.

The Apple Watch in stainless steel with the Apple metal link bracelet weighs exactly the same as a Rolex Submariner.

1 Like

Yes. :sunglasses:

Personally I prefer the lighter aluminium but do miss a sapphire display.

1 Like

I can’t justify upgrading from the 2 after less than 2 years (maxed out on the XSMax :grimacing:) but when I do I will consider SS. Have been a little disappointed with the the scratchability of the non sapphire model.

1 Like

We upgrade every other year (Zero to 3 last Xmas). We’ve always gone for aluminium and never had a problem nor noticed any aesthetic issues.

I’m not one of the people who thinks the watch is ugly - and I didn’t want it to get thinner. While ideally the battery would last a week I don’t see that coming with next year’s watch. Or indeed the one two years after that.

Stainless had the sapphire glass. I had the aluminum and I scratched it. No scratches on my stainless steel watch, not even while doing construction work…

I have Aluminium and am very happy with it. I should note though that I can’t actually purchase stainless steel - at least not inside of Austria. We don’t have cellular for Apple Watches yet and so it’s not for sale.

1 Like

I would trade Austria’s healthcare system for cellular watch coverage :slight_smile:

4 Likes

I hate to be a pedant :man_student:, but Galileo disproved this over 400 years ago.

Perhaps you meant to refer to momentum or impact?

3 Likes

Apples, meet oranges!

1 Like

I’ve only had the Space Grey Aluminum since series 0. I’ve been very happy with their durability. My only major critique was an aesthetic one with respect to the watch bands available. But, I was able to solve that problem with a quality third-party retailer. My favorite so far is JUUK. They make amazing third-party watch bands for the Apple Watch.

1 Like