Leaving the protective plastic on?
-
- Senior
- Posts: 67
- Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 7:11 pm
- CW-watches: 0
- Location: Massachusetts, USA
Leaving the protective plastic on?
Has anybody left the protective plastic sheet on the back of the Malvern on? Mine is still on, and at this point, the red stripe has worn off completely. You really can't tell it's on. I'm considering taking it off, because it makes the watch a little less shiny and more fingerprinted looking. However, I kind of want to keep it on, because for some reason I think that it will maybe make the watch more valuable in the future, and it keeps that "fresh out of the package" feeling. Anyways, I'm rambling. Basically, does anybody else still have theirs on? What do you guys suggest I do? Is there any reason to take it off (ie the glue corrodes the metal)?
Thanks
Thanks
-
- Senior
- Posts: 114
- Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 9:23 pm
- CW-watches: 0
- Location: Bodegraven, The Netherlands
NOOO don'tKevRC4130 wrote:I know I can take it off. What I'm really looking for is permission to leave it on.El Tiempo wrote:Kev, you can remove this. You have my permission.
El Tiempo

It makes the watch less beautiful! There's nor reason to let it on. The cristal is sapphire so it'll keep the brand new look.
-
- Senior Forumgod
- Posts: 1281
- Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 9:34 pm
- CW-watches: 8
- Location: Alpharetta, GA
Actually, based on my Malvern Auto (that I just received today!!! #316), the plastic is on the back and I don't believe the back is sapphire.Warhol wrote:It makes the watch less beautiful! There's nor reason to let it on. The cristal is sapphire so it'll keep the brand new look.
Kev, I wondered the same thing. I went ahead and took mine off because I was worried that the heat and/or sweat may cause the plastic or glue to ruin the back crystal. And, as you mentioned, the red stripe is fading. Mine, if I ever need to put it back on, will look brand new! Plus, how likely is it to get scratched when it is sitting on your wrist? That is probably the most protected part of the watch.
Now, if I could get a little plastic cover for the front crystal.

-
- Senior
- Posts: 67
- Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 7:11 pm
- CW-watches: 0
- Location: Massachusetts, USA
Yeah, I just cracked under peer pressure... I took it off. I still have it though, so I can revert back to my pwn ways when nobody is looking.joerattz wrote:Actually, based on my Malvern Auto (that I just received today!!! #316), the plastic is on the back and I don't believe the back is sapphire.Warhol wrote:It makes the watch less beautiful! There's nor reason to let it on. The cristal is sapphire so it'll keep the brand new look.
Kev, I wondered the same thing. I went ahead and took mine off because I was worried that the heat and/or sweat may cause the plastic or glue to ruin the back crystal. And, as you mentioned, the red stripe is fading. Mine, if I ever need to put it back on, will look brand new! Plus, how likely is it to get scratched when it is sitting on your wrist? That is probably the most protected part of the watch.
Now, if I could get a little plastic cover for the front crystal.

-
- Senior
- Posts: 114
- Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 9:23 pm
- CW-watches: 0
- Location: Bodegraven, The Netherlands
Why do you think the crystal isn't sapphire?joerattz wrote:Actually, based on my Malvern Auto (that I just received today!!! #316), the plastic is on the back and I don't believe the back is sapphire.Warhol wrote:It makes the watch less beautiful! There's nor reason to let it on. The cristal is sapphire so it'll keep the brand new look.
Kev, I wondered the same thing. I went ahead and took mine off because I was worried that the heat and/or sweat may cause the plastic or glue to ruin the back crystal. And, as you mentioned, the red stripe is fading. Mine, if I ever need to put it back on, will look brand new! Plus, how likely is it to get scratched when it is sitting on your wrist? That is probably the most protected part of the watch.
Now, if I could get a little plastic cover for the front crystal.
Why would CW lie about that

-
- Senior Forumgod
- Posts: 1281
- Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 9:34 pm
- CW-watches: 8
- Location: Alpharetta, GA
First, the front crystal is sapphire.Warhol wrote:Why do you think the crystal isn't sapphire?
Why would CW lie about thatIt's even engraved in your watch...
I am trying to remember why I think the back crystal is not sapphire, and I think the reason I believe that is, I think Chris told me that. I exchanged several emails with him before I purchased mine and I believe he said the back crystal is not sapphire. I may be wrong, but I don't think so. But, if it is true that the back is not sapphire, I don't think CW is lying, I think you may have misinterpretted something you saw. Or, it is possible that you saw some CW information that is wrong. There are some inconsistencies in the specs for the watch here and there. For example, the power reserve. The PDF file at CW says the power reserve is 7 days for the MA. But when I asked Chris about that he said the PDF was wrong and the power reserve is 38 hours...I think it was. In my booklet that came with my watch, it says 2 days. Now I wouldn't consider 38 hours to be two days, but maybe in watchmaking terms it is?
-
- Senior
- Posts: 114
- Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 9:23 pm
- CW-watches: 0
- Location: Bodegraven, The Netherlands
You might be right. When I read that the watch had sapphire crystal I assumed it would have it on both sides. I have taken a look on CW's site again and it says nowhere that the back is or isn't sapphire.joerattz wrote:First, the front crystal is sapphire.Warhol wrote:Why do you think the crystal isn't sapphire?
Why would CW lie about thatIt's even engraved in your watch...
I am trying to remember why I think the back crystal is not sapphire, and I think the reason I believe that is, I think Chris told me that. I exchanged several emails with him before I purchased mine and I believe he said the back crystal is not sapphire. I may be wrong, but I don't think so. But, if it is true that the back is not sapphire, I don't think CW is lying, I think you may have misinterpretted something you saw. Or, it is possible that you saw some CW information that is wrong. There are some inconsistencies in the specs for the watch here and there. For example, the power reserve. The PDF file at CW says the power reserve is 7 days for the MA. But when I asked Chris about that he said the PDF was wrong and the power reserve is 38 hours...I think it was. In my booklet that came with my watch, it says 2 days. Now I wouldn't consider 38 hours to be two days, but maybe in watchmaking terms it is?
So if you are right, my bad.

-
- Senior Forumgod
- Posts: 1281
- Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 9:34 pm
- CW-watches: 8
- Location: Alpharetta, GA
Straight from Chris:Warhol wrote:I have taken a look on CW's site again and it says nowhere that the back is or isn't sapphire.
So if you are right, my bad.
"the front is sapphire....the back is hardened mineral with a scratchproof coating....like one of the members said the back is the most protected area of the watch...so there was an opportunity to save a little on the cost..."
-
- Senior
- Posts: 67
- Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 7:11 pm
- CW-watches: 0
- Location: Massachusetts, USA
I wish Chris would post himself.joerattz wrote:Straight from Chris:Warhol wrote:I have taken a look on CW's site again and it says nowhere that the back is or isn't sapphire.
So if you are right, my bad.
"the front is sapphire....the back is hardened mineral with a scratchproof coating....like one of the members said the back is the most protected area of the watch...so there was an opportunity to save a little on the cost..."
