# Sinn 356 sapphire vs acrylic



## iwantone (Aug 27, 2011)

Hi all,
When I was shopping for a Sinn 356 UTC, I had a hard time deciding on which crystal I liked more. I'm hoping this thread can help others decide on the subject.

The research I did came up with many people online saying the acrylic is nicer and I started to lean that way before seeing any in person.

Many liked the dome of the acrylic and the ability to polish out any scratches that come up. 
But I also like sapphire because it is much more resistant to scratches and durable overall. Only thing I do not like about it is the poor top surface AR coating that can be scratched.

I aquired a standard 356 with sapphire in December. Loved the crystal. It actually fooled me as well as a few friends because of the amount of dome Sinn was able to achieve with the sapphire.

Fast forward 2 months and I was finally able to find a 356 UTC that I've lusted after... But this one has an acrylic crystal.

A much more pronounced dome. Much more distortion in the dial when viewed from off center. A very unique and retro look. Overall case is taller than the sapphire version by 1mm (16mm vs 15mm). But it is also 2g lighter than the sapphire (72g vs 74g).

Other items to note:
•They are both bead blasted surfaces, but the 2015 made 356 Sa has a darker color to the case than the 2009 made 356 UTC acrylic, which has an almost shiny appearance. 
•The 2009 watch has "SUG Germany" etched between the bottom lugs, 2015 watch does not.
•7750 movement in the 2009 does not have much of a "wobble", SW500 movement in the 2015 has a very noticeable "wobble".

So... What is my final verdict between the two crystals? I like both and would have been happy with either. 









Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk


----------



## City74 (Apr 20, 2015)

To me if you like the “vintage look and feel” buy acrylic, otherwise get sapphire


----------



## OedipusFlex (Aug 26, 2016)

The real question is which do you value more? The scratch resistance of sapphire, or utility of UTC. I personally stay away from acrylic, but as the UTC is harder to find now, would probably keep that model and buy a swatch to practice with polywatch.


----------



## harry_flashman (May 30, 2016)

I love the acrylic crystal 356, but appreciate reading your comparison and seeing the pictures — Thank you!


----------



## sticky (Apr 5, 2013)

If it was a watch I intended to use any I would go sapphire and only get the acrylic if I was after that genuine vintage look/feel.


----------



## sefrcoko (Dec 23, 2015)

Acrylic is actually more impact resistant than sapphire, and marks can be easily rubbed out with Polywatch. Another reason for acrylic if you like the look.


----------



## fastfras (Jul 23, 2014)

I'm going to echo Sticky here, if it's in use regularly I'd go with the sapphire. I like the look of the acrylic but find the scratching incurred a bother. It's your choice, neither is wrong, personal preference in reality.


----------



## Geof3 (Jan 26, 2008)

For the pilots (most of them) 103, 356 etc. acrylic all the way. They just ooze cool, and due to the thickness of the crystal they give those watches a unique liquid look. Acrylic.


----------



## americanloko (Oct 28, 2016)

I had a 103 w/ acrylic, absolutely beautiful, but the scratches come, and they come fast, at the end of the day, it just felt too fragile for me.


----------



## PrimeTime0099 (Feb 15, 2015)

Sapphire.


----------



## Otosi (Jan 11, 2011)

Great pictures! For me, acrylic. I've had a couple acrylic crystalled watches and they really appeal to me. I find acrylic is very forgiving when it comes to fingerprints, raindrops, etc. A coated sapphire crystal can drive me up the wall with its smudges and swirlies. I also like the "feel" of acrylic. It's warm. Kind of odd and difficult to explain, but it is nice to touch. And it definitely is more vintage, which also appeals to me (and seems appropriate in the case of the 356). Frankly I've only had to get out the polywatch once over the years. I just don't bang my wrist into things that often. If I'm likely to, I put on my G-Shock instead.


----------



## jivetkr (Dec 6, 2011)

I've had a 356 acrylic for 3 years now. When initially purchased I was concerned about the crystal, but I've had no issues. I convinced myself that if I get tired of the acrylic, when I do my first service I'll have rgm swap it out for sapphire. I doubt I will do this now.

I polish out scratches a few times a year, but otherwise its been great. I love the distortion it gets when viewed off center.


----------



## Dualmonitors (Oct 8, 2016)

this is exactly analagous to an audiophile's talk of analog versus digital sound


----------



## Kirkawall (Mar 28, 2015)

Dualmonitors said:


> this is exactly analagous to an audiophile's talk of analog versus digital sound


... or transistor vs. tubes, except analogue can be more beautiful AND more accurate.&#55357;&#56832; I've owned both now, and would take the acrylic every time. More striking, more true to the vintage vibe of the case and dial and don't mind the very odd scratch. Also lighter and cheaper. What's not to like?


----------



## MoreToasties (Jul 16, 2010)

For me, the acrylic is just so much better in profile. Makes a huge difference when you catch a glimpse of it on your wrist.

Sent from my SM-G955W using Tapatalk


----------



## Dualmonitors (Oct 8, 2016)

MoreToasties said:


> For me, the acrylic is just so much better in profile. Makes a huge difference when you catch a glimpse of it on your wrist.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955W using Tapatalk


While I agree that acrylic has a small edge in the side profile (~1mm), it isn't that big a difference now that Sinn is using the high domed sapphire crystal. They are awfully similar and, even if you were merely a couple of feet away, you'd likely not be able to tell the difference unless you're even closer or seeing them at exactly the horizontal profile.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## Marcus_Corvus (Feb 5, 2016)

I got the acrylic one. You always can upgrade to Sapphire if you don't like it.


----------



## Dave Matison (Mar 24, 2006)

Sapphire.


----------



## Tanjecterly (Mar 13, 2013)

Acrylic is best for the old time feel; if you get scratches, you use polywatch. I've not used it much with my acrylic 103 though. I'm careful about that, I guess. 

If you get scratches on your sapphire, what can you do?


----------



## xenioskasinides (Oct 9, 2019)

My question is: can you change the acrylic with sapphire or it doesnt fit ?¿

Sent from my CLT-L29 using Tapatalk


----------



## Dennis Parris (Oct 30, 2018)

xenioskasinides said:


> My question is: can you change the acrylic with sapphire or it doesnt fit ?¿
> 
> Sent from my CLT-L29 using Tapatalk


I believe you can swap them. At least that's true for the 103. I had inquired about the possibility of ordering a standard 103 st with a sapphire crystal (I don't like display case backs), and WatchBuys told me they could do it no problem. I ended up just going with the standard acrylic anyway, but the option is there.


----------



## xenioskasinides (Oct 9, 2019)

Thats good if they are identical

Sent from my CLT-L29 using Tapatalk


----------



## Dennis K (Apr 24, 2018)

I can confirm that the crystals can be swapped between the different versions of the 356. However it's not cheap and I personally don't understand why anyone would swap out the acrylic for sapphire anyway. Apart from offering greater scratch resistance, I think the sapphire is inferior in every way.


----------



## Dennis Parris (Oct 30, 2018)

Dennis K said:


> I can confirm that the crystals can be swapped between the different versions of the 356. However it's not cheap and I personally don't understand why anyone would swap out the acrylic for sapphire anyway. Apart from offering greater scratch resistance, I think the sapphire is inferior in every way.


I understand that for some folks it's a real pain in the butt to have to either live with scratches or polish the crystal periodically. I don't blame them if they prefer not to deal with it. 
For me, it's not really a problem. I polish every month or so, and if in the future I wear the crystal down from too much polishing, I'll just have a new one installed when I send the watch in for regular servicing.

For my tastes, polishing is far preferable to the blue sheen from AR coating. If Sinn provided the option of an uncoated crystal, I would think about it.


----------



## paddlefoot64 (Feb 11, 2006)

Was walking down Bourbon St. one afternoon and noticed something skipping along the pavement in front of me. Upon closer inspection, I discovered it was my 356. After taking good care of it, a broken pin allowed it to fly off my wrist. Left a small chip in the acrylic crystal. Have not had it repaired, just adds to the patina.


----------



## gr8sw (Jun 14, 2006)

prefer acrylic on these :-!


----------



## kritameth (Oct 11, 2015)

Just wanted an excuse to upload some pictures. Very glad I went with acrylic, I'm just absolutely in love with the look and distortion. Can't stop looking at it today.


----------



## fiskadoro (Sep 2, 2015)

This is an interesting discussion as I'm the proud owner of the silver guilloche dial 356 Flieger Sa III which has that really thick, domed sapphire crystal which gives it a bit of a vintage vibe, but also helps to keep the visibility of the electroplated dial really high, to see all the intricacies of the patterning. 

Whereas I'd normally be 100% into an acrylic crystal for the 356, this does (at least to me) seem like one example of where the crystal-clear glass really enhances the look of the watch.

As with most things Sinn, it's nice that they offer many different options for buyers at least!


----------



## kritameth (Oct 11, 2015)

fiskadoro said:


> As with most things Sinn, it's nice that they offer many different options for buyers at least!


I agree. Now if only they'd offer an option for inner AR only on their models with AR coatings, a la Damasko, I'd rebuy the Sinn 104 again.


----------



## laurentg1969 (Nov 15, 2020)

OedipusFlex said:


> The real question is which do you value more? The scratch resistance of sapphire, or utility of UTC. I personally stay away from acrylic, but as the UTC is harder to find now, would probably keep that model and buy a swatch to practice with polywatch.


or the day?


----------



## Roningrad (Aug 2, 2018)

I tried to avoid acrylic crystals but when I bumped into Vostoks, I had a change in perspective as they really are warm and nice to look at.

Scratches would be inevitable. I suppose it depends on your bread & butter lifestyle, hobbies and physical/health pursuits.

Personally, nowadays the struggle between sapphire and acrylic has never been as easy. It makes the decision for speedy and 356 choices a lot more challenging. Hardlex is a different ballgame. Either I truly love and adore the watch or I'm not going for it or ditching it.


----------



## Roningrad (Aug 2, 2018)

It would be very interesting to know if someone had removed the top-layer AR coating in their Sinn and how it fared from the before and after DYI.


----------



## Roningrad (Aug 2, 2018)

xenioskasinides said:


> My question is: can you change the acrylic with sapphire or it doesnt fit ?¿
> 
> Sent from my CLT-L29 using Tapatalk


I reached out to Sinn about this a couple of years back. It is possible.

As for swapping it on your own or a watchmaker having to do it, I suppose this is likewise possible so long as you have the Crystal for the swap.


----------

