Originally Posted by jestragon
I'd be reluctant to say that the 62 is that much more fragile and don't have the impression that the screen is less scratch-resistant, speaking from my own experience at least.
About a year ago my 62s had broken and I also had a broken 60 laying around as well. (The 60 had served me many hard years and I just didn't throw it away when I got the 62 which I killed by riding with it the micro USB connected in the rain cuz I hadn't read Embeeddee's warning yet!
I found out when I was sending the 62 in to get "worked on"
that they weren't really going to work on it but send me a refurbished one and thus it didn't really matter how broken it was when I sent it in. They also said they could do the same with my 60 while I was sending the 62 in.
I had only suspected the 62 screen scratched easier as my 60 went several years with no scratches and only was scratched by something pretty traumatic (a great story in itself). The 62 got scratched the first week and kept getting scratches. Since I was sending them both in AND I realized it didn't really matter how broke they were; they weren't really FIXING my units I decided to do a little unscientific scratch test side by side.
On the Moh's scale of hardness I'd say the 60's a full point harder... and yet never cracked.