Can anyone compare the Rolex Sub. to the

[phils]

Tudor Pelagos?
I'm torn between them. I know of the $$ differences, but both have their advantages and disadvantages.
Which would you choose and why?
Thanks.

[thomaspp]

Sub. I've heard great things about the Pelagos but I like the smaller size of the sub and prefer steel or gold on the subs.

[ltmgeller]

Sub

[Wesley Crusher]

The Pelagos is a great watch and I believe that it complements the Sub very well, but if I had to choose between the two, there is no doubt in my mind that I would choose the Sub.

[GradyPhilpott]

I think that Tudors offer a lot of value.

In terms of the Pelagos, it's titanium and it's larger than a Sub, so for those who think that a Sub is too small, it's a good choice, besides being tough and lightweight.

I'm not so fond of the "snowflake" hands, but I could certainly learn to live with them, considering how highly visible they are in the dark. I definitely fall into the "form follows function" camp.

I'm also not particularly fond of watches over 40mm, but I'm decidedly in the minority on that issue. The truth is that I'm big enough to handle a 42mm watch, so again, I could learn to live with that.

I'm really happy with my 14060M, so I don't feel the need to buy another diver at this time, but if I were in the market for a diver that's not a Rolex, the Tudors would be high on my list.

[Laszlo]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

I think that Tudors offer a lot of value.

In terms of the Pelagos, it's titanium and it's larger than a Sub, so for those who think that a Sub is too small, it's a good choice, besides being tough and lightweight.

I'm not so fond of the "snowflake" hands, but I could certainly learn to live with them, considering how highly visible they are in the dark. I definitely fall into the "form follows function" camp.

I'm also not particularly fond of watches over 40mm, but I'm decidedly in the minority on that issue. The truth is that I'm big enough to handle a 42mm watch, so again, I could learn to live with that.

I'm really happy with my 14060M, so I don't feel the need to buy another diver at this time, but if I were in the market for a diver that's not a Rolex, the Tudors would be high on my list.

Well said.

[DCgator]

Depends too on how much you'd like to spend on a watch....happy hunting! Each watch has its own indiv character so really up to you which one sings to you more.

[Rags]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

I think that Tudors offer a lot of value.

In terms of the Pelagos, it's titanium and it's larger than a Sub, so for those who think that a Sub is too small, it's a good choice, besides being tough and lightweight.

I'm not so fond of the "snowflake" hands, but I could certainly learn to live with them, considering how highly visible they are in the dark. I definitely fall into the "form follows function" camp.

I'm also not particularly fond of watches over 40mm, but I'm decidedly in the minority on that issue. The truth is that I'm big enough to handle a 42mm watch, so again, I could learn to live with that.

I'm really happy with my 14060M, so I don't feel the need to buy another diver at this time, but if I were in the market for a diver that's not a Rolex, the Tudors would be high on my list.

Well said exactly my thoughts.
Never liked the snowflake hands.
Prefer 40mm over 42mm
I love my 16610 sub.

[mike]

Well, I have both.

Someone will mention the in-house movement of the Sub vs the 2824 of the Pelagos so I'll leave that alone. That's a horse that's been beat to death. Both work well and can take a pounding.

Certainly for their intended purpose either will serve well with the Pelagos going a bit deeper and has an He valve (though that's moot for all but a very few. However to get the talking point one has to pony up a bit more for the Rolex SD.

The Pelagos is bigger, wears bigger, and is thicker. You decide there.

The Sub is more flashly of the two and probably is the more versatile wear. The Tudor makes no bones about being what it is--purpose built for the deep. Less flashly and duller due to the Ti case and bracelet, that might be a good thing for things that notice underwater and want to "investigate"

Personally I think the matt dial and luminous bezel of the Pelagos is an added feature and one I wish the Sub had.

Some have complained of no pip on the Pelagos bezel, but that's one less thing to get knocked off.

Mercedes hands vs Snowflake to me is personal choice--Both work good for me.

The braceelt of the Sub is a work of art and getting an ideal fit is easy. Here's where for me the Pelagos takes a back seat. While the bracelet is amazing and has a diver's extension more micro adjustment--or a half-link would be NICE!. I stated before that for me a draw back to the Pelagos is the lack of ability to get an ideal fit for some. I wear mine a tad loose compared to the Sub and an additional micro adjustment would solve the problem.

Most will probably say the Sub due to appearance. The Pelagos isn't as bling.

Fit and finish of both are Rolex quality, but the Sub is like----a swiss watch.

If I had to pick one for all seasons it would be the Sub due more to versatility rather than function.

[77T]

I've chosen the Sub over Tudor (both before and after Pelagos release).

There is no substitute. However, like Mike, the Pelagos would be a good choice for your 2nd diver in the drawer.

[kilyung]

Having had both, I can state that both are exceptional watches. I think both have a purpose in any collection. I never once thought "I wish this was a Sub" with the Pelagos. The lume, size, and weight of the Pelagos make it the better tool watch. However the Rolex FEELS substantial. I guess I'm saying, it entirely depends on what you're looking for.

[AK797]

Originally Posted by kilyung

However the Rolex FEELS substantial. I guess I'm saying, it entirely depends on what you're looking for.

I understand this concept as this was why I went for my subc over a POc, it just felt more substantial.

[Tombstone]

The Pelagos is a great watch, I have eyes for the Sub. I would pick the Sub. IMHO

[Daytona4130]

I've owned a 14060. I ended up selling and, and I now regret it. I hate the sub C because of the square lugs. After owning a DSSD, the submariner just doesn't make me smile anymore. I would choose a Pelagos

[Tseg]

The good news is they are 2 very different watches so if you were to hold both at the same time you will definitely end up with a preference. At this point, since you are already comparing them in your mind, cost is irrelevant and should play no part in your decision. If the Sub provides an emotional edge and the Pelagos provides a financial edge you would likely end up being disappointed buying the Pelagos first. But maybe the light weight, larger size, design and color of the metal of the Pelagos shouts at you more than the Sub.

[hchj]

I heard pelagos is a scratch magnet, especially the bracelet buckle. Not sure if its true

Sent from my GT-I8160 using Tapatalk 2

[kilyung]

Originally Posted by hchj

I heard pelagos is a scratch magnet, especially the bracelet buckle. Not sure if its true

Both the Pelagos and Sub have SS clasps so I don't see how one can be more scratch prone than the other.

[HogwldFLTR]

I don't like the Pelagos dial near as much as the Sub's. The cutout face really doesn't appeal to me.

[AbsolutelyROLEX!]

Both are work horses, depends on you

[superdog]

I have had both as well.

I LOVED the pelagos. I did flip it, but that is not really saying all that much. It was an amazing watch. It is an amazing watch. The lume is unbeatable and the styling really turns me on.

But to me, nothing can beat a sub. The pelagos is gone, but the sub will always remain.

People talk about a few "must haves" for any watch collection. For me, the only real must have is a sub. I absolutely adore my 114060.

[Roll the Lex]

Since I really don't want another watch with a black dial for now, I'd pick the sub- vastly more options in terms of color- you've got your standard black dial, hulk, TT with blue or black dial, YG with blue or black dial.

And even among the black dial/bezels, I'd pick the sub as the ceramic bezel is more shiny.

Also not a fan of the Tudor's snowflake hands.

[mjclark32]

I'll never part with my sub, I've tried on the Pelagos and it just didn't do it for me

[jiminpotomac]

Funny. I couldn't bond with my Sub-C or GMTII-C but love my Pelagos.

[ASH]

A fair comparison would be a Pelagos and Black Bay since you can get both for the price of a sub.

[Scotswierdo]

Only my view but Id always wish I had the SUB...irrational I know but the Rolex wins thus shoot out in my world...good luck.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[watchwatcher]

I believe the correct answer is a Sub and a Pelagos, not one over the other. Been looking at the Tudor myself, but I don't think I would replace my sub for one.

Ideally, if you did a TT/LVc or one of the precious metal subs, I think you're really looking at an exceptionally nice pair with the Pelagos.

[incontrol]

Of course I would choose a Sub since I just did. My reason was more about not wanting another black faced watch. So I bought the TT for the gorgeous blue bezel and dial.