Love Rolex but this is why I like Tudor even more

[unknown]

Before soms watch snobs might chime in .. I own quite a few Rolexes to so please don't call Tudor the Rolex wannabe or the cheap Rolex or whatever nonsense I read way too often when it comes to Tudor.

The difference in quality is barely noticeable and imo sometimes there isn't any difference, the only bigger difference is the price. And imo this difference is just to big. If Tudor would belong to another group I'm pretty sure they would ask a lot more for these watches. If they belonged to Richemont, Swatch or LVMH I'm sure Tudor would start at EUR 5000-6000 for let's say a black bay, EUR 6000-7000 for the GMT and EUR 7000-8000 for a chronograph.
Comparing them with brands in this price category I would even still call the cheap.

Besides, what's the problem that it belongs to Rolex and why people always refer to them as a cheap Rolex just because they belong to the sms group?
Do these people call JLC a cheap Lange ( Richemont group) or is Omega a cheap Breguet ( Swatch)
I mean, these are different brands within one group and it"s just unnecessary to compare them.
But somehow Tudor doesn't get away with it.

Anyway, for me sometimes the Tudor is even better. Owning the Tudor GMT and Rolex Pepsi GMT ca say I do prefer the Tudor and it even feels better on the wrist. For the looks I prefer the Tudor ( matte dial, prefer the Oyster Rivet bracelet above a Jubilee, And the bezel ic imo nicer than the shiny ceramic)
Technically they're about the same in my opinion but the Tudor is 200M waterproof and the Rolex only 100. On the other hand, if one would test the Rolex I'm sure it would dive 200 M without any problem too.

Another big advantage when talking about Tudor is the diversity they offer. Rolex is a bit too conservative. a black PVD / DLC Tudor, a Bronze, sometimes something limited .... Not necessary but fun and enjoyable.

Anyway, here are soms pics I took from a few Tudor I do like a lot

the black bay ETA Noir





The Bronze






and the GMT






Now thinking about buying another one
Any input ?
The Pelagos blue is an option, the new bronze is gorgeous ( but since I have the first one not sure if that is the best option. Or why not go for a Chronograph Heritage Blue ?


So the GMT ? I prefer the Tudor above Rolex
Subs ? Well here again for me the Black bay is the better one
Chronographs ... Rolex. Love my 116500 white and black and Tudor doesn't't have something that comes close enough

[Cru Jones]

I’m happy that you’re happy.

Your point about Omega/Breguet and JLC/Lange is interesting, but I don’t think the comparisons are exactly the same. Tudor, historically, has never had its own identity like Omega or JLC. Those brands don’t adopt the same styling elements of their sister brands like Tudor divers and GMTs do with Rolex (the dial in particular). Finally, JLC/Lange and Omega/Breguet cover different markets based on the type of watch, not just based on price (Tudor’s experiments with materials being an exception).

[thekman]

It's great that you like them. I considered getting a Black Bay or Pelagos for a while especially that their prices on the preowned market are pretty good and I like them in pics. I got to try most of them during a recent trip to NYC and tbh I decided against getting a Tudor. To me they felt like toys compared to my sub. Also I did not like how tall the cases looked compared to my 5 digit sub.
I still believe that at that price point they might be the best pound for pound watches excluding the Speedy and the new Seamaster but they are just not for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Gunnersaurus]

Each to their own but no way would I choose a Tudor over a Rolex.

[pauljuhn]

Since it is getting harder and harder to buy Rolex in AD, I am seriously considering different options.
one of my option would be Glashutte Original which has much better movement and finish with similar price or slightly higher price than MSRP of Rolex.
Now Tudor is also a candidate, but my main concern is that they look too similar if you know what I mean.
Thanks for sharing your idea though.
Paul

[Ian Macdermott]

Originally Posted by pauljuhn

Since it is getting harder and harder to buy Rolex in AD, I am seriously considering different options.

one of my option would be Glashutte Original which has much better movement and finish with similar price or slightly higher price than MSRP of Rolex.

Now Tudor is also a candidate, but my main concern is that they look too similar if you know what I mean.

Thanks for sharing your idea though.

Paul

Tudor do indeed look very similar in fact sometimes I have difficulty telling which is which.




Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk

[Helmi]

I agree that Tudor offer super products with excellent price but is it superior/comparable to Rolex, imho no. It is like Lexus and Toyota. And in some cases Toyota models are more desirable or better looking than the Lexus but that is the exception case.

As which Tudor to buy next, I suggest the 58, the best proportions on any Tudor as we speak

[Harry-57]

Nothing like getting your defence in first. Sorry, what were we arguing about again?

[Rokoru]

I completely agree with your point of view. I owned several watches of both brands and I couldn´t be happier with the qualities offered by Tudor. Real tool watches imho.

[HogwldFLTR]

For me the Tudor line is mostly too large. The Divers in general lack the dive extensions so they aren't truly dive watches. Also in general they don't perform well in holding their value. For now I'll just say no.

[danwang0520]

i would suggest black bay chrono.....completes the sea, air, and land collection

[SS Oyster]

To me, seems like people buy Tudor when they just can’t quite afford the comparable Rolex, which IMO is far more refined.

I could never bring myself to buy a Tudor as I would just kick myself for not buying the superior product.

It would (for me) be like buying the Hyundai Genesis instead of getting the Mercedes the Genesis was built to imitate. To me, it’s still just a Hyundai.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Singslinger]

I like the history and heritage of Tudor.

I also think many people under-appreciate the fact that servicing support for Tudor is the same as Rolex, which IMO is top class.

[FinWatch]

Originally Posted by SS Oyster

To me, seems like people buy Tudor when they just can’t quite afford the comparable Rolex, which IMO is far more refined.

I could never bring myself to buy a Tudor as I would just kick myself for not buying the superior product.

It would (for me) be like buying the Hyundai Genesis instead of getting the Mercedes the Genesis was built to imitate. To me, it’s still just a Hyundai.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I totally disagree with you.

There are plenty of people like me, who happens to respect both Tudor&Rolex. Different brands, different models. It’s not all about the money. There are plenty of different brands that are amazing. If someone gets the kicks only because of the price (”Hey! Can you see: I can buy a watch which costs tens of thousands...); it’s okay, I’ll get it. But IMO there are plenty of other different reasons for loving the watches... The price is only one factor and doesn’t mean that the most expensive one offers the best quality...





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rolexoman]

A Tudor BB with a red bezel is on my short list, I know it’s not a Rolex and I’m not gonna try and pass it off to be one I just like the looks and the price is within my budget for a quality timepiece

[FinWatch]

Originally Posted by unknown

Before soms watch snobs might chime in .. I own quite a few Rolexes to so please don't call Tudor the Rolex wannabe or the cheap Rolex or whatever nonsense I read way too often when it comes to Tudor.



The difference in quality is barely noticeable and imo sometimes there isn't any difference, the only bigger difference is the price. And imo this difference is just to big. If Tudor would belong to another group I'm pretty sure they would ask a lot more for these watches. If they belonged to Richemont, Swatch or LVMH I'm sure Tudor would start at EUR 5000-6000 for let's say a black bay, EUR 6000-7000 for the GMT and EUR 7000-8000 for a chronograph.

Comparing them with brands in this price category I would even still call the cheap.



Besides, what's the problem that it belongs to Rolex and why people always refer to them as a cheap Rolex just because they belong to the sms group?

Do these people call JLC a cheap Lange ( Richemont group) or is Omega a cheap Breguet ( Swatch)

I mean, these are different brands within one group and it"s just unnecessary to compare them.

But somehow Tudor doesn't get away with it.



Anyway, for me sometimes the Tudor is even better. Owning the Tudor GMT and Rolex Pepsi GMT ca say I do prefer the Tudor and it even feels better on the wrist. For the looks I prefer the Tudor ( matte dial, prefer the Oyster Rivet bracelet above a Jubilee, And the bezel ic imo nicer than the shiny ceramic)

Technically they're about the same in my opinion but the Tudor is 200M waterproof and the Rolex only 100. On the other hand, if one would test the Rolex I'm sure it would dive 200 M without any problem too.



Another big advantage when talking about Tudor is the diversity they offer. Rolex is a bit too conservative. a black PVD / DLC Tudor, a Bronze, sometimes something limited .... Not necessary but fun and enjoyable.



Anyway, here are soms pics I took from a few Tudor I do like a lot



the black bay ETA Noir











The Bronze













and the GMT













Now thinking about buying another one

Any input ?

The Pelagos blue is an option, the new bronze is gorgeous ( but since I have the first one not sure if that is the best option. Or why not go for a Chronograph Heritage Blue ?





So the GMT ? I prefer the Tudor above Rolex

Subs ? Well here again for me the Black bay is the better one

Chronographs ... Rolex. Love my 116500 white and black and Tudor doesn't't have something that comes close enough

Great points, thanks for sharing! I am sharing your love for both of the different brands; Rolex&Tudor!
The Pelagos and Chrono; both amazing for different reasons:






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ricky Rolex]

Each to their own just not for me.

If you're happy that's all that matters.

[unknown]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

For me the Tudor line is mostly too large. The Divers in general lack the dive extensions so they aren't truly dive watches. Also in general they don't perform well in holding their value. For now I'll just say no.

The size is no problem for me, I do prefer watches to be a bit bigger but I accept this as an issue
Is a dive extension really necessary ? The pelagos has that special clasp

And concerning the value, I think they keep very good value.
Don't know how long you're into watches but when I bought my first Rolex 25 years ago, that submariner also dropped 30%
Today the value of most steel Rolex sport watches are not the reference, it's just a hype
a Tudor today drops 20 to 40% I guess but you can get them with a discount which make the price very attractive.

and after all ... Does a real watch enthusiast buy a watch because he likes it or because of the value ?
If you keep your watch long enough it doesn't matter , right ?
20 years ago you could have bought an Omega speedmaster in perfect condition but second hand for less than 1000 USD

[unknown]

Originally Posted by SS Oyster

To me, seems like people buy Tudor when they just can’t quite afford the comparable Rolex, which IMO is far more refined.

I could never bring myself to buy a Tudor as I would just kick myself for not buying the superior product.

It would (for me) be like buying the Hyundai Genesis instead of getting the Mercedes the Genesis was built to imitate. To me, it’s still just a Hyundai.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

here since 2008 and almost 4000 posts ... is your account hacked ?

This is the kind of comment I expect from somebody who just entered this market

[rootbeer7]

OP your comparison between Rolex and Tudor are more valid than your other brands as Tudor was created by the same company that created Rolex, to act as a starter brand for those that couldn’t or wouldn’t spend the money on a Rolex. Nowadays, it’s a matter of choice. To the non-wis, most wouldn’t have a clue about the connection and buying a watch has more to do with how it looks or the brand ambassador. I like older Rolex and find the latest models uninteresting and certainly not worth waiting years for or paying a premium for. Tudor have some interesting pieces as do other brands. Currently my daily is a Panerai 233, a model with great complications and a nod to history for less than a Rolex Submariner, which in effect is just a 3 hand diving watch.

[SamP]

The first two replies pinpoint exactly why some refer to Tudor as the poorman’s Rolex.
There’s no getting away from that. However, there’s also another reason. Tudor have only recently started to use in-house movements. Consequently a lot of Tudors were/are quite thick in depth, ie sitting on the wrist.
I think a more apt monicker for Tudor would be technoman’s Rolex. Tudor use materials Rolex won’t.
Titanium (Not just case back as in Sea-Dweller), bronze, anti reflective coating.
Tudor also have functions and styling cues that Rolex don’t. Crown on left, Snowflake hand, power reserve. You could say Rolex uses Tudor to test the waters, as it were.
Anyway you shouldn’t care what others say.
You like it - you buy it.
I’ve a LHD Pelagos, which exhibits most of the above mentioned traits & Harrods edition BB.
I would prefer the Harrods to have less depth - but there we are.
So, in my most humble opinion, Tudor is the poorman’s Rolex - but I’m happy to add them to my collection.
Regards

[asiparks]

Originally Posted by SS Oyster

To me, seems like people buy Tudor when they just can’t quite afford the comparable Rolex, which IMO is far more refined.

I could never bring myself to buy a Tudor as I would just kick myself for not buying the superior product.

It would (for me) be like buying the Hyundai Genesis instead of getting the Mercedes the Genesis was built to imitate. To me, it’s still just a Hyundai.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would read that as "I can't bear the idea of people assuming I'm a poor man, because I'm wearing a poor man's Rolex"


Rolex maybe marginally more refined than Tudor, though I wouldn't argue Rolex is superior unless you're really lapping up the "Oystersteel".
If that were your watch picking criteria, there are more refined, arguably horologically better watches from other brands for less money than Rolex.
But then then there's the danger of no one recognizing them and not knowing you can afford a Rolex...

Maybe Rolex is the fools' Tudor ?

[Luap1976]

Originally Posted by SamP

The first two replies pinpoint exactly why some refer to Tudor as the poorman’s Rolex.
There’s no getting away from that. However, there’s also another reason. Tudor have only recently started to use in-house movements. Consequently a lot of Tudors were/are quite thick in depth, ie sitting on the wrist.
I think a more apt monicker for Tudor would be technoman’s Rolex. Tudor use materials Rolex won’t.
Titanium (Not just case back as in Sea-Dweller), bronze, anti reflective coating.
Tudor also have functions and styling cues that Rolex don’t. Crown on left, Snowflake hand, power reserve. You could say Rolex uses Tudor to test the waters, as it were.
Anyway you shouldn’t care what others say.
You like it - you buy it.
I’ve a LHD Pelagos, which exhibits most of the above mentioned traits & Harrods edition BB.
I would prefer the Harrods to have less depth - but there we are.
So, in my most humble opinion, Tudor is the poorman’s Rolex - but I’m happy to add them to my collection.
Regards

So you think poor people can afford to buy a nice brand new tudor gmt or any other tudor from the ad lol you must be trolling buddy

[Ian Macdermott]

My Tudor AD provides stout brown bags with eye holes for their customers to don, thus preventing the Tudor owner being shamed at not being able to afford a Rolex. They also provide ear plugs to shut out the howls of derision as one scurries back to ones hovel.

Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk

[Luap1976]

It's really sad that snobs here think that only poor people can buy tudor smh

[HogwldFLTR]

Originally Posted by unknown

The size is no problem for me, I do prefer watches to be a bit bigger but I accept this as an issue
Is a dive extension really necessary ? The pelagos has that special clasp

The Pelagos is the exception of course. The BBs are all fashion watches riding the coat tails of their Tudor ancestors.

Originally Posted by unknown

And concerning the value, I think they keep very good value.
Don't know how long you're into watches but when I bought my first Rolex 25 years ago, that submariner also dropped 30%
Today the value of most steel Rolex sport watches are not the reference, it's just a hype
a Tudor today drops 20 to 40% I guess but you can get them with a discount which make the price very attractive.

and after all ... Does a real watch enthusiast buy a watch because he likes it or because of the value ?
If you keep your watch long enough it doesn't matter , right ?
20 years ago you could have bought an Omega speedmaster in perfect condition but second hand for less than 1000 USD

If you believe that Tudor will perform like Subs did then by all means buy up all you can. Having sold off my Tudor collection, that wasn't my take, obviously.

Many reasons why watch enthusiast buy watches. My statements are for me alone; all need to make up their own minds. I won't engage in false populous statements for the fear of hurting others feelings however.

[Wedders]

Oh! how dare you insult or disrespect the Rolex Sobs on this forum, sacrilegious talk indeed.

[Cryten]

Originally Posted by asiparks

I would read that as "I can't bear the idea of people assuming I'm a poor man, because I'm wearing a poor man's Rolex"

I think this is the crux of it for many people. Tudor are cheaper than Rolex and some can't bear the thought that someone might think they can't afford a Rolex.

This I why I suggest Rolex snobs buy the Rolex first, then buy the Tudor. Now they can be comfortable in the knowledge they can afford a Rolex buy chose a Tudor for reasons other than price.

[Gregs]

Every watch and brand has its own personality. The nice thing about collecting and enjoying is that each watch represents a different mood. To have a one brand collection would be boring.

[Jonesy2099]

I like Tudor watches but I don’t think they compare to Rolex. I have the Tudor GMT but only because I can’t get the Rolex equivalent. Having said that the Tudor GMT is great value, I’m really pleased with it.