what's the deal with Tudor's

[Omarion07]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

Also, even though they had an exclusive contract with Aegler, Rolex's movements weren't even technically in-house until they bought Aegler about 20 years ago. I see the old Tudor as Wilsdorf's way of getting around their contract with Aegler.

Not true! Rolex movements were considered in-house since 1935, with the exception of chronograph movements which they outsourced (and then modified) from ETA and Zenith. See this thread


When did Rolex develop there first in-house calibre
https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink/top...ink_source=app

[TimeAZ]

Originally Posted by Dan Pierce

What makes Tudor special is they pi$$ off just the right people.
dP

boom goes the dynamite!!

[haganaga]

I had a 39mm Explorer MKII and Speedmaster Pro already so when it was time for a dive watch, the BB58 blue perfectly nailed everything I was looking for. Size, weight, style, comfort, and some much needed color. Only the GO SeaQ compared but wasn’t worth the extra $6400 to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GGGMT]

Originally Posted by haganaga

I had a 39mm Explorer MKII and Speedmaster Pro already so when it was time for a dive watch, the BB58 blue perfectly nailed everything I was looking for. Size, weight, style, comfort, and some much needed color. Only the GO SeaQ compared but wasn’t worth the extra $6400 to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Exactly my experience. I went with 925 for PM. The watch is unreasonably great.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[onlyonerolly]

Originally Posted by AlbionJackal

Buying a Tudor instead of a Rolex, is like supporting the Dogheads instead of supporting the Albion...

Lol. Irony being my FXD is blue and white… how’s the Championship?

[GGGMT]

Originally Posted by Dan Pierce

What makes Tudor special is they pi$$ off just the right people.
dP

Magic just magic!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[1sttimerolex]

Hmmmmm, the more I look at these pics of Tudor bb58, maybe I should just keep my sub date and add it, instead of trying to swap my sub date for a sub

[Purple Hayz]

Originally Posted by Omarion07

Not true! Rolex movements were considered in-house since 1935, with the exception of chronograph movements which they outsourced (and then modified) from ETA and Zenith. See this thread


When did Rolex develop there first in-house calibre
https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink/top...ink_source=app

That is not correct. You may consider Rolex whatever you like, but the fact remains that prior to acquiring and absorbing Aegler (which was wholly owned by that family, even though they made movements exclusively for Rolex from 1935 onward), Rolex was an etablissuer, not an in-house manufacture.

Of course, the same can now be said of Tudor, since Kenissi has been spun off and is now partly owned by Chanel and Brietling (though still controlled by Tudor).

p.s. Valjoux and Zenith (EP) cals were both used in early Daytonas.