Tudor BB Chrono v. Omega SM Diver 300

[WantBlue15202]

If you were deciding between these two watches which would you go with?

My hesitations with the Tudor Chrono are that it will always be not a Daytona.. And even though I'm a huge fan of the overall design of the Tudor, it seems weird to get excited about it simply because it looks like a Daytona. The SM300 overall just seems a bit more design quirky and unique, and something has really started drawing me to it. Although the lug taper/polishing on the SM300 is a bit odd, and the helium escape value is a feature I'll never actually put to the test...

Just curious on other's opinions.. apologies in advance if this is a boring post!




V.

[MONTANTK]

I would go with the Tudor. I don’t like the Omega bracelets. I also feel like the Tudor Chrono is it’s own watch and shouldn’t necessarily be compared to the Daytona. It has a very different aesthetic and just has such a classic look to it. I may even go so far as to say I almost prefer it over the Daytona

[nigelUK]

To me, it's nothing like a Daytona. It's a very cool slightly chunky bicompax chrono.

Personally, I'd choose it over the Omega, all day long. If you prefer the look of it, then go and buy it.

[Wrist Watcher]

Have owned both and kept the Omega. The "Tokyo" version is my favorite. Awesome watch. I found the Tudor to be super thick and not wear near as well on my wrist as the 300M.

[beshannon]

The new Omega Seamaster is awesome and would be my choice easily.

[IR201]

Originally Posted by Wrist Watcher

Have owned both and kept the Omega. The "Tokyo" version is my favorite. Awesome watch. I found the Tudor to be super thick and not wear near as well on my wrist as the 300M.

Tokyo version is special!!

[Lew Archer]

Both are fine looking watches. Sounds like the Omega is more to your liking. Go with that, unless you really want the chronograph function.

I wouldn't worry about the Daytona comparison. I feel they are sufficiently distinct, design wise. The Tudor has its own vibe.

If you haven't already, try them both on, ideally side by side (which may not be an option, unless you can find an AD who stocks both Omega and Tudor and has both models). But, if at all possible, try each one on. Go with your very first emotional reaction to the watch on your wrist, that little voice that says, "this one".

Good luck!

[Marco Panti]

Originally Posted by WantBlue15202

If you were deciding between these two watches which would you go with?

I would fear you might become bored of the Tudor.

I think retro design is one thing, but faux vintage in its essence is the deliberate creation of an illusion, designed to deceive and this reflects low design integrity. The fake rivets on the bracelet are an example of this.

So personally I would characterise the Tudor as a low integrity design that has been executed extremely well. If you can enjoy the execution and not become deluded as to the design authenticity then you might continue to enjoy the piece longer term.

I do hear of owners becoming disillusioned with their retro Tudor pieces, I imagine this must feel very disappointing for some. No doubt others are philosophical and just move on having enjoyed their time with it.

Obviously many will keep the piece long term and don't over think it, or continue to get enjoyment from a very well made, vintage Daytona homage piece that was obtainable, and reasonably priced to boot.

I think it depends mostly on who you are.....

The Seamaster is very different, personally I feel the white dial version works far better on the black rubber strap, but this deviates it even further from being a direct competitor to the Tudor other than in price.

The Seamaster has a long design evolution you can look into and enjoy even though Omega are rather more daring with their deviations than say Rolex would be. Personally I appreciate this but I think you have to find the variants that really speak to you rather than what might be trending.

I agree the Helium valve execution could be a lot more discreet e.g. Deepsea, Pelagos. And yes if you don't plan to saturation dive I can't imagine you need it.

But then you most likely wouldn't need 300 metres water resistance either.....

Get each on your wrist if you can and see how how feel wearing them, how they fit you and yes play with their features and all of that.

As they are quite different I suspect a winner would emerge fairly quickly?

[Wrist Watcher]

Originally Posted by IR201

Tokyo version is special!!

Agree!

[WatchNutcase]

Originally Posted by WantBlue15202

If you were deciding between these two watches which would you go with?

My hesitations with the Tudor Chrono are that it will always be not a Daytona.. And even though I'm a huge fan of the overall design of the Tudor, it seems weird to get excited about it simply because it looks like a Daytona. The SM300 overall just seems a bit more design quirky and unique, and something has really started drawing me to it. Although the lug taper/polishing on the SM300 is a bit odd, and the helium escape value is a feature I'll never actually put to the test...

Just curious on other's opinions.. apologies in advance if this is a boring post!

I'm not sure I'd agree that the BB Chrono is trying to be a Daytona. The BB58 may also be trying to be a Sub but it looks amazing in it's own disctinct way.

With that said If I was forced into these two I'd probably go with the Seamaster just because of the sizing.

Edit: just noticed this was my 1000th post count, time for a new watch.

[WantBlue15202]

Originally Posted by Marco Panti

The Seamaster is very different, personally I feel the white dial version works far better on the black rubber strap

Completely agree, I had already inquired if you could purchase the OEM Omega rubber strap with the bracelet model. I'd also put the same on the Tudor - just a good combo looks wise.

Originally Posted by Wrist Watcher

Agree!

Looks great! Blue hadn't floated into my thinking at this point - would love to see one of these in person...

[IR201]

Originally Posted by Wrist Watcher

Agree!

Awesome!

[fskywalker]

Different watches, so hard to compare them. The Tudor looks nicer but if thicker; from thise 2 would prob pick the Tudor


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Newmoney]

Tudor

[nm4710]

Love both watches but to me the Omega is far more unique. I had a black SMP300 back in the day and loved it. Still think about it.

N

[jnelson3097]

I just went through this same dilemma and went this route and don’t regret it for a minute.

[ltmgeller]

I prefer the Tudor

[ninjin]

I own both, albeit black dial on the SMP300 and White on the BB Chrono. They are totally different watches. I bought both on bracelet but actually wear both on rubber.

If you see a BB Chrono as a poor relative to the Daytona, then you are reading too much social media. It's nothing like a Daytona!

Both watches are a fine choice and you cant go wrong with either.

However, if it's presence, then it's the SMP that will give you that due to the AR coating on the crystal and the ceramic dial. The BB is a very laid back 'matt' finished watch.






Looks nothing like a Daytona!

[rollie]

I'd go Omega

I had the Chrono white dial and decided to let it go a few weeks later.

The snowflake hand is a pain when it covers the sub dials. You can see this in one of the images on this thread.
It's also annoying having to keep screwing the pushers in and out every time you want to use them.

I think it's had it's hype as a new model and now we will see who keeps hold of it.
Nice looking watch but not for me.

[Boaters]

They are both awesome timepieces but I think the Tudor is better looking..

[Chinballs]

I own both the SMP (black dial, rubber strap) and picked up the Tudor last week. Not even a hard choice, the Tudor will be moving on and my Speedmaster saphire sandwich will keep its place as the chrono in my collection.

The Tudor is a nice watch but the SMP just excites me more.

[Krash]

Omega. Not even close.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GST15]

Tudor Chrono is not a Daytona, and the SM Diver 300 is not a Submariner. But they are also very good watches at a much better price. If you can buy MSRP, always get the Rolex IMHO. Between the two, I would take the SM 300 all day. Really like that one!

[beshannon]

Originally Posted by jnelson3097

I just went through this same dilemma and went this route and don’t regret it for a minute.

The blue/grey is stunning

I also just saw the new ceramic, stunning. The METAS spec master chronometer is also very nice



And if I wanted a chrono, I would buy a new Speedmaster over the Tudor

[Chester01]

I tend to base my watch purchases on function and if I used the chrono more would opt for that. The thickness is baloney that is over blown and repeated so many times it’s nonsense. No one comments on the SD thickness….crickets. Some hate on the tudor because of the “faux” design elements which is also nonsense. All watches have design elements, for example there is no function for the rivets but then again no function for polished center links or date wheels that have the same color as the dial, or round vs square hour markers etc, simply a design elements.

Someone above laughably blasts the tudor for poor “design integrity”. The watch was a bold combination of racing and dive elements combining the durability and water resistance of a diver and adding the chrono. To my knowledge, no one has really attempted that.
Folks that want to talk smack in tudor ‘s “design integrity” seem to forget that The sub/gmt/DD/deep sea and yacht master are all basically the same exact watch and also forget that the Daytona was a forgettable watch with an outsourced movement that broke no new ground whatsoever and apparently as long as it has Rolex somewhere on the dial all is forgiven.

[rcclarkie]

Another vote for the SMP 300m.

But definitely try on before you buy, they are very different watches on wrist. The Tudor fits taller and chunky (like the original BB41) and thus has more wrist presence. I never liked the oversized crown on my BB as it dug into my wrist (not sure if this issue continues with the chrono). Also the matte dial and brushed case/bracelet make it feel a bit more toolish.

Whereas the SMP, despite being 1mm larger on paper, fits nicely due to its better case proportions (less top heavy due to better balance between bezel and case depth), the HEV will disappear after 5 mins on your wrist, and it has an overall more dressy feel with the polished bracelet midlinks and the ceramic dial that absolutely pops in the sun - truly, the wave dial is stunning in person

And, if you plan to do anything active with your watch, the OEM rubber for the SMP is divine. I regularly go back and forth between bracelet/rubber for absolute versatility.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HHIslander]

Omega. I own it, so probably biased.

The Tudor looks like a Speedmaster Racing clone to me. If you want a Chrono, there are better choices.

[NachoNeal]

Personally not a big fan of the SMP. Plus I AM a big Tudor fan.
If you're going to wear the BB Chrono as a Daytona substitute, I would recommend holding out for a real Daytona.

[Rori]

Originally Posted by MONTANTK

I would go with the Tudor. I don’t like the Omega bracelets. I also feel like the Tudor Chrono is it’s own watch and shouldn’t necessarily be compared to the Daytona. It has a very different aesthetic and just has such a classic look to it. I may even go so far as to say I almost prefer it over the Daytona

This. I don’t like Chronos but this one is amazing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DJ2020]

I would choose the SMP. Yes, I may be a little biased because I do own a SMP and I am a big fan of Omega. But I have owned many Rolex, Tudor, Breitling and a host of other brands as well.

After owning the others, I choose Omega and have never regretted it as I continue to be impressed daily by the quality, durability and outstanding accuracy.