Tudor GMT holy grail or horrid monstrosity

[Bluside]

To each their own.

My Tudor GMT gets more wrist time than my BLNR. The watch just seems more practical. It is heavier. I noticed this initially, but I guess I have gotten used to it.

It is certainly not my grail, and certainly not a monstrosity. Just curious, do people complain about the weight of a Platona?

[Stevec14]

Horses for courses. I bought a Tudor gmt and loved it for a period of time, and was a great replacement for a 16710 that I parted with to help fund a Daytona. It always wore big however but I enjoyed it. The worst part of the watch for me was the bracelet which I could never get to fit 100%. I sent it into Rolex to have the date mechanism serviced and was without the watch for a couple of weeks. When I got it back it felt huge and heavy and I decided to move it on, and purchased another 16710.

I am much happier now, however that’s not to say the Tudor is a bad watch. It’s tremendous at the price point. Just the size and thickness won’t be for all. It’s also not really fair to compare vs the Rolex gmts as they are very different. In many ways the Tudor has no competition. It’s a good value, good looking watch and certainly no monstrosity.

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by Rocket launcher

Tudor GMT holy grail or horrid monstrosity

if those are the two options, watch companies are threading a needle here with zero margin for error

[vipereaper30]

I have let a couple of BLROs go but still have the Tudor and it's a keeper for sure. To each their own makes the world a more interesting place!

[Etschell]

Originally Posted by Bluside

To each their own.

My Tudor GMT gets more wrist time than my BLNR. The watch just seems more practical. It is heavier. I noticed this initially, but I guess I have gotten used to it.

It is certainly not my grail, and certainly not a monstrosity. Just curious, do people complain about the weight of a Platona?

it is the thickness. but rolex arent thin. i bet bulvgari octomo owners laugh at thickness posts

[Nikrnic]

I've never seen one to try it on but I did flip my BB 41 inhouse (too chunky, faux rivets) in favor of the same in eta version. I like it much better now but it is at the edge of being too big for me. If the new GMT is larger than the BB 41 eta I'd have to pass.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[rajurama]

Originally Posted by DressWatchJones

Completely agree. I had the exact same experience.
I really want to like Tudor (not totally sure why) but I just feel like they are utterly overrated. Watches feel cheap, bracelets are horrendous, designs are too similar to others (but not quite as good)
Wonder how many people would buy Tudor if they weren't associated with Rolex. Sure some people love them, but just not for me

Really?! Have you ever seen or even held a Tudor in real life?!? I feel they are rather most Under rated! They actually so much more value for money than other brands in same price range and manufacture movements.

[G M Francis]

I think the BB GMT is a really nice watch but I agree, it’s too thick. I sold my two BB’s for that reason as I wore an aquanaut 5167 solely for the better part of 6 months. When I put a BB on it had me scratching my head why it was so deep. Anyone who thinks this is obviously not alone as the 58 is out as part of the Tudor range. I’m really keen to see one as from the photos I’ve seen it looks a killer size.