Tudor BB Chrono v. Omega SM Diver 300

[Belugahype]

Don't think you can go wrong with either, I personally like the look of dive watches so I'd gravitate towards the SM300. I've tried on the SM and it looks great on the wrist.

[PBJ1925]

Omega. SMP on rubber = supreme comfort. If I wanted a chrono I’d get a Speedy


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Driver8]

Personally I'd go with the SMP. It's a fantastic watch in its own right, plus it's great value. Also (and this won't bother most people but it does me) the SMP has a true in-house movement, whereas the Tudor uses a modified Breitling B01.

Don't get me wrong, the B01 is a superb chronograph movement, but I'm a weirdo who likes his watch movements to be made by the company with their name on the dial.

[amphr1]

For what it's worth, the lume in the skeleton minute hand in the SMP is very nice and unique.

I love my SMP, but it's become kind of a field watch for me, the watch i go to the shooting range with for example. For some odd reason, the clasp irritates me after a day of wear. The very similar Omega clasp from the Speedy does not. I have no idea why. It always conjures up the thought of James Bond when I wear it.

I don't have the Tudor, but it is on my shopping list. I'm still trying to think if I'll enjoy it. I don't like that it wears large for a small case watch. I don't like that it's missing lumes in 3, 6, and 9 hour marker and the seconds hand. but I do like the snowflake hour hand.

Given that you can get SMP at a reasonable price, especially pre-own, and that you're currently having to pay premium on the Tudor, at this time I would recommend the SMP. That may change if the price falls back on the Tudor.

[Buzzlite]

I went into my AD today to buy the new chrono black dial or white dial,

I wore my Seamaster Tokyo 2020 in, and let me tell you, the difference is night and day, the 300m felt and looked a good few steps up in terms of quality and attention to detail and finishing v the Tudor. It felt cheap. It made me realise how good of a watch the 300m is, so I ended up leaving without the tudor,

[Buzzlite]

Pictures do not do this piece justice the ceramic dial is just unbelievable. In direct sun the dial becomes the whitest white iv ever seen.

[Santiago32]

Originally Posted by beshannon

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

THIS is the Seamaster to get. Stunning

[Buzzlite]

Agree that is a stunning piece the all black

[WiseRat]

The build and finish quality is not really comparable between the two. The Omega is vastly better in this regard, and gets my vote.

[Wrist Watcher]

Originally Posted by Buzzlite

I went into my AD today to buy the new chrono black dial or white dial,

I wore my Seamaster Tokyo 2020 in, and let me tell you, the difference is night and day, the 300m felt and looked a good few steps up in terms of quality and attention to detail and finishing v the Tudor. It felt cheap. It made me realise how good of a watch the 300m is, so I ended up leaving without the tudor,

After owning both at the same time, I agree with this conclusion. The Omega is simply a nicer watch IMO.

[GeekCred]

I would get the Tudor. I think it's more attractive, feels manlier on the wrist, better bracelet, and prefer the winding action with the larger crown.
Get the SM if you want a luxury finish, sleeker case, and want the better Metas movement.

[Rodrigo082]

Omega all the way … in term of finish , movement and brand prestige Omega is by far a better watch than Tudor.

If you want a chronograph, go for the new speedy

[samson66]

Kind of apples to oranges comparing a diver to a chrono, but either way I go for the Omega. I have the white dial SMP 300M and it is a terrific watch. I also just think it looks better than that Tudor. The Tudor chrono in white looks a little washed out to my eyes. Omega is a little further up the food chain that Tudor IMO and I own both.

[7enderbender]

Both very nice. Very different in that one is a diver, the other a chrono. So maybe it’s a question what else you have - and in which colors.
I’m very much an Omega fan. Though there are probably some other models I’d prefer. The Tudor is fantastic in its own way. And I don’t look at it like the “not a Daytona”. Forget price or value for a second: I’d take this Tudor over a Daytona any day! Much prettier.
Or meet you in the middle: already have a Speedmaster?

[IR201]

Honestly the new Omega SMP feels leagues above Tudor in terms of quality on the wrist. I say this as someone with both brands and many Rolex sports models. The Omega competes with the latter. The Tudors don't for me. Just personal opinion!

[Nodzex]

Seamaster would be my 1st choice even though Tudor looks good as well!

[Plebs]

Saw and compared them both in person. Love them both. I would grab Omega first then the Tudor. I’ll be grabbing both tho


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[1William]

I have multiples from Tudor and Omega and like both brands. I had the new Tudor Chrono in black and moved it along as it was not getting any wear. When I reached for a chrono the Speedmaster is the one that gets the most wear and I have both of the SS Daytona-C's. I actually like the Tissot Heritage Chrono 1973 more than the Tudor, go figure. I have several Seamaster's including the white and black dial and the white and blue Tokyo. It is a matter of personal preference as both watches are nice but if I had to choose it would be the Seamaster in Black and White.

[airchitect]

The sea master has always had odd design language to me. Prob because it’s not as staid as so many of its counterparts…. Has a very Japanese vibe to me….


Sent using Tapatalk

[Wrist Watcher]

Originally Posted by 1William

I have multiples from Tudor and Omega and like both brands. I had the new Tudor Chrono in black and moved it along as it was not getting any wear. When I reached for a chrono the Speedmaster is the one that gets the most wear and I have both of the SS Daytona-C's. I actually like the Tissot Heritage Chrono 1973 more than the Tudor, go figure. I have several Seamaster's including the white and black dial and the white and blue Tokyo. It is a matter of personal preference as both watches are nice but if I had to choose it would be the Seamaster in Black and White.

You have a fantastic collection. : )

[rich-96db]

I own both and I like them both equally. If there is any advantage, it's that the Omega clasp has a tool-less adjustment.

[samson66]

Originally Posted by beshannon

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

My issue with this one is the size at 43.5 mm. Not sure why they had to make this one bigger than the standard 42 mm SMP which to me is the perfect size for a diver.

[samson66]

Originally Posted by rich-96db

I own both and I like them both equally. If there is any advantage, it's that the Omega clasp has a tool-less adjustment.

This shows how the little things matter the most. Look how Omega made the hands black rather that SS color and included black surrounds on the indices. Makes all the difference. The hands and markers stand out on the Omega. On the Tudor they sort of blend in to the background giving a washed out look. If Tudor would just make that small change I'd love the white chrono.

[Oyster Sauce]

From a looks standpoint, I think the Tudor Chrono is more versatile and classic looking. As a one and only, I’d go Tudor. If you are adding to a collection, the Omega is an option. Best wishes

[Rashid.bk]

Omega all day, without a thought or doubt.

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by samson66

My issue with this one is the size at 43.5 mm. Not sure why they had to make this one bigger than the standard 42 mm SMP which to me is the perfect size for a diver.

Their nutball typical Omega thinking was that the all black case and band "look smaller" visually so they wanted to compensate for the visual short coming by making it bigger. Seriously, that's what one of the OmegaUSA big wigs said during a review of the watch.
They ruin most of their watches by either making them biggerer or thickerer...

[Driver8]

Originally Posted by samson66

My issue with this one is the size at 43.5 mm. Not sure why they had to make this one bigger than the standard 42 mm SMP which to me is the perfect size for a diver.

Agreed. I've tried that ceramic SMP on and it's a fantastic looking piece - the matt dial with the wave pattern in relief, the brushed ti hands, the no-date movement, etc - all superb. BUT it really does wear every single one of it's 43.5mm. In fact it wears much larger to me than my SD43. If they'd kept it at 42mm it'd be in my collection already.

[Triple Crown]

Omega for me, but would have it in a rubber strap.

[rich-96db]

Originally Posted by samson66

This shows how the little things matter the most. Look how Omega made the hands black rather that SS color and included black surrounds on the indices. Makes all the difference. The hands and markers stand out on the Omega. On the Tudor they sort of blend in to the background giving a washed out look. If Tudor would just make that small change I'd love the white chrono.

I think the difference is that Tudor was trying to make a watch that looks like a Daytona, so they kept the hands and indices surrounded in metal rather than black. The SMP is just being itself.

[Carroll]

Personally love the Omega more than Tudor.