compare tudor prince & daytona

[nyjohnchan]

Which one would you like better: Tudor prince "Tiger" edition or Rolex ss daytona. The tudor only at 1/5 the price of the ss daytona. They have same case, almost the same bazel, tudor movement also made by rolex. Tudor also has one advantage, it has the date, and its a collectors item.

[Dan Pierce]

The Tudor chrono's are about 1/3 the price [a bit less depending on condition] and DO NOT have movements made by Rolex. They use the venerable chronometer grade Valjoux [now ETA] 7750 chronograph movement that is modified by Tudor.
I prefer the Tudor as I need the date feature as well as [in my case] a rotating bezel w/ 2nd timezone function.
dP

[nyjohnchan]

nice Tudor prince, thank for the correction on the movement. I knew its a eta movement, but I thought its rolex modification.

[kcmo]

I think the Tudor chronos are fantastic, but they're still very different from the Daytona. For me.....Daytona all the way!

[azguy]

To me the biggest dif is the perfect 3, 6, 9 configuration of the Daytona, really hot looking and very easy to see at all times

[horseco]

I like the placement of the sub dials on the Daytona better... its one of the reasons I like the AP RO better than the ROO

[capote]

I could never get over the Tiger tie-in, that kind of obnoxious random marketing is a huge turn off for me. The Tudor big block on the other hand is amazing. But in the end I think I would go with a Daytona in this case.

[nauticajoe]

Both are a beauty but at the end the Daytona has my vote.

[roadie1]

Daytona for me!

[ikovalchuk17]

Daytona all the way. The Tudor is still nice though.

[YoyoGift8]

I like both, depends on the budget.

[Kevin B]

My vote is for the Tudor. Love the sub dial placement and the date also lots of variations on the dials. I feel like you can't go wrong with either though.

[gwalker]

Tudor all the way. The fact the Daytona has no date is a huge turn off for me. I like the Tudor dial configuration a lot. Guess that's why I love ROO Chronos so much.

[East Bay Rider]

Let's see:
It's mechanical.
It tells the time.
It has a rotatable 12 hour bezel.
It has a date feature.
It has a chronograph.

Pretty much the ultimate watch, if you only have one watch. It really does almost anything you really need a watch to do. I like purposeful things. I like that my Tudor chrono is useful in daily life, besides looking nice.

[AJMarcus]

With all do respect that's kinda like comparing a Honda to a Mercedes. There's a reason why it's $10k more!

[Dan Pierce]

Originally Posted by East Bay Rider

Let's see:
It's mechanical.
It tells the time.
It has a rotatable 12 hour bezel.
It has a date feature.
It has a chronograph.

Pretty much the ultimate watch, if you only have one watch. It really does almost anything you really need a watch to do. I like purposeful things. I like that my Tudor chrono is useful in daily life, besides looking nice.

Well said, Bill.
dP

[Kevin B]

With all do respect that's kinda like comparing a Honda to a Mercedes. There's a reason why it's $10k more!

How so? Please explain.

[AJMarcus]

Let me first say the Tudor Chrono is a great watch. And if they would remove Tigers name from the dial it would be even better. But to answer your question the Rolex in house movemenT 4130 in the Daytona is exceptional by anyones standards. Most consider it one of the top ten watch movements ever made. It has just 290 components, for example, which is fewer than any other chrono. Very simple in its massive complication considering what it can measure. It has a 72 hour power reserve and the blue para chrome hairspring. Tests show it is 10x more shock resistant and virtually impervious to X-rays and magnetic fields. Impressive for any mechanical object but especially a wrist watch. Again, Tudor I think is best compared to an Omega. Just my two cents!

[Kevin B]

And if they would remove Tigers name from the dial it would be even better

Thats funny

I would counter the complication argument this way: Tudor one ups the Daytona by means of a date wheel thus making it the superior watch

To each his own, both fine watches

[dddrees]

Both are great chronographs and I would be extremely happy to have both. However I currently only have the Daytona.

[George Ab]

Tudor movement is not made my Rolex but ETA.

I would pick the Tudor just because I will not own a watch without a date. I like the look of both.

[springer]

I vote Tudor over the Daytona.

[nyjohnchan]

I am very happy to see all these nice comments about both watches. Personally, I like both of them, but from economics point of view I have to pick the Daytona. I bought the Tudor 10 years ago, and only recently can afford the Daytona.

[mikkolopez]

I went for 2 Tudor Tiger right now and a 3rd one incoming because i like this design with the date wheel. I am not a chronograph fan (more like a Diver watch fan) but the Tudor Tiger is a hell of a watch for my use. I like how the movement (though not Rolex) is the ever-reliable Valjoux 7750 (now ETA 7750) and the way the dial was designed. I know it's not vertically symmetric but that was what drew me to this 6,9,12 non-traditional sub-register placement dial vs the traditional 3,6,9 sub-register. It's hip to me.
Here's my current 2


I'll post a pic of my incoming black with white sub-register once it comes.

I could afford a Daytona now but am worried if i can wear it during my daily activities and places i go to without worrying about how expensive it is. I like to enjoy wearing my watches than worrying about them

[jolimont]

Originally Posted by AJMarcus

And if they would remove Tigers name from the dial it would be even better.

[Feras]

I am not a big fan of the daytona, to be honest the daytona and the seadweller are my least favourite Rolexes. So, for the varietys sake i would get the Tudor, the name Tiger and date with multiple variations are all tempting.

[Noriki]

Agreed, I don't buy this watch is becos of the word tiger on the dial. Otherwise I will consider the Tudor panda dial.

[Harryo]

I would buy a Daytona if I had the money, in a heartbeat! Daytonas are legendary watches with huge pedigrees, great staying power and a cachet all of their own. I have had a few Tudors over the years and loved them because they are functional, robust and versatile. The difference in price between the two has been explained already. IMHO both watches are "worth" their respective costs but as also previously mentioned, the Tiger connection is a complete deal deal breaker for me. I think it is just naff, and did so even before Tiger's meltdowm. Hindsight is easy but I REALLY regret having sold two "big block" Tudors in the past; these watches are aesthetically much more appealing than their later Prince Date versions. The heft of the case, the way it sits up nicely on the wrist, everything about them I really like. And accepting that they have age on their side, they are proving much more "collectable" than any of the later Tudor chronos.

[HORNBLOWER]

Tudor, much more bang for your buck. I recently priced a ss Daytona in an AD. When he told me the price I could see that even the dealer could hardly keep a straight face.

[astrazen]

Originally Posted by AJMarcus

Let me first say the Tudor Chrono is a great watch. And if they would remove Tigers name from the dial it would be even better. But to answer your question the Rolex in house movemenT 4130 in the Daytona is exceptional by anyones standards. Most consider it one of the top ten watch movements ever made. It has just 290 components, for example, which is fewer than any other chrono. Very simple in its massive complication considering what it can measure. It has a 72 hour power reserve and the blue para chrome hairspring. Tests show it is 10x more shock resistant and virtually impervious to X-rays and magnetic fields. Impressive for any mechanical object but especially a wrist watch. Again, Tudor I think is best compared to an Omega. Just my two cents!

Very well put