A tale of three Subs (A Black Bay Black comparison)...

[Evo6]

I recently broke down and purchased a Tudor Black Bay Black, the gilt dial and vintage cues were just too much to resist, especially for the price. However I already own a no date SubC and a vintage 1978 1680 so I thought since many here are interested how the BBB stacks up I thought I'd give you a comparison review to chew on.



first up the case...
1st place: 1680
IMHO the original 40mm Oyster case of the 1680/5513 is still the king, the proportions are perfect, the wrist presence is phenomenal, it's not too large or small and sits very low and comfortable on the wrist. It's equally at home on a NATO or as I prefer it a nice vintage style leather strap like the one from Hodinkee above.

2nd place: SubC
The "maxi" case of the SubC is really not 40mm, in fact the BBB 41mm case seems to be exactly the same width. Despite that the proportions are still great and the beefy lugs, although not as elegant as the 1680 are still nice and balanced, especially on the bracelet. The 904L steel really does have a warmer feel too.

3rd place: BBB
The case of the Black Bay is where I have my biggest gripes, although it has the nice thin lugs of the classic Oyster case the 41mm size means that the strap width has now widened to 22mm. Although this is by no means a deal breaker it departs significantly enough from the classic proportions to feel just slightly unbalanced. It's also thicker/chunkier than the SubC, but not uncomfortably so. The lack of crown guards is a nice vintage cue that I appreciate greatly though, at least until I bump the crown.

The movement...
1st place: SubC
Parachrom hair spring, in house chronometer movement. Mine has held -2 Sec. a day since I received it.

2nd place: 1680
Again, in house chronometer, 37 year old watch holds about -5 sec/day but it's probably due for a service.

3rd place: BBB
Nothing wrong with the ETA 2824, especially how Tudor does it but it's not a chronometer. I still need to see how it does after a few days on the wrist, some seem to be great others less so.

The Bezel...
1st place: BBB
Here the BBB shines, or more to the point doesn't. The matte black aluminum bezel with the red triangle is just pure joy. Also the action and clicks are actually smoother and more precise than my SubC. We'll see how it wears with time but looking at my 1680 bezel I'm pretty sure it won't be an issue.

2nd place: Tie SubC & 1680
At this point we all know the pluses and minuses of the original and ceramic bezels, I appreciate both.

The bracelet...
1st place: SubC
Glidelock rocks, nothing comes close.

2nd place: BBB
The Tudor bracelet is quite well made but I doubt I'll ever even mount it on the watch, the 22mm width just feels too thick to me. The OEM fabric strap is fantastic though and this, a Bond style NATO or a vintage style leather strap is really the way to go with this watch.

3rd place: 1680
The "Tuna Can" bracelets work fine but I find them annoying and rarely wear them.

The crystal...
1st place: Tie BBB & 1680
This is sorta a personal preference, you either love top hats and tropics or you hate plastic and want durable sapphire. I love the top hat on my 1680, despite the scratches the magnification on the date is stunning and the side view is delicious. That said the slight doming at the edges of the BBB crystal is a nice touch and you still get the benefit of the sapphire durability.

2nd place: SubC
Nice flat sapphire, no complaint.

The Crown...
1st place: Tie SubC/1680
Both have the triplock Rolex crown, proven and perfect.

2nd place: BBB
Although I really appreciate the "Big crown" on the BBB I would have preferred a more aggressively knurled one like the triplocks Tudor used to use.

The dial and hands...
Three way tie:
The dial and hands are where we get into even more subjectivity, I love all three for different reasons, the vintage 1680 has gorgeous patina that only comes with the passage of decades, however no working lume. The SubC has the "Maxi" chromalight markers that are the best lume I've ever seen, the BB has slightly patina markers with quite nice lume and the gilt dial is really fantastic and pretty much the #1 reason to own it.

Value proposition:
These three watches offer 3 distinctly different value propositions, but all are equally valid assuming you can afford them. The vintage 1680 is the only watch that might "appreciate" so despite its higher cost it wins for long term investment. The drawback is it's (somewhat) fragile and it's important to keep as many of the original pieces together as possible. The SubC is likely to lose the most value right away if purchased new, I bought mine from David SW barely used so it hasn't really lost any value for me, it’s also probably the most durable of the three, in fact it's pretty much my "beater" watch. The BBB is interesting because it comes in at 1/2 the price or less than the Rolexes, that makes it very appealing to those who want something from the house of Rolex without the usual hole in the wallet. Despite the hit I actually bought my BBB new from an AD, the first time I've done that.

So the question I had originally: “Could the BBB take the place of my SubC?”
For me the answer is no, at least not yet. But it's close and if it had 20mm lugs and a glidelock-ish bracelet it very well might have. For now I'm content that all three will be getting plenty of wrist time in rotation.