Tudor Ranger 90220

[explorer 1]

Snagged a Tudor Ranger reference 90220 from the early 80's. Appears to be in great shape, all references present and correct, right movement, original dial, quite an unusual reference, in that it's the one reference specifically for the non dated Ranger. The dated version being ref. 90330.

[raydin]

That looks stunning! Congrats. Did that model come on bracelet at all?

[StuS]

Now I do like that, What size is it?

[al1991]

Lovely watch!

[explorer 1]

That looks stunning! Congrats. Did that model come on bracelet at all?

I bought it with a Tudor jubilee bracelet, with folded links identical to Rolex jubilee except the clasp is signed Tudor, also marked 6251 H. If I'm correct the H denotes 1983 according to most Rolex clasp references, and 1983 is correct for the reference, so I'm inclined to think that the Tudor jubilee bracelet came with this watch, until proved otherwise. Unfortunately there are not many examples of this reference on the web, and none showing a full set of papers and boxes or bracelet type in detail.

[Roland]

That looks absolutely lovely...

[SSK007]

Great looking watch.

[andy tims]

Tidy.

[mantaray]

That is a really nice time piece ..... congratulations .....

[MrSmith]

for a fleeting second i thought that was a new release and had finally found my next purchase!
sublime, why cant they make something with a similar economy of design today??

i hope it was really expensive because if it was a steal i’ll be even more annoyed

[explorer 1]

Now I do like that, What size is it?

34 mm from memory.

[mr.chef]

Here is my Ranger from the 60's
Very hard to find a genuine one.
Yours would have come on a Tudor folded oyster.
Love the reference
At 34mm mine doesn't get the wrist time it deserves.

[Bluetinfloor]

As posted above, a tudor oyster is most likely what this came on. Whilst an "H" stamp does denote circa 1983 bracelet issue, the 6251H stamp is a bracelet ref in its own right and would be supplemented by a further mark for year, generally top right portion of the marked clasp.

I bought it with a Tudor jubilee bracelet, with folded links identical to Rolex jubilee except the clasp is signed Tudor, also marked 6251 H. If I'm correct the H denotes 1983 according to most Rolex clasp references, and 1983 is correct for the reference, so I'm inclined to think that the Tudor jubilee bracelet came with this watch, until proved otherwise. Unfortunately there are not many examples of this reference on the web, and none showing a full set of papers and boxes or bracelet type in detail.

[explorer 1]

As posted above, a tudor oyster is most likely what this came on. Whilst an "H" stamp does denote circa 1983 bracelet issue, the 6251H stamp is a bracelet ref in its own right and would be supplemented by a further mark for year, generally top right portion of the marked clasp.

My bad, the clasp is marked as a G rather, '82.

[explorer 1]

Here is my Ranger from the 60's
Very hard to find a genuine one.
Yours would have come on a Tudor folded oyster.
Love the reference
At 34mm mine doesn't get the wrist time it deserves.

What year and reference is yours? Noticed the absence of T before and after SWISS.

[mr.chef]

Hi it's a 7966/0 from 1966 ish.

[mr.chef]

I asked Morgan from Tudor collector and his response was "SWISS is common on tritium pieces when we are talking Tudor. Opposite of Rolex in that regard"

[azrael]

for a fleeting second i thought that was a new release and had finally found my next purchase!
sublime, why cant they make something with a similar economy of design today??

i hope it was really expensive because if it was a steal i’ll be even more annoyed

Sure, the Tudor Heritage Ranger.

[Topcat30093]

Congratulations, thats a classic looking watch

[soapy]

I like those a lot, congratulations.

[Velorum]

Sure, the Tudor Heritage Ranger.

Bigger than 34mm though

[barreti]

What a lovely watch.
I've not seen that hour hand before, or at least I don't remember it.
Does that shape have a generally used name?

[Dave S]

That's nice. Another one to add to the list...
Dave

[Kidsteruk]

That is lovely.

You see so many dodgy versions of these on eBay that you forget how nice the actual one is