Tudor have the reputation of being a bit of an enigma - are they a “poor-mans” Rolex? a “wannabe” Rolex? a parts-bin special? Or, are they something else?
I recently purchased a 1990 Tudor 75100 Prince Oysterdate, and also own a 1982 Rolex 15000 Oyster Perpetual Date. They being, at first glance, very similar I’ve decided to take a close look at both to see what, if anything, they have in common. Both are 34mm across the case, my examples each have silver dials and “cyclops” acrylic crystals and both have 19mm lugs.
The Packaging
As both watches came with complete packaging, I thought it might be useful to start with the “bibs & bobs”.
As can be seen from the photo/s, the contents are virtually the same. 2-piece outer cardboard boxes - red themed for the Tudor, green for the Rolex. The red theme continues with all things related to the Tudor, just as everything to do with the Rolex is green. The inner boxes are the same specification and size - wooden boxes with either red or green vinyl outer wrapping. There are minor differences in the internal shaped/slotted removable cards that hold their respective watches.
The coloured booklets, both containing time & date setting and other instructions, are of a similar format and appear to have been published/compiled by the same printing house. Whereas the Rolex booklet gives additional information regarding the history of the Oyster range of watches and photo’s of various 80’s “celebs” who promote the brand, plus photo’s of the Rolex factory, the Tudor provides only information pertaining to some other models in the Tudor line (basically Date, Day-date, Submariner & Chrono) as well as list of Rolex Service Centres around the world. There is no historical information about the Tudor brand at all in the booklet, nor any reference (other than the list of Rolex Service Centres) to their relationship with Rolex.
Obviously there is no red chronometer seal/hang-tag with the Tudor, but the “Oyster/Swimpruf” hang-tags are or similar design, as is the multi-lingual guarantee translation document. The Tudor document wallet is leather, whereas the Rolex item is a plastic “book”. To be fair, I believe by 1990 (when my Tudor was manufactured) Rolex had changed theirs to a green leather document holder in the same/similar style as the Tudor item.
The cases
Similar, but different. The Rolex case is more rounded at the case sides and the lugs are slightly finer. The lug ends on both watches have that quirky Rolex razor-sharpness to them. The more rounded sides of the Rolex case may explain why there is a gap between crown and case on the Tudor (which I assume uses a Rolex crown tube), but not on the Rolex where the crown fits snugly against the case. Having looked at various photo’s on the net, this gap is apparent on other examples I’ve seen. The case sides on both watches are polished, with the upper surfaces having a brushed finish.
The case backs of the two watches are very different, are not interchangeable, and each require different Rolex case tools to open them.
The Rolex case back is convex and “sterile”, whereas the Tudor is flat and has the engraving “Original Oyster Case….” etc etc.
The crowns are identical, both being signed with the Rolex coronet and both being the “TwinLock” variant. I believe the Rolex case is machined from 904 grade stainless steel, I assume the Tudor case is standard 316 grade.
Both have acrylic crystals, however the crystal on the Rolex is significantly thicker than the crystal on the Tudor and is slightly domed. The crystal on the Tudor is flat. The difference in thickness of the crystal may relate to the published difference in water resistance between the 2 watches - the Rolex is water resistant to 100m, the Tudor 50m. Both, obviously, have the 2.5 magnification “cyclops” for date magnification. With the thicker crystal and convex caseback, the Rolex sits slightly higher on the wrist than the Tudor.
Both have their model number engraved between the lugs at 12 and the serial number between the lugs at 6. The Tudor serial number comprises 5 digits, whereas the Rolex comprises 7 digits.
Movements
The Tudor has a “Top” grade 25-jewel ETA 2824-2 movement, whilst the Rolex has the chronometer-rated 27-jewel Rolex 3035 movement. Both are hackable and have the “quick-set” date change facility. According to info gleaned from various sources on the net, the ETA movement in the Tudor is built and finished to Rolex specifications. I don’t have the tools to open either watch, but from photo’s available on the ‘net it appears that the Tudor ETA is more highly decorated than the Rolex movement.
On my wrist, both watches keep time within COSC specs - the Tudor runs about +3secs per day, the Rolex about -1/2sec per day.
Winding the ETA movement reveals the signature 2824 “sand in the gearbox” courseness, whilst the 3035 movement winding feel is as smooth as butter.
Bracelets
Though similar at first glance, there is quite a big difference between the “Oyster” bracelets fitted to the 2 watches. The Tudor bracelet, made up of folded steel links, is coded 7835 with 361 hollow end links. The Rolex bracelet, of solid link construction, is coded 78350 with 557 hollow end links. Both are 19mm at the lug ends, however the Tudor tapers to 13mm at the clasp, whereas the clasp on the Rolex is 15mm. Bracelet links on the Tudor cannot be removed without major surgery (unbending the hollow centre links), whereas the Rolex solid links are fitted with screws to facilitate removal. The link sides are highly polished on both the Tudor and Rolex bracelets. The bracelets are perfectly interchangeable between the 2 watches, provided the the Tudor end-links are utilised for fitting the Rolex bracelet to the Tudor and vice-versa. The clasps on both bracelets lock and unlock with that characteristic Rolex smoothness indicating a high degree of precision machining and finish to the mating surfaces.
Dials
The dials on both watches are silver and give a nice “sunburst” effect in strong light. The applied hour index markers and hands are slightly thinner on the Tudor dial than those on the Rolex, but both are very readable. The second and minute hands on both watches “touch” the minute index markers making time-setting a simple exercise. The fonts used for the date wheels are different for each watch, with slightly larger numerals on the Rolex. As a result, the date aperture on the Rolex dial is slightly larger than the Tudor. The “verbiage” on the Tudor dial is a little easier to read than that on the Rolex dial, but there isn’t much in it. My guess is that both dials were manufactured in the same facility. Both have applied logo’s in the “12” position - I believe the applied Rolex coronet is white gold, I assume the Tudor shield device is steel.
Conclusions
Whilst at first glance, these 2 watches appear very similar, closer inspection reveals they are, in reality, quite different. The Tudor definitely displays some of it’s Rolex “DNA”, but has a character all it’s own. Finished to the same standard as the Rolex, the Tudor does not deserve the tag “poor mans Rolex”. However, it not a Rolex, and nor does it try to be IMO. The only common part that I could find between the 2 is the crown (and probably the crown tube) - everything else has a point of difference from it’s relative. The cases are subtly different, the hands and hour index markers are different, the case backs are different, the bracelets are different and require different end-links to marry up to their cases, the crystals are different. The Tudor bracelet is lower-spec than the equivalent fitted to the Rolex 15000 and the water resistance of the Tudor is rated at 50m compared to the 100m of the Rolex.
So, what is the Tudor 75100? IMO it is a high-quality watch that benefits from the renowned manufacturing quality-control of it’s parent company Rolex. It cost less than Rolex 15000 in it's day and accordingly has a lower-spec bracelet, movement and water resistance.
At the time my Tudor was manufactured, the mechanical Swiss watch industry was still recovering from the “Quartz Crisis” and it makes sense that Tudor cosmetically aligned itself (to some extent) with it’s high-profile cousin during those times. In more recent years, Tudor has taken on it’s own identity and it’s relationship with it’s parent company is far more segregated, both in design and marketing. IMO Tudor is, and has been, another example of excellent marketing/positioning by Rolex. I doubt Rolex has ever lost a sale to Tudor, but I’d guess many a Tudor has been sold based on the brands relationship to Rolex.
So where is/was Tudor’s position in the market amongst the pantheon of Swiss brands? For my example, based on it’s era (late 1980’s), personally I’d rate it equivalent to the Omega’s of the day - somewhere in the upper middle ground, similar to where Glycine, Fortis etc are positioned today.
This is the first time I’ve ever tried to do a watch review and/or comparison so your constructive feedback will be appreciated! Please note that all views and opinions expressed in this review are my own, and not based on any particular expertise!
Thanks for reading
Cheers
Dave
Fantastic review. I would say Tudors current positioning is well below Omega if the prices you see on Chrono24 is anything to go buy. This makes a modern Tudor somewhat of a veritable bargain but I do prefer the models that relate more to their past when the design connection between Rolex and Tudor was closer.
Excellent stuff, a good read and very informative.
Thanks for me.
A great review - thanks for this and the balanced conclusions too.
Two lovely watches.
Brilliant review - thanks for taking the time and effort :thumbup:
Great write up, thanks!
Great review.
I enjoyed this.
An interesting and useful review, thank you for sharing.
Thanks for that, I enjoyed reading it.
Nice one Dave, enjoyed that a hell of a lot! And my limited Rolex and Tudor knowledge is just that bit broader now...
Great work. Comparing the packaging was a good idea also. I often wondered what the difference would be between Rolex and Tudor boxes.
sooo similar, but so different. :)
very nice review!
Really top review thanks for doing it really enjoyed and learned quite a bit.
+1Originally Posted by DavidL
Nice review. I have always liked Tudors for their more subtle and discreet nature compared to Rolex. The price variation helps too.
That is a fantastic review, thank you for taking the time to put it together.
Every now & again there is a spate of Tudor's on SC, and it's great to be able to learn more about them and their position in relation to their parent company's offerings.
Thanks. Very interesting. Just picked up a Rolex Precision and am getting a taste for vintage pieces...might have to add a Tudor!
Very interesting post. Thank you. I'am also dreaming since years to buy a Submariner but at the end I land to observe on the bay the final prices reached by Tudor Subs. But I am still and firmly convinced to wait with a purchase till the day I can affort the "real" one simply because of all thous little differences that only experts or enthusiats can see and apreciate. Cheers, L
Again awesome to see a review like this.
I've just read this aain after 12 months and think its a superb review.
Such a pity Tudor are not in the uk. A fellow member bought a hydronaut 2 from Germany recently and I had a look. Really lovely and not at all a poor mans Rolex.
Can anyone do a Rolex/ Tudor sub review like this? I'd love to see one.
Great review. Maybe I should invest in a Tudor.
Reviews like this is why I am here, thank you very much for taking the time to share your opinions of the two watches.
Best
Den
Unfortunately Tudors are totally unavailable in the USA as well.
I'm glad Tudor has gone away from classic Rolex designs,there new stuff is awesome and keenly priced.
Excellent review :)
And I like Tudor....a lot :mrgreen:
Tudor was my first "expensive" watch. I still have a warm feelings for it - even now when I moved to Rolex :)
Thank you very much for the reading!
Both are beauties!
I have a date 15000 from the same period with a Champagne dial.It's my absolute favorite. Great review.Thanks.
Both great watches, but if I had to choose I would go for the Rolex, every time
Great review. Thanks!
Great review and pictures mate.
Just a point. Both watches will be 316 steel, the 904 didn't come in until the most recent 6 digit reference models I believe.
Enjoyed this review, very interesting reading.
Tudor is quite similar to the airking with the engine bezel, although Rolex didn't add this feature on the date version. Good review.
Good work
Andy
Wanted - Damasko DC57
Thanks for this, an interesting review
Very nice review, I really enjoyed reading. I wonder what the price difference between the watches is?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote