During a watch discussion recently, a friend advanced the view that a Tudor was "...a brilliant buy - you are basically getting a Rolex at a sub Omega price". I know that Tudor & Rolex are owned by the same group & that Hans Wilsdorf founded both of them. My mate is also correct in that Tudors are very keenly priced. My question would be, is his view an over simplification? Tudor have made leaps forward since the 70s & 80s, I'm not sure that it's true to say that "a Tudor is a Rolex" any more, if it ever was...
Speaking as someone with one eye on a blue Pelagos, I'd like to think that a Tudor is as GOOD as a Rolex but that's not the same as saying "a Tudor is a Rolex" - they may be comparable but they are not the same. Perception of Tudor has changed for the better, but how much Rolex DNA does a current Tudor contain?
Hmmm
Although they are the same company, Tudor is looking at its own manufacturing facility (although it’s still probably Rolex). It's a bit like (but probably even more so) saying that a Seat/Skoda is a cheap way of buying an Audi - and while a lot of that might be true, if it doesn’t have X brand on the dial/bonnet then it’s not X brand. That leads to the poor man’s Rolex accusations, rather than it’s a good brand/watch in its own right.
The new movements appear to be based on the new Rolex movements - to the lay person like myself, there are some really close similarities, but maybe some cost savings too.
I have no idea if Tudor use white gold/gold for their hour marker surrounds and hands like Rolex do, and I doubt that quality is at quite the same level.
Tudor was made to the same standard as Rolex when they made the same watch cases and bracelets, and had the same dial manufacturer, but just had a different movement in them - I’m not convinced that the same can be said today.
How much DNA - none whatsoever imho, and they are worse off for it. Maybe the 58 tried to claw a little of that back, and maybe this year’s Basel will continue to look at elements of the old Tudor/Rolex back catalogue, but maybe not.
Keenly priced. Not so much, just considerably cheaper than Rolex ;) the bi-metal Black Bay is just capped gold, and not too dissimilar to what Omega used to do up until around 5 years ago. At least Omega now use solid gold pieces, and have started using gold for their hour indices on a lot of models. Unfortunately, Tudor are a little hamstrung in that a) it’s the same company; b) they won’t be allowed to truly compete with/against big brother. A bit like Swatch Group’s Tissot; Longines; Omega; Blancpain; and Breguet - they all have their own specific place to place in the overall plan.
It's just a matter of time...
Tudor is no more a Rolex than a Skoda is an Audi because it's part of the same company
Different products at different price points, whether the extra cost is worth it is purely subjective but they are not the same thing.
I recall a time in the 70s when it was put about that Tudor where made by Rolex apprentices. Interesting myth, but I doubt it was true.
Pretty much how I see it. I don't know the ins and outs of the Rolex manufacturing plants but I'm pretty sure that it's the same plant, operators, and machinery producing watches under two brand names. For example they won't have one crystal forming department per brand, it'll be the same department making crystals for all watches under both brand names. This will be the same for each part of the watch.
They'll likely have a separate brand, sales and marketing teams but not manufacturing.
Love my Tudor, especially the Blue Pelagos (I am by no way a Rolex/Tudor expert) but own both brands and I think the quality is up there with Rolex and there is the plus that Tudor are available and for decent money.
Also just got the Tudor GMT and again there has been a bit of slating on these for one reason or another but my personal opinion is I love it and the quality for the money is spot on.
Don't get me wrong I would love a JC DS if I had the spare money and could pick one up at reasonable cost but I think people need to look at the brands and watches on there own merits and not for the relationship with the two brands.
Sent from my Mi MIX 2 using Tapatalk
As a contemporary note watchfinder have just produced this video comparing the Pelagos to the Sea Dweller , some interesting point raised above are echoed in the video
https://youtu.be/KG0P9meJTzY
Steve
The Tudor de nos jours is what Rolex used to be before they jumped the shark.
My mate bought this exact model for £85 brand new in the early 1970s, I've always liked this style.
Eddie
Whole chunks of my life come under the heading "it seemed like a good idea at the time".
Leaving aside the technical comparison, I think the designers are quite careful to make sure that you can tell which one looks like the expensive luxury watch, and they are careful to market and price them in such a way that they are not seen to directly compete. If a particular Tudor design ever threatened to take sales from Rolex, I think it would quickly be buried. It would be easy to come up with those appealing designs too, they could just start making reissues of the older Rolex designs that many people prefer to the new ones. The BB58 is getting close to that, even if it's referencing older Tudor models, but I guess they've calculated that the customer who wants a new Sub isn't going to get a Tudor with a faux rivet bracelet, though some who like the idea of a vintage one or might have settled for one of the many homages might do.
I enjoyed watching that. Thanks for posting.
I think the video sums it up quite concisely and the macro footage really highlights the differences in detailing and finish quality between the two models very well.
I should also have added that I am an Audi owner, who recently visited a VW showroom about a new car. All of the sales staff in the VW showroom ignored me for 10-15 minutes despite me being the only person in the showroom. When I finally gave up waiting and went to find someone to assist, I was told that they had no brochures available on the model I was interested in purchasing, so I should download it at home.
I left and went to the Audi showroom, where I was greeted on entry by a very helpful lady behind the front desk, who showed me to a seat, got me a cup of coffee and a brochure for the models I was interested in, while I waited for the sales assistant.
'Same' company, different price points. ( I did not try Skoda or Seat by the way).
Last edited by Maysie; 11th February 2019 at 18:46.
If anyone is thinking that they are buying for the wrong reasons imo. The Pelagos is a superb watch and until recently trumped Rolex on movement in terms of power reserve and clearly still had all the tech such as anti shock and anti magnetism etc. The deployment clasp is also better on the Pelagos. Most importantly the Pelagos is a completely different aesthetic. It is not designed to be worn for dress occasions. If you look to the BB for this you won’t get precious metals, ceramic bezel, micro adjustment clasp etc etc
Ultimately it is not as well made as Rolex or where it is it offers a different option to Rolex. Tudor are a fantastic brand who make very high quality watches at s very good price. Prices will only go up as the brand grows in notoriety. We have already seen them stop giving the 2 straps and bracelet on BB’s.
Love my black bay s and g on a everest robber strap (they are expensive)
I also have a sub hulk that just spins round doing nothing
I always think that when you first start your watch journey its all about one day i will have a rolex then you go through the rolex range and come out of the other side to the real world when you buy and wear what you really like and not what watch peer pressure tells you to do
Sent from my iPad using TZ-UK mobile app
Sports Rolexes aren't meant to be worn for dress occasions, either. Only Americans and Bond wannabes would wear (say) a Sub and a suit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwMY...F&index=4&t=0s
Really in 2019! Rolex Professional models are quite large, heavy, expensive, mechanical, and have polished sides. Not really suited to wear in most sporting situations - in fact most professional sports people sponsored by Rolex wear their watches for holding a trophy, not during the sport itself.
A modern Rolex is designed more for the boardroom or sales floor rather than the court, course or pitch. Have a wander round the City - you'll get fed up of telling blokes they shouldn't be wearing a Sub and a suit.
I have handled both, the Oyster Perpetual 36 is a different watch to the Explorer though. And terms like fit and finish are often banded around but I'm yet to see macro photos showing this 'huge difference', may be you could post a few showing the huge difference between quality of a Black Bay and and entry level Oyster Perpetual because I don't see it.
Where are the huge differences? Dial printing, case polishing, bracelet clasps, hands, lume, case back, crown detail - all a different design to Rolex, but hugely worse in fit and finish – no way.
Last edited by chrisparker; 12th February 2019 at 17:18.
Aesthetically I have always much preferred the dial on the Tudor Oyster Prince Date Day (or the later Tudor Prince version without the word Oyster) to the Rolex Day Date that has the "fussy" extra minute chapter ring with the Roman numerals. For that reason it is the Tudor version that I have always wanted, and which I consider to be "better". I also like the fact that Tudor made it in stainless steel, which makes it massively practical and affordable, vs the Rolex version in solid yellow or white gold.
Skoda/Audi have far more in common than Rolex/Tudor, they share engines/drivetrains etc. Vintage Tudor can be closely linked to Rolex in the same way sharing cases/bracelets etc. As far as I know modern Tudor has nothing in common with Rolex except being part of the same organisation (but also able to steal design queues such as the gmt)
Rolex dont make their own crystals...
No Tudor parts are made in Rolex factories. They are all outsourced to third party manufacturers. This is officially communicated too.
Imo though Tudor are generally much higher quality than Omega. At much lower price. Says alot about Swatch group.
Owning both Rolex and Tudor, I am of the opinion that Rolex is more refined, better engineered (to the point of over engineered) and finished better than Tudor. However, a lot of these aspects will not be apparent unless you are a WIS or quite familiar with the products.
Another key point is that we are comparing two products which are great already, albeit one is excellent and one is very good. So the “baseline”, being Tudor, is fairly high already. Tudor makes a great product which is refined, well engineered and well finished, just not as much as Rolex.
BW,
Chi Kai
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don’t think Tudor is on par with omega. My aqua Terra has a better quality of bracelet, white gold marker surrounds and hands that are impeccable and the movement is the 8500 which is lovely as well.
I do think the Pelagos has a far nicer bracelet than the BB. The Pelagos has a smooth taper whereas the BB tapers in visible jumps. I also find the Pelagos bracelet more comfortable and it feels better to the touch than the BB.
Omega and Rolex still have the edge on Tudor imo but that is what you expect.
New Tudors are better made than old Rolex.
New Rolex are better made than new Tudor.
New Rolex are considerably more expensive than New Tudor.
Some parts for both are made in the same place.
Some TZers are informed, or at least interested and happy to converse.
Some are rabid keyboard warriors with small parts concerns of their own.
They’re different watches, with close ties. If you are one who thinks a Tudor is a Rolex, that’s your problem.
If you are a Rolex owner horrified at the thought of yours being compared to a cheaper watch, that’s your problem.
The rest of us reasonable, measured and less foaming-at-the-mouth types will remain generally interested and not overly engaged, and gladly remember the names of those people who are best avoided conversing with.
I’m off to hospital, maternity ward, and will deal with things today that really matter. I will be wearing a Tudor, although I could wear my Rolex - and I enjoy both, but neither matter.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by notenoughwrists; 14th February 2019 at 11:27.
I would probably argue that Rolex is Porsche and Tudor is Audi.... that probably applies for the present situation.
Vintage tudors are a whole different story with the main difference being outsourced movements.
It is also worth highlighting the fact that Tudor was always the first company to experiment with different trends and materials.
Can anyone buy a fully ceramic cased Rolex branded chronograph or a titanium cased world class diver? They can if they go with tudor...
So not as bad!!
This comes from someone who owns examples from both brands. Arguably all my watches are vintage and now-vintage and didn’t manage to bond with a Tudor blackbay gmt that crossed my path...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by Ar.parask; 14th February 2019 at 12:39.
You know that their really is only one way to solve this.........
FIIIIIIGHT!!!!!!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Note the "more than likely". They haven't a clue.
Its exceptionally stupid too considering Rolex current supply limitations...
Take price into account. How much is a Omega 9300 chronograph, compared to a 7750 or B01 tudor. Omega's quality issues are well known tbf.
And deeper into the rabbit hole we go......
Just had a call from Goldsmiths saying my watch was back from Rolex..... which was odd as they had my Tudor.
Collected it 10 mins ago and it came like this:
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I view my BB as a Tudor, not a Rolex wannabe, poorer brother etc.... It's an exceptional watch without the price tag or (tin hat) stigma that can be associated with a Rolex
- - - Updated - - -
I view my BB as a Tudor, not a Rolex wannabe, poorer brother etc.... It's an exceptional watch without the price tag or (tin hat) stigma that can be associated with a Rolex
A bit of an interesting read: https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/articl...-watch-factory doesn't really clarify the Tudor a cheaper Rolex discussion but does provide a bit more insight into Tudor as a brand and their dependability on Rolex infrastructure.
Parts manufactured in China, final assembly and test in Switzerland. Materials and tolerances differ, but ultimately that’s the approach that Rolex, Tudor, Omega and many others take.
Secrecy and “mystique” of the brands is all about not admitting this is happening, right? Or wrong?
I don’t have a problem with it either way. I tried a Tudor on, didn’t like it. Tried an Omega on, liked it (surprised myself), bought it. I am that shallow.
A Tudor isn’t a Rolex, but for many Tudor probably represents better value for money based on current prices, especially secondhand.