Tudor vs. Rolex: Which Watch is the Better Buy?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 лип 2024
- Is Tudor a better buy than Rolex? We attempt to answer the difficult question that's been plaguing the industry for a while now, is Tudor now a better watch maker than Rolex?
Connect with us at: linktr.ee/watchfinder
Watchfinder is the number one place to buy, sell and exchange premium pre-owned timepieces. Discover more exceptional watches at www.watchfinder.com - Навчання та стиль
Personally I think Tudor is for people who just want a smart, well made watch without all the bling and bagage of owning a Rolex.
Nobody asking you if it's real or how much it cost!
100%
I feel like Tudor is what Rolex used to be. It’s a solid tool watch, expensive but reasonably priced for the quality & workmanship that you get.
@@chriscon8463💯
Yes, I'm surprised the watch community doesn't talk about the baggage that comes from owning a Rolex more. So many people will think it's overly indulgent, fake, or indication of you being a status obsessed douchebag.
(Insert the “knowledge” meme/GIF of the dude in the black jacket pointing to his temple and smirking)
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think if you can afford Tudor, you can afford Rolex too. Tudor doesn't cost 1 euro, and Rolex doesn't cost 1 million. They are both luxury watches. Maybe people are in too much of a hurry to buy, but you just have to put something aside for a little longer. I don't really agree with the idea that a luxury watch is the poor version of another. They are all expensive..
True. I got a regular black bay as my first slightly more expensive watch in 2020 and shortly after a BB GMT
Sold both now in 2023 as I got into a 16570 😊
I own two Tudor watches that cost a combined 7 grand new. I dont even think I could get a basic oyster perpetual for that. Not new anyway.
@@bobbressi5414you can absolutely get an OP for that much, especially if you’re in the US.
You’ve nailed it. Nevertheless they are 2 different propositions, technically, historically, how they feel in your hands. I’m lucky enough to own a few pieces from both brands and I love all of them. I suggest friends to try a watch for good before buying it and to make their choice weighing all features and price, and they will never look back.
I remember talking to an industry person during the pandemic and remember them saying that like everybody suspects, Rolex does nerf Tudor. One concrete example was reserve, person said that the Kenissi movements actually have better PR but they can’t publish that to not overtake the crown. I mean you can see it on the really off proportions of watches. But yeah, that line about showing off on IG, I just started laughing.
Honestly hearing this topic again is really tedious. I have pieces from both brands and I buy each watch on their own merit
What would you say are their respective merits other than prestige?
Same here. Tedious to some sure; but not I or the gents running a UA-cam channel with a watch business.
It’s the content viewers want
I actually prefer the Less shiny look and the absence of the cyclops date window in the Tudor. Also like the fact that it is less imitated and avoided by car salesman, drug dealers or any other rich wannabe douche who immediately go for a rolex.
Looks like a knock off rolex
Buy Tudor for Tudor, not as a second choice after Rolex. That goes with all other brands out there. I have Tudor BB Reverse Panda, Longines Master Collection Moonphase, Tissot PRX Chronograph, Tag Heuer, Hamilton Kahki Field King and others but I have them not because I can’t afford a Rolex or Grand Seiko.
Tudor is slowly but surely shaking away the curse of being considered the "poor" people Rolex, I personally like the Black Bay better than the submariner.
@@ThatGuyUpThere Tudor is a solid brand. It isn’t Rolex on quality, design or prestige but it’s certainly a solid brand and nothing to be embarrassed about.
So long as a watch is worthy of being passed down thru generations it a great watch.
This comparison needs to stop between these 2 brands. Yes, they are under the Hans wilsdorf umbrella but that’s where it stops. 2 completely separate brands at separate price points. No, you’re not getting a Rolex when buying a Tudor but Tudor are solid watches.
Putting rolex in the title attracts more views, which these youtube channels are desperate for
@@robertposteschild2353 click bait, gotta love it
Tudor is better. I don’t even wear my submariner anymore
You know why they're making the comparison, right? They're a WATCH SELLER. They want to reel you in with the Tudor, make you feel like you've failed because you "couldn't afford the Rolex" or whatever, then get you back next year when you sell them your Tudor and buy a Rolex from them. It's pure capitalism, dude.
The difference between Tudor and Rolex is almost entirely in the marketing. Not the product.
Omega for me...
Omega, the Rolex-quality watch for people who aren't obsessed with themselves.
I've tudor BB58 blue and the black, and a rolex seadweller 50th anniversary. The BB is my go to.
same for me, the Golf GTI of watches. leave the 911 for the weekend 😊
Congratulations, I've been a subscriber since the beginning. You have worked hard and deserve your success!
I went to see my cardiologist. It looked like he was wearing a steel Daytona Panda. When i got closer I realized it was actually an Invicta. What should I do now? Can I trust his advise or will his advise just be something that sounds good until you look more closely into it?
The cardiologist sounds smart to me.
Probably invested the £20k he saved on the invicta purchase sensibly rather than wasting it on an overpriced watch. Sounds shrewd to me.
He's not dumb enough to suck off a sales rep for a watch, so he has that going.
Probably used the savings for something really worthwhile; plastic surgery for his trophy wife.
Back in summer 20 I was under the knife for plastic surgery on nasal skin cancer. The consultant remarked positively on my watch. I clocked his family care worn ye olde Submariner. Me, I was wearing my Pagani Batman homage.
Let’s just say we were close enough for me to see the honesty in his eyes
I just bought my self a Brand new Black bay 54 and I fell in love, it's also my first luxury watch. I think I did a good decision.
Good for you. You have a great watch there, and if your heart is happy, so are you!
@@markstarmer3677 indeed I can’t take it off my wrist
You didn’t mention that your arm doesn’t get chopped off for a Tudor if you are walking down the street in São Paulo. Or Camden.
Camden, Newark, or Paterson. I still love my Submariner best, then my BB58 and Breitling Colt 41 Marine Blue.
And that should also tell you something about both brands
Or Croydon…
@@RocketDog73Fucking Croydon..
@@13Tyres wow, that bad then !
I get around this silliness by buying Omega.
The people that talk down on a Tudor are always Rolex fanboys. They just get mad over the fact people get a watch with the same finishing and quality for less money and no wait list so in order to make themselfes feel better they need to make you unhappy about the watch. Poor behaviour but oh well, the watch community is quite toxic afterall.
You are correct, I own a single red seadweller and a Tudor gmt, the finishing is on a par.
Tudor is similar the Porsche Boxster. Most people say that you buy the Boxster because you can't afford a 911 but those know, appreciate the the performance and recognition of a good product, at a great price
No Rolex and Tudor are more like Fender and Squier guitars, or Gibson and Epiphone. A Porsche is a Porsche. A Boxster is like an entry level Rolex OP or Air King.
I’ve had 3 Rolex now down to one.
Sea Dweller 16600
Got a Tudor FXD MN23
Lots of Seiko’s
I think Tudor’s key selling point is availability (for retail at ADs, rather than only at inflated grey market prices). Buying a Bronze BB58 in the New York boutique was a really nice experience, compared to the Exhibition Only/sneering response to waitlist requests you experience in many Rolex ADs.
When I got my Sea-Dweller about 20 yrs ago, I had my choice of all of the Rolex SS sports models at the AD (some, like the Polar Explorer 2, available discounted…). Tudor reminds me of that at the moment.
I like how the discussion usually goes to which one do you choose. I’d just like to say that it is, in fact, legal to own both and be happy with both.
nbody will buy both.
I am pausing midway to comment that the animation is SICK!!! Great job
I own both several rolexes (mainly sport line dssd JC, sd43, 2 explorer2 and a ceramic bezel Daytona). But lately I have been attracted by Tudor, not for the price but for the esthetics. I bought BB chrono panda and a gmt and I find myself wearing them a lot. I think comparing Rolex to Tudor is a thing of the past. You can like both and buy both. For info I have been collecting for 30 years.
Used to own a sub 14060, and currently own a BB58. They wear the same. The only difference in wear is the what your imagination tells you.
I have a Tudor 1926 and it's well made, attractive, and fills my needs. Its an everyday "tool watch" that doesnt look like a tool watch. It doesnt compete with a Rolex. It competes with Longines and that's fine.
Thx for the vid! Is it possible that you just like a certain Tudor model more? Why do certain people think that price is the only determinant?
I have owned a Rolex Submariner 14060 since 1993....It is one of my personal favorites....I'm am currently saving for another Rolex, but a date just this time as I've gotten older I want that look as a main daily. I also must say I own about forty different watches from Timex, fossil, Omega, Tag, Tissot, Dan Henry.....all makes....I still very much want a Tudor BB58 in the vintage gilt....it looks incredible...I also want to say my name is Michael and I'm a watchoholic...🤣
I have both and will say Tudor is just as good as Rolex in quality just in a different style and cache
i am lucky to have a 4 digit Sub and a 6 digit gmt, alongside those i have a BB58 and a Pelagos blue. i use the right watch for the right circumstances. 70% of the time its the BB58 which reminds me in dimensions, fit and finish of a 5 digit submariner. Times have changed in the uk and u have to think in advance if its safe to wear a sports Rolex. The workaround is the Tudor, to me just as good as a Rolex but easy to replace and no waitlist to ruin your day. Horses for courses.
The other point you didnt mention I have found the modern Tudors incredibly accurate movements. Latest one I tried the BB Pro was almost 0 seconds drift per day. I have never had that from any Rolex.
When I buy a watch, I do it because I like it and I don't care what other people say or think, in the end, the one who is going to enjoy it is me. I have one Rolex and two Tudor and viewing the entire range of models, I generally like the Tudor. Sorry about that, Tom.
BTW, nice to see you back Tom, we were kind of concerned...
I personally prefer the current Tudor designs and dimensions over their Rolex counterparts regardless of price or prestige. I just want a nice watch that fits well with a design that I like and Tudor has that.
I own the polar explorer but if I didn't and was buying that I'd go for the bb pro, doesn't wear as thick as the specs would indicate, t-fit clasp, and better lug to lug than the exp ii. Also, I'm not a huge fan of the cyclops. Still love my polar though.
Oh no, not this again...
Owned both. Rolex is quality but I had a heart attack every time I knocked them or scratched them. My Tudor North Flag is more stress free to wear 😊👍🏻
Disappointed they didnt compare the black bay pro and the explorer ii. Especially sense it was the thumbnail…
I own them both, the Black Bay Pro is the better watch all things considered.
@@Anonymouslyme1 Oooo, please elaborate? What makes it better?
@@nshandy everything apart from the thickness. Overall the Tudor is a betting looking watch. The dial and handset is a better design, you’ve got 4 different shaped hands on the Rolex, they don’t match one another and look a mess. The Tudor hands look more harmonious plus they are ‘floating hands’ you know blacked out near the centre. The Tudor has a better crown, it’s huge and really tactile, best I’ve ever operated. The one on the Rolex is too small, inaccessible and therefore difficult to tighten. Let’s talk about the movement, all the new Rolex 32xx series movements are back to front, when you set the time the hands move in the opposite direction to all other watches, to advance the hands you wind towards you, not away from you. The Tudor is traditional in this sense. The Tudor movement has the same 72 hour power reserve, silicone hairspring etc Accuracy; my Black Bay Pro gains about 0.3 secs per day and so do does my Tudor BB58. I have a handful of Rolex’s and they are all about 1.5-2.0 seconds out a day (within spec) but generally slow which is a nuisance. In my experience Tudor in-house movements are better than Rolex movements. Now, with the date function, my BB Pro date display jumps at exactly midnight every day, or within seconds. Every Rolex I have jumps about 4 minutes after midnight. The clasp on the Tudor is far better because it has the full T fit system whereas the Explorer II just has the Easylink, which is good but nowhere near as good as the T fit. I could probably go on, but the only thing that’s wrong with the BB Pro is its thickness but I think it’s fine, I’d prefer it thinner but it isn’t and I love the chunky tool watch vibe. The Rolex is like a wafer in comparison but the watch is too big in diameter so I’ll call it quits on size overall. So, there you have it, the Tudor Black Bay Pro is by far the best Explorer 2 watch that Rolex/Tudor group produce currently. I don’t think it’s even close.
I'm lucky enough to own both brands and neither are particularly affordable and both are certainly luxury items in my opinion the biggest difference is that you still feel reasonably safe wearing your Tudor in the city unlike the Rolex.
Depends on what city....and what Rolex model. I also own both and have worn both on NYC subway. Never a problem for me.
NYC, Philly, Boston with my Sub in the summer never an issue.
@@NinjaNoviceI was referring to the UK especially London people are being robbed of Rolex daily
Which watch did you sell for those aligners?
There’s not a huge amount of difference, but there is a difference There’s plenty of great competition, Zenith, grand Seiko fans can claim they are better but they are slightly different.
Naturally, from a collector's point of view (most of us I reckon) it's not a question of one or the other, particullarly when it comes to vintage ones. A 1990 Tudor Sub is presently faaaar more expensive than many Rolex equivalents. Let alone the gold & steel day dates, for instance.
As a watch enthusiast who doesn't prioritize image I buy what I like, and therefore own multiple Rolex and multiple Tudors. I tend to go for the types of Tudors that Rolex doesn't make, such as the Pelagos FXD, BB Ceramic and BB Bronze. Otherwise if there are two similar watches such as the Tudor Pro and Explorer 2, I'll buy the Rolex simply because it's a better looking and higher quality watch.
I dont even have to watch to say the Black Bay smokes the Sub from a dollar/ value perspective. its every bit as good of a watch, looks better (imo) and costs so much less. Just doesnt carry the prestige is.
Forgetting price, there isnt a single Rolex I'd personally choose over a BB54 - from a design/wearability perspective.
As someone who's owned one for about 8 months now, I completely agree. I don't really even look at dive watches anymore, thanks to grabbing this one (though there may still be room for a Doxa in my collection, I feel like it's different enough)
I have nothing against either brand. But neither really does anything for me.
Expensive watches in stainless steel has never been a draw to me. For Rolex, their cheapest watches in SS don't feel like the rest of the brand. The Rolex catalog is filled with beautiful watches. If I wanted a plain SS (which I do not), the Tudor would be a good draw.
is it illegal as a swiss to buy a german or japanese watch?
I just wanted a) a watch I find aesthetically pleasing that b) I could afford. The BB58 fits both criteria. Submariners don't fit either of them.
On the other hand, I like the look of the Oyster Perpetual more than the BB39/41/etc. (but still can't afford one).
The thing you forgot to mention is the new Tudor Black Bay is now METAS certified, which in theory means the movement is better than the Rolex Submariner
Tudor gets you reasonable value for money watches with links from the Rolex’ past. Rolex gets you the execution perfection and design innovation you’ll never find in a Tudor. Rolex will never make a re-edition of itself, that is what Tudor is for. I own watches from both brands, my 2 pences
I almost got a BB54 when it came out but I have an Explorer and felt it was a brand level down so didn’t purchase in the end. Personally I wouldn’t buy one, I’m not a huge fan of the hour hand on Tudor but the quality is good for the price
For Value, my pick is Tudor. For prestige, it’s gonna be Vacheron Constantin
yes if you want a Sub or GMT-Master II then you can functionally cross-shop a BB58 or Pelagos or BB Pro. But the Glamour, Royal, 1926 are simply not comparable analogues for an OP, DJ, or DD, which is a huge proportion of Rolex's catalog and some of their most iconic watches and top sellers
For my taste/lifestyle, I identify more with the Tudor Pelagos FXD in black, than a Sub. I will wear the Pelagos more places, more often. It is a true tool watch. The Sub, is obviously beautiful, but it is too much of a fashion/status statement.
Same, sold my sub but kept my Pelagos.
Tudor is actually very competitively priced vs not just Rolex but the industry in general. Apart from 3 Tudor models, the most expensive Tudor is cheaper than the cheapest Rolex. Why is this ? What is it about the mechanicals, materials that make Tudor so much cheaper than the equivalent Rolex, IWC, Omega, Breitling etc. Is it just that Tudor is using older technology or are we all being hoodwinked that these other brands, with Rolex being the worst culprit, are ACTUALLY much cheaper to manufacture than we're led to believe or that the margins are way too high because we "collecting idiots" believe we're acquiring something distinctive and luxurious. Watches and diamonds share a common myth of being desirably common !!!
The Longines Spirit Zulu Time x Hodinkee watch is better than the Tudor Black Bay GMT.
This is not an appropriate comparison. These are two separate brands serving different purposes. Might as well be Omega/Jaeger or Rolex/IWC or VC/Casio or Breitling/Tudor. Rolex still enjoys the brand recognition / hype and from what I've learnt that's where it stops. Mechanically, its no different. We make too much of this. No one that spends 1000's of $$$ on watches buy it for it's functionality, tell the time or go diving with it. It's a statement piece, period.
I have the Tudor BB GMT S&G rootbeer & I can easily afford a Rolex but I'm not waiting on a list for years or buying a used example for a couple of thousand more than frikkin Rolex charge for one. I've spent around £59k in the last few months on 6 (3 in the winter sales) watches including the aforementioned GMT-Master II wannabe...which I absolutely love btw.
You can’t afford a Rolex then
Whats a better analogy Audi vs VW, or Porsche vs VW?
Audi vs VW, they are closer.
If Tudor were not made by Rolex no one would give a damn...but since it is by Rolex-and actually available- it has a mostly Rolex cache so sells well.
Tudor isn’t made by Rolex it’s a separate company, like VW & Audi.
I have both a Tudor Black Bay 41 Heritage and a Rolex submariner no date. There is no comparison. The Rolex is perfection. The Tudor is nice, but nothing like the Rolex.
I love my blue Tudor Pelagos. I prefer the look of it compared to any submariner. It's the perfect summer watch
Sorry a submariner is a submariner there is no comparison! No matter what you say, deep down Rolex is Rolex and Tudor is Tudor! The whole world, even those who don't know anything about watches, know what a Rolex watch is, no one outside the community knows what a tudor is!
@@MrDukeOmega I don't care who knows the brand. I got a VC which isn't as popular as Rolex but I love it. Is it better than Rolex? Yes, a lot better watch
Something wrong with the soundtrack?
There are levels to watch collecting and each person should do it responsibly. There really is no definitive answer because a collection could have both as well as other brands. The one watch person just buy what you like.
It's all a bit Porsche Boxster syndrome, isn't it! Both are comfortably out of my budget, unless I sell my 1 watch collection Omega Tokyo Olympics Moon Watch and sell my car, I'm confined watching you two settle these chronograph battles! David Beckham wearing Tudor gave the brand a certain je ne sais quoi. If I'm offered either for free, I'm not going to do that gift horse mouth thingy, both look splendid.
I bought an Explorer - in spite of it being a Rolex - because I liked the dial. Sold the Explorer this year and bought a Ranger, much more of a real tool watch. I also had a 5 digit Explorer II for a while but hated the cyclops and poor lum; much prefer the BB pro.
Rolex makes fine watches, and so does Tudor.
Yes.
Is the 50th or 60th video you've done about this? I've lost count...
Own a Rolex Explorer & Tudor Black Bay 39 Anthracite.... Both have their time on my wrist, but the Tudor is the more handsome and daily wear. Also have Cartier, Omega & JLC. Different days, different wears.
Tudor is not a better buy because it's an inferior watch. They also tank on the secondary market. I've tried on many Tudor's and they feel cheap in comparison to my Rolex's and Omega. They are average watches and nothing more. I highly doubt anyone would care about them if they weren't linked with Rolex. I'm sure many will argue with that but deep down you know it's true.
Straight out of Rolex fanboy 101.
@@mijnbuisje I like lots of brands but Tudor is not a better buy than Rolex or a better watch
I have the BB58 with the black dial and the only watch i would trade it for is the Omega seamaster 300, never really liked Rolex
I've got a Ranger, and an Explorer 40, and they are both great watches; brothers, cousins, whatever. The bracelet on the Ranger blows the Explorer bracelet into the weeds with the T-Fit micro adjust compared with the Explorer fold out link which, on my wrist, is either too tight, or too loose for my liking.
In terms of the styling, the Explorer wins of by a whisker, but ask me tomorrow which I prefer and I might have changed my mind.
However, the big thing that puts me off most of Tudor's lineup is what you, Andrew, were waxing so lirically about, that "snowflake" hour hand which looks to me like a miniature Lego block has fallen into the watch when it was being assembled.
Tetris even. I hate it.
I have a 2021. Pelagos LHD, bought a Blvgari octo Roma, then 12 days ago got a Rolex dj41 Wimbledon, fluted with a jubilee at rrp from my Ad, all bought from Ad’s (not same AD’s)am I happy yes of course I am I have things I liked
If you want a watch made by a watchmaker that’s not mass produced then look elsewhere
I stayed with grand Seiko spring drive.
No point comparing. If you must have the Rolex brand on your wrist then nothing else will do. Both brands do the same job but if you're going to follow that argument you might as well buy a Steeldive SD1953 for £50 and spend the other 'thousands' on something far more useful instead...
YES!!!!
here's what amazes me, both are COSC certified, in other words mechanical watches don't get any more accurate, and both are for all practical purposes "in house" built. a Tudor BB 58 in blue - pros - no date (no one needs a date, and the rolex "bug eye" lens is totally obnoxious), Rolex submariner 16613 in blue - pros - two tone (gold and stainless). If I could get the Tudor with a gold crown, bezel ring and a two tone bracelet that would be the ticket 🙂!!!
I like both,but the rolex is realy more expensive and yoj will be in waitlist for month,tudor could be buy quickly,its a big diference
Ask anyone to name a luxury watch brand, and they will say Rolex. They are masters of marketing, and yes they make good watches. I have one Rolex and five Tudors, the reason I don’t have three Rolex watches and no Tudors is Rolex is just a bit boring. Tudor make more interesting watches. I have a Titanium Pelagos, carbon FXD among others, Rolex makes steel watches or precious metals, but have not come out with anything new for years.
I have both Tudor (very solid first METAS watch by the brand, which is Black Bay Ceramic + the new BB54) and some Rolex watches and I’m pretty confident to say “Tudor is not better than Rolex in any aspect” apart from the price point! For the price you pay for Tudor, yes you get the best watch on the market, even comparing to any Omega (i do also have some Omega’s) or to other brands! But Rolex sits on the different level by far and superior to all other watch brands in most categories! Selling numbers and interest around the globe tells you the truth, even if you think people are fool or so… Rolex has the crown for the well deserved reason and it doesn’t seem to be changing soon or later! Cheers
I used to have a Tudor but I feel that the quality wasn’t as good as it should have been
I think the Rolex is like the Rolls Royce and Tudor is the Bentley from the eighties. But both are expensive. F1 engines from the sixties, Ford Cosworth . That’s your ETA movement in your Tudor. The Ferrari in house engine, that’s your Rolex. Both very successful engines. Myself, I am more of a Jim Clark guy in a Lotus Cosworth 😊
I love both but I guess resale keeps me from buying more Tudor's. Tudor will lose more value quicker. A few of my no-date subs that I paid $2800 new are now worth over $10000. Let it be known that I like to flip watches but have always kept my Rolexes.
Realistically Rolex will always be regarded as the number one brand for Swiss watches. Quality and Reputation are going to influence a lot of buyers.tudor is really good,. I personally own one of their watches and I think the quality is definitely up there.
Realistically Patek Philippe, Varheron, Jacob & Co. Aare
@@MultiTrumpetmanjacob watches are for cocaine dealers and other kind of people who usually die in shootouts, wearing ugly clothes on.
So true .. yearsss ago you could go buy a Submariner (very good condition) for bout $4K. If only that were true today ! Imo feel they probably cost maybe $6-8K (true value) not $12-$15K worth. Rather be noticed for my smile or personality than what I wear on my wrist .. Omega SMP LoL
Tudor would be my choice for a couple reason. One, less attractive to theft and two, METAS certified. But like you kinda said, Rolex is the trope of success.
I can afford either but but I prefer Tudor designs to Rolex designs, and I would feel self conscious wearing a Rolex as it is so recognizable and blingy.
Value for money, and quality, i can't go past my three Tudors 👍 Au
Because of the profile builders who need to spend money in ADs in order to get their Rolex, AP, PP allocations...they are dumped at 40-50% discount brand new or almost brand new.. Yes, Tudor is real value for money!
alright dude, you got 1.13 million subscribers. I think we gotta move on from the imac built in camera quality
I guess Tudor continues to do what the founder intended in the beginning. Personal preference? Totally! And in my humble experience, Tudor makes me smile. Rolex makes me puke, when I think of how in the recent years, the human angle was neglected. Some say the AD's created the mistreatment (AD butt kissing list). I say Rolex should care for how the brand is perceived. I have owned a Rolex Datejust a while ago and sold it because it's become a safequeen. I also had a Speedmaster reduced. Sold it and will buy again or will die of regret. Great video guys.
It amazes me that we usually hate or just won’t buy something from a company if they have shit customer service or treat prospective customers poorly but with Rolex people ignore this. Rolex is a status symbol and as such speaks volumes of the people who buy them.
General public buy a Rolex to flex, it makes them feel good because they can flex
I don’t need to flex and will not entertain ever buying one from a company who who treats potential customers so poorly.
There are far better watches and brands especially if you take away the status symbol so just like I don’t want a Ferrari I don’t want a Rolex
Also I have noticed a lot of Rolex owners have no clue about the watch they have but speak to a non watch enthusiast about their Grand Seiko or other higher end brands they usually understand their watch a lot more
My buddy has all kinds of 5 figure watches and he still likes Tudor
Got a Tudor black bay S&G and a Rolex GMT rootbeer and in my opinion I actually prefer the Tudor. Yes Tudor is not Rolex and I just don’t care, honestly I can happily wear my Tudor and not worry about being mugged when out with my family. It just does not draw as much attention so I enjoy it more. I also think it’s miles better value in my opinion. As such I won’t be buying another Rolex and will be buying another Tudor.
Tudor makes the watches that remind me of the ones that made me fall for Rolex watches. The kind of Rolex that Rolex won't build anymore. Sure, a BB58 is no 5513... but it's a heck of a lot closer to a 5513 than a big-ol shiny ceramic sub is.
Tudor is a watch brand. Rolex has become a jewellery brand. Either way I'm like both brands and feel fortunate to have one of each.
Two separate offerings for 2 different targets. Do not want the Rolex (had a chance to buy a steel DJ) and went with BB58. I’m relatively young and Rolex seems like too much flex for now. I like the understatement of Tudor, nobody knows this brand, makes me feel safe with it. My next purchase will be Speedy, but plan to get an Explorer in some years. I also do not like the statement that Tudor is a poor man’s watch - come on, how can the entry luxury product be stated like that. We also can say that Rolex is a poor man’s AP😅 There is always a bigger fish.
I just wish Tudor did the Pelagos in steel and not titanium.
I could afford to buy either, but will likely purchase neither. I have better uses for that much cash than to wear it on my wrist (although I have zero issues with those who might want to). So many interesting and well crafted watches are priced below Tudor. Also, I've yet to see more than a few R or T designs that make me desire one, even independent of the price.
Rolex watches are clearly more attractive than Tudor watches to the majority of people who can afford both. Tudor's matt dial and snow flake hour hand ,doesn't do for me at all.
I think Longines watches are the next best if you can't afford a Rolex.
We need to get back to real life.Most people will not spend or can afford a tudor let alone a Rolex. I am a collector so for me it's not about name. A tudor is a tudor and a Rolex is a Rolex period. They are two totally different watches. If you can get any of them I would say you are in good standing. Good content as usual guys.
I just bought a new BB58 and it's every bit as fine as my Rolexes.
Is it better than Rolex? I dont think so. But now that Tudor is making Master Chronometers that operate at a 4hz beat rate, I'd say they've definitely one upped Omega in the movement department at least. Though Omega has them beat on finishing when it comes to steel.
My understanding is Omega’s beat rate is due to the coaxial escapement which was one of the biggest innovations in modern mass produced watch making - in terms of innovation Tudor doesn’t touch this… I do agree though, 4hz is nice and my Tudor gmt is still a sweet movement.
Agee Omega has to improve again though, with Tudor beginning to introduce metas, but is some time away from introducing it to the whole range like omega
@@jimmy7494How exactly is this movement innovative when other, closer to conventional designs, can now reach the same accuracy at a higher beat rate with a longer power reserve?