# Tudor or Rolex?



## SBryantgb (Jul 2, 2015)

Is a Black Bay any less of a quality than a basic black on black Submariner? And if so where is the quality difference. Is the man who buys a Black Bay getting the better deal (and an extra holiday that year), or is his watch just a pale imitation?


----------



## ong (Jul 31, 2008)

Personally I don't think there's a major quality difference. Tudor have been called both the poor man's and the thinking man's Rolex for reasons of cost mainly. My Grandma had a ladies Tudor that we called Grannies Rolex when we were kids. Each to their own. I prefer the Sub to the Black Bay but also not keen on the latest extra large Sub models. Interested to hear others views.


----------



## artistmike (May 13, 2006)

The real comparison comes when you look at the movements, where there is a real difference in quality. There was a time until quite recently that the cases were the same and Tudor just installed ETA movements inside.. To be honest I'm not sure that a lot has changed other than Tudor's dial designers seem to be doing a great job of making theirs look different these days... ....


----------



## RWP (Nov 8, 2015)

No problem.....not a choice I am likely to face any time soon Steve :sadwalk:


----------



## SBryantgb (Jul 2, 2015)

Me either, but its a question I have pondered on since the BB is possibly within reach.

So is the Tudor ETA produced by Tudor/Rolex or a third party item?


----------



## it'salivejim (Jan 19, 2013)

Completely different watches with different movements so apples and pears really.


----------



## Nigelp (Jan 28, 2015)

Got to agree with jim again I can't see a correlation these days between the two its a bit like comparing Rolls Royce and Bentley, in the old days it was just badge engineering now they are worlds apart with a different market focus. I think Rolex have kept the same direction but Tudor have sought out to be trendy, bit like Bentley really


----------



## rhino2k (Oct 17, 2014)

I think you already know the answer to this question deep down :biggrin:

I would only look to Omega if a Rolex was not in budget. That's just me though, I do like a nice SMP/Speedy :laugh:


----------



## Mart (Sep 2, 2010)

Tudors make better monarchs.


----------



## Muddy D (Nov 16, 2013)

Purely in terms of aesthetics, it would be Tudor all day for me. I think the Black Bay looks so classy. I'm not a Rolex hater by any means, I also love GMT iis and have owned one previously though I think Tudor is a less ostentatious display of wealth, likely to only really get noticed by a real watch connoisseur. I'd be happy wearing either, they're great makes.


----------



## andyclient (Aug 1, 2009)

As already said its mainly down to the movement, which to answer one of the questions above are bought in from eta but I believe they do modify them in their factory whereas the Rolex is an in house movement made by Rolex . All down to choice really but a Tudor will never be a Rolex despite most sellers , auction houses etc calling them a Tudor Rolex to increase the interest/ value


----------



## Padders (Oct 21, 2008)

it'salivejim said:


> Completely different watches with different movements so apples and pears really.


 You think? The new in house movement which is slowly being rolled out across the range is basically a cheaper to produce version of Rolex's latest offering. They look very similar and share similar stats inc 70 hour power reserve. When ETA movements were being used your point was valid but now they use a Rolex-lite heart I think it is more like Waitrose apples vs Aldi apples. Pretty much the same product, marketed differently.

Look at the Pelagos, it eats the Submariners lunch at half the price.

Ironically it seems Rolex have always used Tudor as a way of competing on price directly with Omega. A few years ago Omega decided that they would compete instead with Rolex by upping their prices across the board by around 50-100%. That now leaves Tudor looking cheap, priced at Longines levels, probably not for long.


----------



## it'salivejim (Jan 19, 2013)

Padders said:


> You think? The new in house movement which is slowly being rolled out across the range is basically a cheaper to produce version of Rolex's latest offering. They look very similar and share similar stats inc 70 hour power reserve. When ETA movements were being used your point was valid but now they use a Rolex-lite heart I think it is more like Waitrose apples vs Aldi apples. Pretty much the same product, marketed differently.
> 
> Look at the Pelagos, it eats the Submariners lunch at half the price.
> 
> Ironically it seems Rolex have always used Tudor as a way of competing on price directly with Omega. A few years ago Omega decided that they would compete instead with Rolex by upping their prices across the board by around 50-100%. That now leaves Tudor looking cheap, priced at Longines levels, probably not for long.


 Until they start inserting the Tudor MT5612 movement in the Black Bay (and I've seen no news to suggest they are), my argument still stands. It could still stand when comparing the Pelagos to the Sub. Both great watches, doing a similar job, but aesthetically miles apart.

The new MT5612 is largely unproven, while the good ol' 3135 or 3130 is a tried and tested workhorse.

I'm a big fan of Tudor, and it's good to see it breaking out from its big brother's shadow, but in regard to the original question over Black Bay and Submariner, it's still whether you prefer apples or pears


----------



## Padders (Oct 21, 2008)

It is the new Rolex 3255 that the Tudor MT5612 bears an uncanny resemblance to and that too is unproven so I am not sure your point works!


----------



## chocko (Nov 9, 2008)

I think the general perception ( not a watch aficionado) is Tudor is the poor mans version of the Rolex.


----------



## andyclient (Aug 1, 2009)

chocko said:


> I think the general perception ( not a watch aficionado) is Tudor is the poor mans version of the Rolex.


 A bit like my mother in law telling me her Skoda is a Volkswagen


----------



## nirrad (Feb 5, 2016)

For me, a Submariner/GMT look is a Rolex and Rolex is a submariner/GMT look, just as a Big Bang/Fusion is a Hublot (porthole in English) look and a Hublot (porthole) look is a Big Bang/Fusion. Anything that resembles either of these 2 classic creations and goes by a different name will never be on my radar.

If I wanted a Tudor I would be looking for model with unique features and/or functions that would distinguish it from other brands. I would start with this one I guess : http://www.tudorwatch.com/en/north-flag/


----------



## joolz (Jan 9, 2004)

Some of us like different










Show us your Tudors


----------



## andyclient (Aug 1, 2009)

joolz said:


> Some of us like different
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Close but


----------



## richy176 (Aug 7, 2013)

SBryantgb said:


> Is a Black Bay any less of a quality than a basic black on black Submariner? And if so where is the quality difference. Is the man who buys a Black Bay getting the better deal (and an extra holiday that year), or is his watch just a pale imitation?


 Trying to justify price difference just on quality can be very subjective. Rolex spends far more than Tudor to establish and maintain their brand image. Tudor is aimed at a lower market price point.

Does the Tudor buyer get a better deal? Maybe initially but do they hold their value as well as Rolex?


----------



## deepreddave (Jan 28, 2011)

I've always thought of a Tudor as 85% of the watch that a Rolex is at 50% of the cost, more fashionable but with reduced appreciation in future years. If that makes sense. I'd rather wear a Tudor but my asset balance would be more protected if I owned a Rolex.


----------



## SBryantgb (Jul 2, 2015)

So the bottom line is that a Tudor is of less quality than the afore mentioned Sub because it relies not on an in house movement, but an off the shelf (although modified) ETA.


----------



## Padders (Oct 21, 2008)

SBryantgb said:


> So the bottom line is that a Tudor is of less quality than the afore mentioned Sub because it relies not on an in house movement, but an off the shelf (although modified) ETA.


 But the Pelagos and North Flag do, so how does that fit into your philosophy?

I would be very surprised if the Black Bay didn't get the in house movement within the next 12 months.


----------



## SBryantgb (Jul 2, 2015)

Padders said:


> But the Pelagos and North Flag do, so how does that fit into your philosophy?
> 
> I would be very surprised if the Black Bay didn't get the in house movement within the next 12 months.


 I have no philosophy I seek only enlightenment :yes:


----------



## it'salivejim (Jan 19, 2013)

Padders said:


> It is the new Rolex 3255 that the Tudor MT5612 bears an uncanny resemblance to and that too is unproven so I am not sure your point works!


 You keep shifting the argument away from the original question.

The new Rolex 3255 is not in the current Submariner, and the Tudor MT5612 is not fitted to the Black Bay, so comparing a current Rolex Sub with 3130 movement with a current Tudor Black Bay with ETA is like comparing apples and pears.

You can come up with however many future hypotheticals you like, but in the real world, as it stands at this moment in time - apples and pears.

And to the OP, Tudor watches are superb, as are Rolex, no less or greater quality, just different.


----------



## RTM Boy (Jun 1, 2011)

It's really very simple. Different brands built to different specs for different price points to give Rolex (as a group) a wider reach across the market (to take Jim's metaphor further; like greengrocer offering a whole range of different fruit - all good - all prefectly edible). :thumbsup:

As the Victorian cartoon in Punch said; "You pays your money and you takes your choice." :yes:


----------



## SBryantgb (Jul 2, 2015)

it'salivejim said:


> And to the OP, Tudor watches are superb, as are Rolex, no less or greater quality, just different.


 That's what I was looking for :thumbsup: The quality is equal. it is just arrived at via different means.


----------



## Padders (Oct 21, 2008)

it'salivejim said:


> You keep shifting the argument away from the original question.
> 
> The new Rolex 3255 is not in the current Submariner, and the Tudor MT5612 is not fitted to the Black Bay, so comparing a current Rolex Sub with 3130 movement with a current Tudor Black Bay with ETA is like comparing apples and pears.
> 
> ...


 Fair point.


----------

