Jump to content
  • Sign Up to reply and join the friendliest Watch Forum on the web. Stick around, get to 50 posts and gain access to your full profile and additional features such as a personal messaging system, chat room and the sales forum PLUS the chance to enter our regular giveaways.

Tudor bb58 blue or seamaster blue??!!


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 45
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

If you want a Rolex Sub .... then why not just save for one and in the meantime wear a Seiko.... The new Omegas are superior watches to the Rolex Submariner. The movement is superior , the bracelet is

Interesting, because I have both. The power reserve doesn't concern me. The one with the eta movement is the most accurate watch I own, possibly luck, the COSC movement runs +2 seconds/24 hours. I had

Oooh  --  a bit of light touch moderation  --  I like it Sir.   As someone who is pretty unimpressed with "divers" of all sorts (and who would definitely take off a DSSD before washing up),

11 minutes ago, Col81 said:

I can still get this watch at list £2840 what do people think future values will be like? I believe they are over 10000 made now. Is it a good investment?

There's about 60 for sale on Chrono24 at around £4000 - so on the face of it £2840 doesn't seem too bad - I never buy a watch as an investment but Tudor do seem to hold there value reasonably well and if it is true they only produced 10,000 its not many in the great scheme of things

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/07/2020 at 20:43, JonnyOldBoy said:

If you want a Rolex Sub .... then why not just save for one and in the meantime wear a Seiko.... The new Omegas are superior watches to the Rolex Submariner. The movement is superior , the bracelet is superior , the case is more sculpted.... Its completely illogical to me to spend £3300 on a very nice watch ,,, only in a couple of years to upgrade to an inferior, overpriced watch !?!?

Sorry, buts its just daft to me.... Buy the Seamster and enjoy it , they are awesome watches..... The Sub is for old duffers .... [ hides ]

Slightly late to reply but i have to take issue with one thing. Omegas bracelets are absolutely nowhere near current Rolex bracelets. In fact they are garbage in comparison.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Slightly late to reply but i have to take issue with one thing. Omegas bracelets are absolutely nowhere near current Rolex bracelets. In fact they are garbage in comparison.

Generalising like that just goes to show how little you know of each manufacturer. Do you even have any current models from each manufacturer?

Depending on the model, each manufacturer has micro adjustments on the bracelets.

I’m not sure which came first out of the SM300 (need to check on that exact model) or DSSD for micro adjustments but they’re pretty much on par with each other. The SD4000 has glide-lock but it’s not the same as that on the DSSD and requires you to remove the watch from your wrist. DaytonaC doesn’t have glide-lock, only a hinge that lets you extend the bracelet by a preset amount.

I actually changed the clasp on my PO9300 to that from the SM300 for the micro adjustment. It came as standard on my PloProf though.
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, WRENCH said:

Really ? Yet many forum members own both.

Well, this is why I pointed "to me".

And that was the reason when I bought the BB burgundy long time ago.Because I didn`t want to spend money on Rolex and I convinced myself it was basically the same.

Funnily, I had it longer than the Explorer 16570.  I flipped both.

I also bought Tudor 79280 because of the Daytona look ,but again didn`t work for me. Also gone.

This is just me.

Cheers.

Dimi

Link to post
Share on other sites
Really ? Yet many forum members own both.

Many? Not many on here own a Rolex and out of that not many own a Tudor too.

Even on the Rolex forum there isn’t a large percentage that own a Tudor and there’s some crazy collectors on there.

It’s a nice brand and I do love some of their watches but I’d always feel as though I should have worked harder and got a high end Omega or an equivalent Rolex. At the price point (after discount) they are very good quality and well made and I’ll give the brand credit for that.

Came close many times on buying the titanium Pelagos in blue but there was always something else more interesting that would catch my eye.
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Igerswis said:


Generalising like that just goes to show how little you know of each manufacturer. Do you even have any current models from each manufacturer?

Depending on the model, each manufacturer has micro adjustments on the bracelets.

I’m not sure which came first out of the SM300 (need to check on that exact model) or DSSD for micro adjustments but they’re pretty much on par with each other. The SD4000 has glide-lock but it’s not the same as that on the DSSD and requires you to remove the watch from your wrist. DaytonaC doesn’t have glide-lock, only a hinge that lets you extend the bracelet by a preset amount.

I actually changed the clasp on my PO9300 to that from the SM300 for the micro adjustment. It came as standard on my PloProf though.

For what its worth i have 4 'current Rolexes' and a 'current' Omega!

my ceramic non-date sub has a glidelock clasp as does my DeaDweller43mm.

my point really is not the clasps but the overall quality of machining on the bracelets (and the watchheads) and here Rolex eclipses Omega, movements are of course another story entirely.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't got the latest Rolexes, but historically Rolex bracelets have been poo even if technically superior. 

I mean screws are superior to pins technically (more expensive to manufacture) but the Omega bracelets always felt better and were less prone to stretch, less rattles etc. 

Seamaster clasps are famously easy to scratch... Or they were in early Bond models. 

Rolex have upped their game no doubt but that they were historically so awful in this regard is shameful and no doubt the reputation will take time to cat h up to the modern reality. 

 

I was going to speculate on value retention... And it is speculation - I might be completely wrong.... 

Rolex has set this example of not letting people buy their watches, creating false scarcity which it seems other brands are jumping on board with... Patek Nautilus for example in steel is unobtainable and so this pushes up the value of the Aquanaut which was relatively unloved prior to the situation.  AP too is going to go the same way... Withdrawing AD statuses and making it harder to buy. 

This is all very well with brands that produce few watches, or with the massive demand like Rolex (even  igger than the huge number of watches they produce) but it is certainly not the business model of Tudor.   Generally I believe you can walk in and buy these watches (correct me if I am wrong) and they produce a huge number of watches.   Long term I think therefore their prices are never going to be huge.   Probably similar to an Omega Seamaster which seem to just track against inflation after the initial depreciation. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
For what its worth i have 4 'current Rolexes' and a 'current' Omega!
my ceramic non-date sub has a glidelock clasp as does my DeaDweller43mm.
my point really is not the clasps but the overall quality of machining on the bracelets (and the watchheads) and here Rolex eclipses Omega, movements are of course another story entirely.


Then your either a troll or your talking out your a**.

I have three of each brand on a bracelet and I’d say it’s a level playing field between the current models. Use a loupe and you’d find bigger differences but to the naked eye and in the palm of your hand it’s a marginal difference if that.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Igerswis said:

 


Then your either a troll or your talking out your a**.

I have three of each brand on a bracelet and I’d say it’s a level playing field between the current models. Use a loupe and you’d find bigger differences but to the naked eye and in the palm of your hand it’s a marginal difference if that.

 

I beg your pardon?

I am certainly not a troll and nor am i talking out of my nether region!

It's nowhere near a level playing field and if you think that you are deluding yourself.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Igerswis said:

Then your either a troll or your talking out your a**.

 

2 hours ago, davidif said:

I beg your pardon?

I am certainly not a troll and nor am i talking out of my nether region!

It's nowhere near a level playing field and if you think that you are deluding yourself.

Can we keep this friendly please. :yes:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, WRENCH said:

Can we keep this friendly please. :yes:

Oooh  --  a bit of light touch moderation  --  I like it Sir.

 

As someone who is pretty unimpressed with "divers" of all sorts (and who would definitely take off a DSSD before washing up), I will keep my comments here fairly general.

Firstly, if you ( @Col81 ) really want a Rolex Submariner (and I'm afraid I'm in the "god knows why!" camp)  --  then the sensible thing to do is to save for one. Buying anything else with a plan to flip it later is likely to leave you dissatisfied and fretful  --  it will always remind you that it is (in your view) second best, and you might be chary of wearing it because you want to preserve it pristine for resale. Whoever recommended getting a Seiko until you can afford the Sub was talking a lot of sense.

Secondly, whilst I don't rate "divers", I have a son (whose work is in sailing and water-sports safety) who most certainly does. He owns both an SM and a (post-ETA) BB (though not the specific models you mention) and his view is: "SM is more robust  --  if he thinks he might ding the watch, or get it wet, he'll wear the SM  --  but he prefers the look and feel of the BB on the wrist". It's worth saying though that, when he dives he wears a Suunto (or sometimes two)  --  never an expensive mechanical watch.

Thirdly, were I to want another diver, I would definitely choose the SeaQ or FF Bathyscaphe over a Sub. Beautiful, very well made, not nearly as ubiquitous, and no silly marketing driven waiting lists  --  and, in the case of the FF just as much "heritage". . . . . . . . . . . . But then again, personally I'd also take the SM over the Sub.

Fourthly, ETA really knows how to make mechanical movements  --  they do, after all, turn out a few each year. So, it's not at all surprising that they are at least as accurate as the average in-house movement. In general they are robust, reliable and easy to service. Unfortunately, they are also common, boring, and not very pretty.

HTH

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Alpha550t said:

Any chance of a list of initial/acronym meanings?   

Can't believe you are referring to my post  --  but, for good form:

SM  --  Omega Sea Master

BB  --  Tudor Black Bay

DSSD  --  Rolex Deepsea Sea Dweller (yes, I know, two "seas"  --  but it's "superlative" don't you know).

ETA  --  ETA SA Manufacture Horlogère Suisse (Swatch Group movement manufacturer  --  previously used by Tudor in the BB)

SeaQ  --  Glashütte Original (GO) SeaQ

FF  --  Blancpain Fifty Fathoms

:tongue:

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, yokel said:

Can't believe you are referring to my post  --  but, for good form:

SM  --  Omega Sea Master

BB  --  Tudor Black Bay

DSSD  --  Rolex Deepsea Sea Dweller (yes, I know, two "seas"  --  but it's "superlative" don't you know).

ETA  --  ETA SA Manufacture Horlogère Suisse (Swatch Group movement manufacturer  --  previously used by Tudor in the BB)

SeaQ  --  Glashütte Original (GO) SeaQ

FF  --  Blancpain Fifty Fathoms

:tongue:

FFS - For ****s Sake .... you missed that one off the list .... ;-) 

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...