Quote:
Originally Posted by NKflyer
Yeah, I actually had my bezel pop off so I got to see the inner workings first hand. Had to send to RSC New York to have it repaired and this was well before Tudor came to the USA. They were like "what the heck is this thing"  . |
OK, that confirms it then. Thanks for the info NKflyer.
In my opinion the TBB has two weak points as a serious diving instrument, that the older Tudor Sub did not have.
The new bezel design, if it is like the new Rolex ceramics, relies on glue to hold the insert in place. The older design of the aluminium bezel that snaps in place and is held put by elastic tension is pure genius. It’s been in use for 60 years, how many old Subs have you seen with a missing insert ? People tends to worry about cracking the new ceramic bezels, I would be more worried about them becoming unglued.
The function-less (hence unnecessary) cosmetic colour ring. Like I mentioned before, due to the crown/tube design, there is a very small gap between the aluminium colour collar and the crown when the last is screwed down. This creates a spot where sea water will accumulate and will be difficult to rinse after a dive. I had problems with said ring, it got corroded after just two diving holidays an was replaced under warranty. If I could have it my way I would loose the ring completely or replace it with a stainless steel one. But even this problem is just cosmetic. The crown and tube are still perfectly safe and functional even if the colour collar completely rots to dust.
So that’s still pretty good for a serious diver's watch. Others are doing much worse in my book (don’t even get me started on Omega’s He valve…)
