Thoughts on the Tudor Heritage Ranger?

[Andrejb]

What’s everyone’s thoughts on the Tudor Ranger? I’ve owned one before and loved it. I’d like to hear everyone else’s thoughts on how it stacks up with the rest of the heritage line? I don’t hear much about it




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[eric90]

I also had one, really nice watch although I felt it wore a little large.. the dial just seemed to have a lot of space. Due for an upgrade at Basel and would love to see it in a smaller case (ie. Black Bay 36) and in-house movement

[Andrejb]

Originally Posted by eric90

I also had one, really nice watch although I felt it wore a little large.. the dial just seemed to have a lot of space. Due for an upgrade at Basel and would love to see it in a smaller case (ie. Black Bay 36) and in-house movement

For sure. Even 38-39mm would be fantastic. A change of case shape would be great as well. More similar to the black bay 36/41 or explorer


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[maylebox]

I loved the one I had but when I bought my 214270 MKII I found myself wearing the Ranger much less often so I sold it. I could see it back in my collection someday.

[Dr Watches]

Nicely priced, good looking, but too large (for me) for what it is. An all dial watch of that size is large. The lack of fitted endlinks on the bracelet is a huge negative as well.

[Old Expat Beast]

I’ve had mine for almost five years and still like it more than the Explorer (which I sold) as a field watch. Why? More space between springbars and case, plus lug holes, makes it easier to improvise/change straps in a hurry. It’s rated 50m deeper than the Explorer, a flat back makes it very comfortable, the blacked-out rehaut with 99% brushed steel removes all the bling, and the big dial makes it easy to read in low light. And the protruding winding crown, which people often criticise, makes it easy to wind and set on a bund strap.

I actually like the bracelet with non-fitted end links, which is a nod to the 1950s Tudor Prince line and a nice change from the uniform fitted endlinks used across the Rolex and Tudor range right now. Red seconds hand and domed crystal are also nice throwbacks. I also kind of like that Rolex registered the name Ranger in 1929, almost a quarter century before they registered the Explorer name.

[Andrejb]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

I’ve had mine for almost five years and still like it more than the Explorer (which I sold) as a field watch. Why? More space between springbars and case, plus lug holes, makes it easier to improvise/change straps in a hurry. It’s rated 50m deeper than the Explorer, a flat back makes it very comfortable, the blacked-out rehaut with 99% brushed steel removes all the bling, and the big dial makes it easy to read in low light. And the protruding winding crown, which people often criticise, makes it easy to wind and set on a bund strap.



I actually like the bracelet with non-fitted end links, which is a nod to the 1950s Tudor Prince line and a nice change from the uniform fitted endlinks used across the Rolex and Tudor range right now. Red seconds hand and domed crystal are also nice throwbacks. I also kind of like that Rolex registered the name Ranger in 1929, almost a quarter century before they registered the Explorer name.

Agree with all of these opinions. All around great watch! Anything you would change?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by Andrejb

Agree with all of these opinions. All around great watch! Anything you would change?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fatter lugs wouldn't hurt. That's about it. Maybe add "Ranger" on the dial, too.

[jlovda]

A personal Tudor comment. I do not like any of the Tudor current "hands," especially the "snowflake." To me they looked the best in the 80's as a "low cost Rolex" with Mercedes hands in an Oyster case.

[DLRIDES]

Like .......................

Perfect size

Doesn’t have the goofy caveman club hands (snowflake)

Wish they would use an in-house movement

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by jlovda

A personal Tudor comment. I do not like any of the Tudor current "hands," especially the "snowflake." To me they looked the best in the 80's as a "low cost Rolex" with Mercedes hands in an Oyster case.

Snowflake hands may not be pretty but they were designed (in the 1960s) for a purpose - to be more legible underwater. Mercedes hands are just a holdover from 1930s Rolex dress watches.

[Andrejb]

Old photo on the wrist




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mgsooner]

Really love the dial, it’s just too big. At 38 or less it would be towards the top of my list.

[GradyPhilpott]

Tudor's a solid watch company with a solid history that's doing some very interesting things these days, refreshing old designs for the 21st Century.

The addition of in-house chronometer grade movements is a big plus, too.

Like every other thing in the universe, they aren't for everyone, which is a good thing or they'd be as hard to come by as the SS Rolex professional series.

[carlhaluss]

I really like the looks of the watch. A smaller size would appeal to me more, though, although I do enjoy watches of all sizes. Just feel the smaller size would be more appropriate for this model. I think it looks great on a bund strap,too.

Cheers,
Carl

[sickened1]

Love the Ranger (on both bracelet and Nato).

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by Andrejb

Old photo on the wrist




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Looks good on that strap

[cdbeaver66]

I love my Ranger. It’s a vintage watch with a slight modern twist with the red second hand and large dial. If it were to be updated I would like to see it in a smaller case with a date and Ranger in red font!!






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[stefs]

I think its a great watch although maybe a touch large. I had one, ended up selling it and miss it. May well replace in the future
If tudor was to do the same as they did with the black bay and bring out a smaller version (38ish) it would be very hard to walk past one.

[Rocket_Man]

I had one and sold it off. It was one of the first 'nice' watches I bought, probably bought it too quickly. I never got used to the way the bracelet integrated (or didn't) with the case. I thought I'd get used to not having the date, but for a watch I wanted to wear at work, I learned I needed a date. If I still had it I would probably wear it on a NATO and mostly on the weekends. But I don't see buying it again.

[1William]

I have owned the Ranger several times and really like the watch. It has never stuck in my collection as I have a lot of watches and it just does not stand out in comparison to some of the others. I think it would have a better chance in my collection if I only had a few watches.

[bharat]

Love this watch!

[BDL]

Had one, lots of really good but one bad, too large. If they would bring this out in say 38mm it would be darn near perfect.

[Sublovin]

Nice. Reminds you of the Explorer. Would be low on my list of must have Tudor though

[watchwatcher]

I love it. I may round out my Tudor collection with one this year...depending on if anything comes out of interest at Basel this year.