Tudor on same level as omega?

[AK797]

Rolex and Omega play in the same pool but at different ends and the pool is going ever more Olympic.

[peterpl]

Originally Posted by sportsmaven20

IMHO, I believe if Tudor wasn’t so closely connected to Rolex, the love we are seeing in this thread would not be even remotely as strong.

This is 100% true. If Tudor was not related to Rolex at all I would bet there would be a huge amount of customers that wouldn't look at the brand at all.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by peterpl

This is 100% true. If Tudor was not related to Rolex at all I would bet there would be a huge amount of customers that wouldn't look at the brand at all.

And if many would just take off there Rolex blinkered glasses,them perhaps they could start to appreciate all brands of mechanical watches.

[1William]

It has to do with comparing similar offerings. Tudor is a great brand and for the money offers a great deal of value and style. Omega is a great and historical company and at one point was the bench mark above Rolex. Tudor holds it value a lot better than the average Omega but you can get a really great Omega pre-owned and have accessed a watch that was twice the msrp. Go try them on. I would never buy either brand new as the market is full of great condition pre-owned models with almost full warranties for 30-50% off retail.

[uansari1]

Originally Posted by Zackwheat

Unless Omega can give me +/-1 sec per week accuracy that my Tudor GMT gives me, I’m not buying “the co-axial movement is better” argument.

My Omega SMPc, which I traded toward the 16610, was +1 per month. Is that good enough?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[R G]

Originally Posted by padi56

And if many would just take off there Rolex blinkered glasses,them perhaps they could start to appreciate all brands of mechanical watches.

But he’s just said the same thing as you from a different angle.

[Strummer25]

My 2 cents. Having owned 2 x Seamasters and current owner of B.B., it’s Omega every time. My only gripe with them is the brain numbing amount of special editions they release

[Saaci]

One point a lot of people are making in this thread is “I own such and such and it achieves great timing accuracy on a daily basis” in reference to which brand has superior mechanics. I would say that the benefit to omegas implementation of the co-axial escapement is more likely to be with decreased wear to critical parts over a time frame of years to decades. Hard to know how the various MT calibers will age since they are so new. I greatly prefer Tudor’s aesthetics to Omegas though!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Saaci

One point a lot of people are making in this thread is “I own such and such and it achieves great timing accuracy on a daily basis” in reference to which brand has superior mechanics. I would say that the benefit to omegas implementation of the co-axial escapement is more likely to be with decreased wear to critical parts over a time frame of years to decades. Hard to know how the various MT calibers will age since they are so new. I greatly prefer Tudor’s aesthetics to Omegas though!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Today most all mechanical movements with careful regulation could run to today's COSC spec or better.Even any Rolex movement if not regulated correctly could show poor accuracy.And movements from what most would say very low end,like the Chinese made seagull ST19. Movement cost just $60 but when regulated correctly can run well in side the COSC spec even to +-2 seconds a day.

[tudorbaja27]

Originally Posted by padi56

And if many would just take off there Rolex blinkered glasses,them perhaps they could start to appreciate all brands of mechanical watches.

[tudorbaja27]

I chose a Black Bay over a Seamaster. Omega does make terrific watches as well. To each his own

[DoDe]

Originally Posted by AK797

Rolex and Omega play in the same pool but at different ends and the pool is going ever more Olympic.

True

[watchwatcher]

OP raised two separate issues here. One, he's looking for a nice beach watch. I'll be willing to bet either brand could fill that niche pretty easily. Two, is Tudor on the same level as Omega?

I wore the so-called "Bond" blue Omega Seamaster for many years and beat it all to hell at the pool, beach, yard work, you name it. Nowadays, though, my Pelagos is my go-to for that sort of thing. It's lightweight, comfortable, and (I think) looks like a million bucks. Plus it won't break the bank if something happens to it.

Now...both watches are great in their own right and I've enjoyed owning both. As to which one is on what level...I couldn't tell you. And don't care. My advice: go down to the AD and take a look at a few offerings from each and pick the one that you like. I was actually at an AD yesterday that carries both brands and saw several nice watches in both camps.

For whatever reason, though, it seems that the Tudors are the ones making my pulse speed up lately.

[SilverFoxUK]

If you want a sub-£3,000 watch new (after negotiated discount), I think it's a close call between an Omega SMP Moonwatch and the Tudor BB58. The latter is getting so much positivity in reviews, it's hard to ignore. I bought the Omega pre-Basel 2018 and quite like it, however the manual wind and 42mm case are against it for me (I have quite a small wrist). I think I might sell my Moonwatch when I can break even on it. Dealer told me I could within 5 years most likely.

[Peter99]

When I visit the town Mall I almost without fail visit the largest jewellery store where I window gaze the arrays of Breitling, Logines, Omega and Tudor etc.

And for me the Tudor for sure stands out as the most esthetic and pleasing of them all!
The Tudor design is quite different, in that they are unfussy with dials which are uncluttered with this that and the other!

If I had cash to spare outside of my reserves for my next Rolex, I would certainly buy Tudor.

I was window gazing one day and the Shop Manager came out for a chat, as they do and guess what, he was wearing a Tudor!
He quite agreed with me, of course!

[Justinmg]

Originally Posted by padi56

And if many would just take off there Rolex blinkered glasses,them perhaps they could start to appreciate all brands of mechanical watches.

Yep!

[opawlows]

Originally Posted by padi56

Tudor can equal most of the Swiss brands including Rolex,many today just wear the brand and not the watch.

Well said.

[mgsooner]

I've really tried to find an Omega watch I love. The closest I got was the Railmaster before I decided to purchase my 214270. To me, it comes down to aesthetics. First, I just can't do the polished details they include on the vast majority of their watches. Second, sizing. Omega offers very little in the way of alternatives below 40mm.

The fact that the BB58 exists pretty much makes Omega a non-starter for me, at least on this day in 2018.

[samson66]

Omega may be slightly ahead of Tudor based on history and cost, but I personally don't know of a ~$4,000 swiss watch that does it better than Tudor. Given the choice between paying $3K for a Tudor vs $5K for an Omega, I'm going (and have gone) Tudor.

[AK797]

Originally Posted by JacksonStone

I agree with the others: Omega is above Tudor, imo. I think the brand is closer to Rolex in regards to overall quality of workmanship and advances in design and technology, although I'd still give the overall nod to Rolex. The problem I have with Omega is the tendency toward ephemera: they change their designs too frequently and too drastically, with too many stylistic flourishes intended to grab attention, rather than stand the test of time. Also, they put out way too many LEs and variants of their core watches. However, for the designs they nail, they're a great brand.

Nice choice of words.

[eco8gator]

Omega is a standalone iconic brand. Tudor will always be in Rolex shadow though they do make some nice homage watches. IMHO the last cool watch Tudor made was the Blue 79190 Submariner.

[Ravager135]

You're going to get a lot of opinions here, my personal one is that Tudor<Omega<Rolex. Tudor has excellent pieces and a great price point, but the finishing is not nearly as nice as Omega.

Omega has something really special with the co-axial movement, but there is a ton of variability among its lineup in terms of quality. For one, Omega cannot hold a candle to Rolex when it comes to precious metal pieces. Even in their stainless steel models, the Speedmaster Professional feels cheaper when compared to other sport models. I think this is deliberate to keep the reference as close as possible to the original. If anything, it adds to charm to the watch.

Every single modern piece that Rolex makes feels like a brick. Everything is solid and feels like it can withstand a nuclear war. You can hold an OP in one hand and a Daytona in the other and despite a huge price difference, the pieces feel identical in craftsmanship. You can't even say that about IWC or Panerai. The higher end models on those respective brands just feel better produced that their introductory models. Not so with Rolex.

[teabags001]

Originally Posted by eco8gator

Omega is a standalone iconic brand. Tudor will always be in Rolex shadow though they do make some nice homage watches. IMHO the last cool watch Tudor made was the Blue 79190 Submariner.

I did hear this before. That the best homage Rolex you can buy is actually a Tudor. I think this comment kind of says it all. No matter what they do they will always be in the shadow of big brother. That being said the hype of Tudor has been growing so much in the past few years and I was thinking they have closed the gap with omega on brand appeal. Especially now they are making in house movements.But sometimes people dismiss heritage easily. Like when I compared Tudor to longines people seemed too look down on them even though they are one of the oldest watchmakers in the world. And the 2 watches that grabbed my eye and at least on the grey marker seem to be in the same price range were the Tudor Pepsi in steel and the omega moon watch. I love how both can be put on a nato or straps. I want a great watch that I can be more versatile with.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Finslayer83]

I’m a big fan of the 2254.

Wish they did one with out the He valve.

[HogwldFLTR]

Comparison of two divers...

My 20 year old Omega...



My few year old Tudor...



Too me the Tudor seems plain, almost industrial.

[MJ8]

Omega is a notch above Tudor in my book. Would rate Tudor a notch higher than the likes of Tag Heur, Longiness et al

[amh]

For a beach watch, Tudor. They're made to be beat up a little bit.

Otherwise Omega.

PS. Don't get the Bronze version though, problems with salt water
https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=557272

[Pops1973]

I rate omega way above Tudor - went to look at Tudor and was not as good as an omega. In fact I was very disappointed with the Tudor maybe with all the hype I was expecting something more. Tudor not for me. Just my opinion.

[aalin13]

I would put Omega closer to Rolex than Tudor. Subjectively, Omega has more status and history, and objectively, I think their push with coaxial movements and material are the most exciting of any mass produced brands.

Quality wise, I don't think there is a significant difference between any of the three aforementioned brands, they are all well made with decent finishings, but not outstanding. I will say that I think Rolex is still the king when it comes to the bracelet, but the watch head itself, the difference is quite minute.

Personally though, I like Tudor's recent designs the most, they have stuck to a more tool watch like design, whereas the other two appears to be going for more a jewel like design. Checked out a 2018 SMP 300 lately, and it is a very shiny watch.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

[R G]

Other than the Speedmaster, this exact version of the Seamaster was the best watch Omega ever made

Tudor hasn’t manufactured anything close to these two models.