Tudor on same level as omega?

[MRBolton]

Originally Posted by Krash

Before we start comparing Tudor to Omega, maybe we should be a little more realistic.

Tudor vs Tag Heuer? I’d go with Tudor, but I’d say it’s close.

Tudor vs Oris? I’d probably go with Tudor.

Tudor vs Longines? Maybe Tudor, but Longines might have more models I’d actually want to wear.

Tudor vs Nomos? I’d definitely go with Nomos.

Tudor vs Breitling? Breitling, no doubt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You think Tudor and TAG are on the same level?!

[liuk3]

Originally Posted by TheVision

I work in the medical industry and I see plethora of Tag/Rolex/Omega daily but I've yet to see one Tudor in real life.

End of topic :)

That’s actually one of the reasons I love my Tudor so much. I like that it is under the radar. I don’t really give a cr@p what people think about the watch. I love it as much as my Rolexes.

[Malum]

Originally Posted by liuk3

That’s actually one of the reasons I love my Tudor so much. I like that it is under the radar. I don’t really give a cr@p what people think about the watch. I love it as much as my Rolexes.

My exact sentiment when it comes to my BB Steel and Pelagos LHD .

[Krash]

Originally Posted by MRBolton

You think Tudor and TAG are on the same level?!

Yes, pretty close.

I think I like the Tag Heuer Autavia models more than anything Tudor makes.

[mquarter]

Omega is really strong technically and in terms of build quality. In that respect they're above Tudor. But outside of a limited number of speedmasters, Tudor doesn't lose in aesthetics so easily.

[indianmachine]

Omega is probably technically stronger than Tudor but also more expensive. At the end of the day, I'd just pick the watch with the aesthetics and price point that appeal to you.

[Daveh777]

Very interesting discussion. Got my two cents’ worth, I own Rolex, Omega Speedie and Tudor BB58.

Of these 3 brands, to my taste preferences, I think only Rolex has consistently not produced any ugly or weird designs over the years and especially in the last 30 years. Eg Omega Quartz models and some very weird Tudor designs with extreme colours and fonts employed.

I don’t necessarily think it is a Apples with Apples comparison.

Apart from the unsightly faux rivets on the BB58, I would definitely rate the external fit and finish on a par with the early 2000’s Seamaster 300m Diver.

[Manamana]

Originally Posted by Shadow Play

You’re very lucky to feel that way. Means you can buy just about whatever new Omega watch you like, whenever you like.

Me? I’m quite happy to wait patiently for my next Rolex.

Actually a lot of Omega watches are difficult to get now, and some are unobtainium like some Rolex watches.

[Manamana]

Originally Posted by Omarion07

Oh boy.. there’s so much misinformation in this. Omega is owned by the Swatch group and they decide in which “tier” they place Omega. You should look at Omega as part of the swatch group as a whole. And yes there’s “a 2nd tier to keep costs low and price down for the average customer” and it’s called Longines. Tudor was created as a more affordable alternative to Rolex some 50-60 years ago but this is not the case anymore. In the recent years Tudor tried to distinguish itself from Rolex as much as possible while retaining similar DNA.
The Tudor in-house movements are COSC certified but once they’re cased up they run at -2/+4 SPD as opposed to -4/+6 COSC certification only. And FYI Tudor started doing Metas Certification mid of this year with the BB ceramic with a display case back and the more recent “only watch” BB GMT one.

So no Tudor is defo not a “poor man’s Rolex” anymore.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I just want to remind you Longines actually has a bigger name, and history than Tudor. Longines is the first patented watch maker with a lot of innovations in it's name. In the fifties it was bigger than Rolex, and is still a very well respected brand in Europe. Tudor is now much more affordable than Rolex than when it started, and is still the if you can't get Rolex then buy Tudor even more so than before. It only started to be more popular recently because it copied old rolex models which appeals to some. I'm not a Tudor hater, I actually like a couple of it's models, and I'm just stating my opinion. Omega is several levels higher than Tudor in the Horology pyramid.

[Watcheroo]

I wouldn’t compare the two. They both make great watches in their own rights. Don’t forget that Tudor has only been back in the US for less than 10 years (I think the relaunch was some time around 2013) - this is probably a reason why you don’t see them as often as other similar price-point brands.

If I were to buy a new watch, I’d probably look to Tudor first, mainly for aesthetic reasons. I do own an Omega though, and love it, and will likely add another Omega at some point.

Bottom line, buy what makes you smile more.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rmwill]

Omega makes a fine watch, but they are ugly save for the Speedmaster. There is a reason that they are so deeply discounted.

[Shadow Play]

Originally Posted by Manamana

Actually a lot of Omega watches are difficult to get now, and some are unobtainium like some Rolex watches.

I knew one or two of the Speedmaster watches were difficult to obtain. I didn’t think a lot of their models were hard to get.

Which other models are hard to get?

[Manamana]

Originally Posted by rmwill

Omega makes a fine watch, but they are ugly save for the Speedmaster. There is a reason that they are so deeply discounted.

I understand it's a matter of taste, but I find it strange that you see the Seamaster or worldtimer ugly, especially the new ones. If you want ugly then Tuder does more ugly than Omega.

[fmc000]

Originally Posted by TheVision

It's not even a comparison. Omega is Omega..there's no "2nd tier to keep costs low and price down for the average customer".

Tudor, as a brand, as created by Rolex as a cheaper alternative for buyers.

Let's look at your reasoning: Tudor is the second tier level in Rolex Group. Fine.

Omega is not even the second in Swatch Group.

First tier: Blancpain, Breguet, Jacquet Droz.
Second tier: Harry Winston, Glashutte Original
Third tier: Omega
... and so on.

So, there's no need to create "2nd tier to keep costs low and price down for the average customer". There's the 3rd tier already...

[Manamana]

Originally Posted by Shadow Play

I knew one or two of the Speedmaster watches were difficult to obtain. I didn’t think a lot of their models were hard to get.

Which other models are hard to get?

Snoopy, 321, and Seamaster Bond in some markets. Even the limited editions which Omega had a hard time selling all a few years ago are getting harder to get even though they come at a very high number like the Apollo 11 50th and the 50th Anniversary 1957. Also the Speedmaster Tokyo limited editions 2020 especially the Panda and Rising Sun. I'm sure there are more I don't know about.

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by fmc000

Let's look at your reasoning: Tudor is the second tier level in Rolex Group. Fine.

Omega is not even the second in Swatch Group.

First tier: Blancpain, Breguet, Jacquet Droz.
Second tier: Harry Winston, Glashutte Original
Third tier: Omega
... and so on.

So, there's no need to create "2nd tier to keep costs low and price down for the average customer". There's the 3rd tier already...

I think you guys are talking about different types of tiers. Toyota versus Lexus is one way of ordering two tiers of the same manufacturer. Just like Seiko vs Grand Seiko. But the Swatch group is a business relationship, not an internal company division. Their tiers are set up based on product positioning and corporate strategy. It's not like there is a centralized team of designers who come up with a movement and then say "this one is too good to give to the Omega guys, we'll reserve this for Blancpain". The companies are operating independently in terms of design and specifications.

And I'm happy to be corrected but I've not seen anything that would suggest Blancpain has even matched, much less bested, Omega in terms of movement technology and certifications? Does Blancpain charge more for their watches? Sure. But if paying more for less is what it takes to get a "top tier" product then count me out.

[Ollie1982]

Originally Posted by tedo

Omega superior, and also most accurate in all of my collection.

Well at least its not just Rolex that can't get the colours correct on their ceramic bezels.

[eightball76]

I would day that Omega is thought of as a good manufacturer, I have a speedmaster 1861 which I love, although it isn't the best timekeeper (hopefully will be resolved during next service).
I also ordered the new 2021 speedmaster (1863), but alas I had nothing but problems with them quality wise (got original one replaced first time round and then the replacement broke too- both had movement issues and the finish quality of the initial watch was very poor) and the AD gave me a full refund where upon I got the BB58 and have had no issues since.
To say one is better than the other is pointless unless based on experiences. I love all watches and brands and sometimes the cheapest watch can be your favourite. Branding is for the image conscious.
My aim is to acquire another 1863 speedmaster once the Movement issues are sorted but until then I will enjoy what I have.

[Omarion07]

Originally Posted by Manamana

I just want to remind you Longines actually has a bigger name, and history than Tudor. Longines is the first patented watch maker with a lot of innovations in it's name. In the fifties it was bigger than Rolex, and is still a very well respected brand in Europe. Tudor is now much more affordable than Rolex than when it started, and is still the if you can't get Rolex then buy Tudor even more so than before. It only started to be more popular recently because it copied old rolex models which appeals to some. I'm not a Tudor hater, I actually like a couple of it's models, and I'm just stating my opinion. Omega is several levels higher than Tudor in the Horology pyramid.

Historically maybe, but few years ago I tried the Hydroconquest. The amount of play in the bezel is just horrendous and the build quality is poor. Fair enough it was $1500 but a $ 300 Seiko 5 was built to a higher standard. Today, None of Longines sports models can compete with Tudor’s offerings in terms of specs or build quality.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[franktehtank]

They are both mass produced, high quality watches with reliable movements. Pick the one that suits your tastes and budget the best.

[Shadow Play]

Originally Posted by Manamana

Snoopy, 321, and Seamaster Bond in some markets. Even the limited editions which Omega had a hard time selling all a few years ago are getting harder to get even though they come at a very high number like the Apollo 11 50th and the 50th Anniversary 1957. Also the Speedmaster Tokyo limited editions 2020 especially the Panda and Rising Sun. I'm sure there are more I don't know about.

I wasn’t aware of that, although personally, I’m not a fan at all Olympic themed merchandise and I’m definitely not a fan of Bond merchandise.

[Malum]

I don’t think anyone cares about the Olympics unless they are competing.

[173rdabn]

I think Omega is a better choice and I've owned 3 Tudor BBs.

[DannyO]

Omega makes some interesting watches. The new Speedy pro has the co-axial escapement, which is innovative and the Seamaster 300 has always been great. Years ago Omega had a date wheel problem with the Triple Date Speedmaster,very similar to what Tudor is going through, I am not sure how they resolved it. I own both brands and I think the Speedy Pro alone pushes Omega into the next tier.

[2ltdjorn]

I think tudor is more under the radar. in my personal experience only watch aficionados recognize my tudor. the rest nothing. I think omega, tag, and seiko are more recognizable than tudor.

[fmc000]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

I think you guys are talking about different types of tiers. Toyota versus Lexus is one way of ordering two tiers of the same manufacturer. Just like Seiko vs Grand Seiko. But the Swatch group is a business relationship, not an internal company division. Their tiers are set up based on product positioning and corporate strategy. It's not like there is a centralized team of designers who come up with a movement and then say "this one is too good to give to the Omega guys, we'll reserve this for Blancpain". The companies are operating independently in terms of design and specifications.

And I'm happy to be corrected but I've not seen anything that would suggest Blancpain has even matched, much less bested, Omega in terms of movement technology and certifications? Does Blancpain charge more for their watches? Sure. But if paying more for less is what it takes to get a "top tier" product then count me out.

Blancpain, Breguet and GO make and assemble their own calibers completely in-house and HW is basically completely in-house too. JD offers every kind of custom option to the buyer.

On the other hand, Omega assembles, tests and certifies their calibers in their own factory but parts are manufactured by ETA (or at least this was the situation up to 2019, I wasn't able to find more recent information that may confirm or contradict it).

This IMHO doesn't make it just a "Business relationship" within the Swatch Group.

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by fmc000

Blancpain, Breguet and GO make and assemble their own calibers completely in-house and HW is basically completely in-house too. JD offers every kind of custom option to the buyer.

On the other hand, Omega assembles, tests and certifies their calibers in their own factory but parts are manufactured by ETA (or at least this was the situation up to 2019, I wasn't able to find more recent information that may confirm or contradict it).

This IMHO doesn't make it just a "Business relationship" within the Swatch Group.

I understand that ETA is a shared supplier that all companies in the SWATCH group have access to. And I'm not trying to restart the "what is in-house" debate yet again :) But my point is this:

If the engineers at Toyota wanted to create a $100k luxury sedan, the leadership would say, no, that needs to be branded as a Lexus. It doesn't make sense in the Toyota family. Both of these tiers are working cooperatively in deciding what makes sense from a unified family perspective.

But when the engineers at Omega decide they want to build a $725k tourbillon, nobody steps in and says sorry, that must be a Breguet model, don't you realize you guys are tier 3?! The two brands are operating independently in terms of direction and design, and can clearly have overlap in terms of target market.

[Kenworthy]

Omega biggest issue strangely enough availability I’ve always admired omega & couple times was going to buy, but I always think mmm I’ can wait until next year instead because there always available.. & think buy the Rolex. Tudor now because I don’t want to miss the opportunity to buy …

[Tikandtokalot]

Over the years I thought that next to Rolex on a wish list would always be an Omega but since the resurgence of Tudor that has changed.

[Know1isgod]

Have both in my case. Whatever the origin story, I think the mission of Tudor reflects Rolex's decision not to concede the $3-6K space to others. Believe the reemergence of Tudor over the last 10 years speaks to the Wilsdorf's Foundation strategic thinking and belief in Tudor as a profitable brand.

I wonder if the foundation decided to move upmarket with an upscale line under a new name, would it cause Rolex to lose some of it's luster?