Tudor Black Bay GMT Review: A Week On My Wrist

[shedlock2000]

I know that there are many threads out there about the BBGMT, but I’d like to offer this post as a ‘week on the wrist review’ rather than any ‘official Tudor gmt’ thread. In that light, the post offers a more thoughtful investigation.


Background:

I have owned a number of Rolex GMTs (16753, 16710, 116710) before moving to a Bremont Alt1 ZT/BK. I wanted to get back into a bracelet gmt after a year or so on a NATO and the release of the BBGMT coincided nicely. I managed to find (after some considerable searching) an AD in Lisbon that had one on the leather. One thing I can say for certain is that they are currently not readily available! After some persuading, they were willing to switch it to the bracelet for me which they sourced from one of their other references.

I made the decision to move to Tudor after considerable discussion with Mike (who is Tudor’s North American rep., I believe). He indicated that the new movement reads like a WIS wish list and the shock absorption would be greater than the ALT1 (which is another reason I made the move).





Initial thoughts:

I was drawn to this watch due to its vintage cues and attention to detail. Tudor really considered the strengths and popularity of early Rolex GMTs and have brought several of the classic elements to bear on this new BB iteration. I was eager to get back into a braceleted watch and enjoyed the riveted bracelet. I was and remain ambivalent to the cyclops issue -- I have had them before and certainly don't hate them. I like the pepsi bezel and the hint of colour thrown into the watch; I also like the aluminium insert. The watch I tried on was on the leather strap -- which I really enjoyed -- and I did not actually get to wear it on the bracelet for anything other than sizing purposes. The deployant was comfortable and low profile; the hint of brown really suited my skin tone and the watch felt quite comfortable on it (if not a bit of a different feel to the Bremont).





Extended thoughts:

The blue on the bezel spends most of its time black -- the only iteration of the gmt bezels I actively dislike, is the 'coke' and this is a really big issue for me. I hardly ever see the watch bezel bright enough to call blue -- even in the daylight. In almost every photo I have and almost everytime I look at the watch, the bezel has a 'coke' bezel feel (though with a deeper red, of course).





The watch wears heavy; much heavier than my much larger Bremont Alt1 and much less well than the Bremont Alt1. The bracelet is peculiar in that I seem never to be able to get it to size correctly. On the first adjustment, the watch is often too tight while I sleep and much of the day. If I increase the adjustment to the second position, the watch becomes too loose and falls to that awkward place where movement of the wrist is inhibited. Of course, when I get cold, the first position eases up and the watch fits nicely -- but when I teach, the watch again becomes tight.


The watch wears heavily and feels constantly top-heavy (in a way that my Bremont and other GMTs did not). I tried out the watch on a NATO, but the higher case thickness means that much of the case is visible behind the NATO -- an aesthetic I do not prefer (the more elevated spring pin holes on the Bremont means that straps cover more of the case -- and Bremont have a pretty case profile anyway). The BBGMT also sits much higher still on the wrist with 2mm of NATO underneath and the extra height makes the watch feel even more top-heavy. Despite being 2mm thinner than the Bremont, the Bremont wears more snugly and moves about on the wrist less.








The case thickness of the GMT means that the end links have a considerable curve to their geometry. As my wrists are quite big the angle of the bracelet into the endlinks does not follow that curve and looks forced and dis-jointed. The 22mm-20mm width of the bracelet is not uncomfortable, but certainly adds to the bulk of the watch and makes it feel quite sizeable. OK, if you like the feeling that you're wearing a big watch (that's not actually that big), but not great if you like to feel like the watch is 'part of you' rather than 'on you'. I have big-ish wrists at 8" and like a larger watch to accommodate that space, but I would prefer that I didn't feel like I was wearing something massive. Moving briefly from my Bremont to my old GMT 17653 (before I sold the latter) really highlighted that I suit a bigger and thicker watch. However, the Tudor's larger case size and awkward endlink geometry means the watch feels and looks bulky on my wrists. Curiously, the watch looked and felt better on the leather. Given that my reason for moving away from the Bremont, though, was the desire to get back into a bracelet (together with the fact that I can't wear leather straps as I never take my watch off and the life of leather straps is significantly reduced when you swim and bathe with them) meant that I didn't want to buy the Tudor on the leather.

Due to some nice touches and good finishing, the watch is probably at its most beautiful when the sun is low in the sky. This is true of most Rolex GMTs too. The gold plots really light up and the hands reflect the light beautifully. This beauty and glimmer is a bit of an odd juxta position for a 'tool watch' which emphasises the 'tooliness' with tight vertical knurls on the bezel, a slab chunky case, and a matt dial.


Operation:

The watch is within COSC, but only just; it gains about 3-4 seconds a day (my Bremont ALT1, by comparison, lost 22 seconds in 210 days). The bezel operation is not a joy; I have been told that it is not as smooth as the operation on the Subs -- but having never handled a Tudor Sub, I cannot comment. It's certainly less pleasurable than the operation of a 1675/16750 but better than that of a 16710 or sub; the roto-click chapter ring affair on the Bremont is a much nicer movement, but a completely different thing altogether. The jumping hour hand operates nicely and the large crown makes the adjustment enjoyable and I like the feel of the crown and the operation of the mechanism etc. I have not (as of writing) experienced any date malfunction.





Practicality:

The top-heaviness of the watch makes it quite noticeable on the wrist and the awkward sizing of the bracelet helps the watch feel a bit ungainly. The matt dial is a delight and the chapter ring is a beautiful touch which aids readability. The extended GMT snowflake hand is possibly my favourite thing about this watch -- its extension to the end of the chapter ring and the snowflake being out of radius with the other markers makes the 24 hour extremely readable in the dark and a boon to the short sighted operator (in this case, me!). The lume is bright, but the lack of blue lume is a sorry loss (especially given that it's the same cost as green lume).

This is my first time with snowflake hands and I adore them. The extra size and clarity took a bit of getting used to, but has become something I don't really want to do without. I am not certain if the hands are a bit wider than a GMT II, but if they are, the width and extra luminosity is appreciated. The bezel is readable and easily adjusted, though the movement feels a bit graty -- perhaps not graty but certainly not smooth. The narrow grip on the bezel edge is not my preference; it certainly adds to a tool feel, but is less easy to grip than the tapered and overhanging chunky Rolex bezel. The insert numbers are easily readable in the daylight, but the lack of lume on the bezel numbers is a huge disappointment to me (I use my watch in the dark a great deal); the lack of a lumed pearl or similar means that I can't even gauge the bezel time. On the upside, the white gold plots and hands mean that some visibility is available in low-not-dark light. The crown operation, as mentioned above, is a delight.

The watch can be worn under a shirt and suit nicely and the blue of the bezel is best when worn next to a brighter blue. It looks best under a shirt cuff unless worn on a NATO when it looks well with outdoorsy kinds of clothing. If I keep the watch (which will be unlikely) I will probably have to put it on a NATO unless I am teaching. Much like the IIC, I expect this watch to go well under a brown or blue suit and look both modern and retro -- depending upon your preference.





Conclusion:

I really want to like this watch. I really wanted a vintage inspired GMT with a new, modern, reliable movement with greater functionality than the calibers 1570gmt and 3075. I really wanted a modern vintage GMT which takes all of the key aspects from the old GMTs we still court. But this watch is just too tall, too heavy, too awkward, and too ungainly to do it successfully. Were the watch 2mm thinner and with a 1mm wider bezel, then I think they would have nailed it. As it stands, the watch feels like a permanent reminder of all the things that were so great about the vintage GMTs without paying attention to the primary beneficence: wearability. Perhaps, if Tudor had included a comfort link mico-adjustment or Pelagos-like clasp, then the watch would would wear more comfortably (and I do point out here, that wearers of the watch on the leather or NATO will probably not share this issue -- and quite rightly: the watch feels much different on straps of all kinds). Perhaps Tudor could have balanced the watch better such that more of the weight were lower down or lowered the case back to GMT IIC heights to make the watch more comfortable on the wrist. Perhaps Tudor could have engaged me as an advisor!!!

I don't know that I am happy with the regulation of the movement either. I know that its technically running within COSC, but only just. Whether or not the regulation will settle down a bit remains to be seen. Certainly, we don't expect mechanical watches to be quartz accurate, but I rather expect something that's closer to -2/+2 (understandng that I have been spoiled by the accuracy of my Bremont). I am also not sure what to think of this new caliber from Tudor. Rolex had some date rolling issues with their caliber 3186 that seem, now, to have been inherited from the similarly designed MT5652. How many watches will be affected by this issue remains to be seen. From a thickness perspective, the 116710 retains a thickness of 13mm (give or take) and so I am surprised that the Tudor have been unable (or unwilling) to lower the profile on this watch somewhat. Were it to measure 13mm, this watch really would fit better, I think. That said, the BBGMT does come with an extra 100mm of water resistance and the case thickness may be a necessary consequence of that design.


In short: Please message me if you have a 16750/1675 service dial/hands and would consider a trade plus cash. The GMT is a nice watch if you like a chunkier feel -- but if you want somethign a touch more refined, the you're going to have to go true-vintage not nouveau-vintage.












Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Cru Jones]

Thanks for the in-depth review.

Who knows, maybe a 58 GMT is in the cards for next year?

[shedlock2000]

Originally Posted by Cru Jones

Thanks for the in-depth review.

Who knows, maybe a 58 GMT is in the cards for next year?

Maybe! I think I'll hold out for a 16750, though: I tried on the 58 and it looked a little lost on my wrist! My G/F really did like the guilt dial, though!

[schoolboy]

Nice review.

Thanks!

[watchwatcher]

Thanks so much for sharing your thoughts so thoroughly.

I concur with your comments about the sizing. I don't have a GMT, but do have the BB, and while I love it, the lack of some micro adjustment is one knock I have on it. The BB is a big, heavy watch. One reason I'm looking at the leather option on this model.

[Urosfan]

Nice review

[Stevec14]

I am a bracelet lover and bought mine on leather. Immediately got the bracelet. I prefer it on leather or fabric (nato). Far less heavy. The leather is fantastic and adds to the vibe this watch was meant to give IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[904VT]

Amazing review Steve, thanks for taking time to put together and share

Congrats as well on your watch and give it some time, you may see it grow on you. Explorer 1 seems like it could be a nice fit or Black Bay 58 for a slimmer watch

[904VT]

Btw I'd be remised if I didn't mention, awesome L322 Supercharged. I'm guessing the 510 HP model...

Check out Nitto's new Ridge Grapplers in 265/50/r20 if you haven't. Looks like you get to off-road some by your avatar.

[shedlock2000]

Originally Posted by 904VT

Amazing review Steve, thanks for taking time to put together and share

Congrats as well on your watch and give it some time, you may see it grow on you. Explorer 1 seems like it could be a nice fit or Black Bay 58 for a slimmer watch

I really have considered the Explorer, but I am irrevocably betrothed to the GMT function (which I use a lot). I have also thought about a 40mm Explorer II.... I just can't seem to commit to the silver bezel. The Explorers certainly wear nicely, though!

[shedlock2000]

Originally Posted by 904VT

Btw I'd be remised if I didn't mention, awesome L322 Supercharged. I'm guessing the 510 HP model...

Good eye! Yes, the SC model. I like to go anywhere fast! LOL

Originally Posted by 904VT

Check out Nitto's new Ridge Grapplers in 265/50/r20 if you haven't. Looks like you get to off-road some by your avatar.

I put tyres on him at Christmas last year and considered both the Ridge Grapplers and Terra Grapplers. I spoke to a number of tyre dealers up here who stocked them, but they both had mixed reviews on the ice and snow (of which we get a lot). I chose to go with the Cooper Weather Master XCL instead. They've been pretty good for me, but I will probably switch them out this winter for Hakkapeliitta 9s because I like to stop when stopping is very difficult!

Yeah!! He sees a fair bit of off road stuff. This year we hit up the trails in Tahoe:

[shedlock2000]

Originally Posted by watchwatcher

Thanks so much for sharing your thoughts so thoroughly.

I concur with your comments about the sizing. I don't have a GMT, but do have the BB, and while I love it, the lack of some micro adjustment is one knock I have on it. The BB is a big, heavy watch. One reason I'm looking at the leather option on this model.

I've seen a few people toying with putting the Pelagos clasp on a BB. I have ordered one from Tudor and will report back how well this works. I think there may be some difficulty with one of the connecting links: I am not certain that I won't have to leave one of the titanium links in place.

[leooooo]

TLDR, just know if this was Reddit you would've esily gotten an upvote from me!

[Likestheshiny]

So, what I'm hearing is that you don't need that Root Beer any more, and you want to give it away?

[I_am_Ned]

Excellent review, thank you for the unbiased approach. Very spot on. As a BBGMT owner I'm a bit biased, and enjoyed reading your perspective.

I'll note that you may have talked me into trying it on the leather strap instead of the bracelet, but I'll also admit that I like bracelets, so maybe I won't. In the mean time, my leather strap and deployent are sitting in the original box untouched.

I have an array of watches that don't feel like I'm wearing one, so I enjoy the feeling of knowing I have this one on.

I am I_am_Ned

[shedlock2000]

Originally Posted by Likestheshiny

So, what I'm hearing is that you don't need that Root Beer any more, and you want to give it away?

hahah! Well, Not really! I sold it a while back (and got next to nothing for it, I might add) because I am completing an unfunded PhD and sometimes I need a cash injection! I regret selling it now.....

[shedlock2000]

Originally Posted by I_am_Ned

I'll note that you may have talked me into trying it on the leather strap instead of the bracelet, but I'll also admit that I like bracelets, so maybe I won't. In the mean time, my leather strap and deployent are sitting in the original box untouched.

I'd certainly try it to get a feel for the watch. I sort of regret paying extra for the bracelet now -- but I also know I would have killed the strap in a matter of months.

[shedlock2000]

Originally Posted by leooooo

TLDR, just know if this was Reddit you would've esily gotten an upvote from me!

I feel loved already! Hahaha! Thanks!

[Snow-Dweller]

Thank you for the thoughtful and well written review.

I’ve just worn my Tudor GMT on bracelet for a month solid. It would appear that I love it for all of the reasons that you don’t. I find its thickness to be a joy (and a very pleasant contrast to the GMTCs that I usually wear). I also like the weight, but then I’m lucky enough to often wear pm, so am used to a heavy watch. I love the bezel, both operationally and aesthetically. My Tudor has averaged +0.6 seconds/day over the last 18 days, and the date is working fine (touch wood).

I do agree that it would benefit from an easylink style adjustment, but that’s really my only criticism.

I just got the leather strap (which I look forward to trying) and may well buy my first RubberB or Everest for it as well.

I’m genuinely surprised by how much I like this watch, which I feel could heavily influence the direction that my modest collection takes in the future. I have even come to like the snowflake hands, which have been my reason for not considering Tudors for years.

Horses for courses, and all that!

[karwath]

Your review confirmed a number of concerns I had about the Tudor GMT.

[darkside7]

If it’s running within cosc spec, then it’s running cosc spec. Why compare to a totally different watch?

[watchwatcher]

Originally Posted by Snow-Dweller

Thank you for the thoughtful and well written review.

I’ve just worn my Tudor GMT on bracelet for a month solid. It would appear that I love it for all of the reasons that you don’t. I find its thickness to be a joy (and a very pleasant contrast to the GMTCs that I usually wear). I also like the weight, but then I’m lucky enough to often wear pm, so am used to a heavy watch. I love the bezel, both operationally and aesthetically. My Tudor has averaged +0.6 seconds/day over the last 18 days, and the date is working fine (touch wood).

I do agree that it would benefit from an easylink style adjustment, but that’s really my only criticism.

I just got the leather strap (which I look forward to trying) and may well buy my first RubberB or Everest for it as well.

I’m genuinely surprised by how much I like this watch, which I feel could heavily influence the direction that my modest collection takes in the future. I have even come to like the snowflake hands, which have been my reason for not considering Tudors for years.

Horses for courses, and all that!

I would love to know your thoughts on the leather after you've worn it a bit.

[dubins930]

Great post! Thank you for taking the time to write this up.

[shedlock2000]

Originally Posted by darkside7

If it’s running within cosc spec, then it’s running cosc spec. Why compare to a totally different watch?

Just because a vehicle’s fuel economy is within specs if it returns, let’s say, 16-20mpg doesn’t mean that you wouldn’t prefer it if the vehicle returned 20mpg instead of 16mpg!

My Bremont is also within COSC spec, but it’s deviance is less than the BBGMT. Less deviance is better than more — especially when deviance is accumulative.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Brandon -B-]

Great review. It looks like you have good sized wrists (mine is about 7”) but I found that on my Black Bay, the endlinks really messed up the fit of the watch. I tried like hell to get the bracelet correct and it never worked out. Like many others I picked up a Ranger bracelet and with the straight end links it went a step closer to vintage looking and magically fit perfectly like I’m sure yours does on the strap. If you really want to love it and give it another chance, try picking up a Ranger bracelet.

Edit: just read that yup you have big wrists. The Ranger bracelet would solve that too as it makes its own angle

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[shedlock2000]

Originally Posted by Brandon -B-

Great review. It looks like you have good sized wrists (mine is about 7”) but I found that on my Black Bay, the endlinks really messed up the fit of the watch. I tried like hell to get the bracelet correct and it never worked out. Like many others I picked up a Ranger bracelet and with the straight end links it went a step closer to vintage looking and magically fit perfectly like I’m sure yours does on the strap. If you really want to love it and give it another chance, try picking up a Ranger bracelet.

Edit: just read that yup you have big wrists. The Ranger bracelet would solve that too as it makes its own angle

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hmmmm, that’s interesting! I wonder if the geometry of the end links are the issue. I have a 22mm straight end bracelet somewhere.... I’ll try that! Thanks for the tip.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Odie-r]

This was really informative - thanks.

I own the BB GMT, and agree with what you've said, but I still like the different feel when wearing it vs. a Rolex GMT. I feel lucky to have it, and who knows, maybe one day I'll sell but for now I'm enjoying!

[Friar]

Excellent review Steve! Thank you. I love my Explorer II since I never have to check more than one other time zone. It fits under the cuff and my polar version is very readable. I often wear it on leather or nylon to lighten the load.

[grymg]

Thanks for the informative read. I love looking at pictures of it and could envision using it for vacations (keeping the more expensive watches at home), but for my skinny risks I agree - too large, thick, and heavy.

I just love the jump hour movement though. So handy.

[shedlock2000]

Originally Posted by Odie-r

I own the BB GMT, and agree with what you've said, but I still like the different feel when wearing it vs. a Rolex GMT.

How would you identify the different feel and what reference is your Rolex gmt? I’m glad you’re enjoying your BBGMT! Everyone loves different things!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk