SlopedOtter actually it’s more like it’s a shorter waiting list - gave up and got mine from grey market. Paid a small premium but not I’m stuck with searching for the steel bracelet. It’s apparently a 3-4 month waiting period.
Carter Lamont actually if you theoretically gave him $100k to spend at an AD, they will magically conjure one out of their supposedly non existent vault at the back.
The overall perception is that Tudor is the smaller and thus a less wanted watch than the Rolex. I dont agree, whenever i see people driving a BMW i never think, 'looser, you cant affort the Rolls'. Same when people drive an Audi, couldn't the driver buy the Lamborghini instead. Maybe people make a choice based upon their feeling instead of their wallet. If i had to choose i'd go for the Tudor, it looks more like the old GMT Master11. The Tudor does everything the Rolex does but it is a bit less the star of the show. The watch is more 'what you see is what you get'. During a party or festival i dont want to stand in the middle of the crowd and jump like crazy, instead i like to look at the people having a great time and that's fine with me. Just like this Tudor GMT, we both look at the world and it is just fine.
I don't really think your analogy is that fitting while I agree with the tone of it. No rolex made today is a rolls royce (That would be Patek sort of territory), nor a Lamborghini (That would be probably an RM). I think that a more fitting comparison for Tudor and Rolex would be seen within car brands as opposed to between them. One could say that Tudor is the Mercedes A class to the Rolex E class, or the BMW 1 series to the Rolex 5 Series. They are both very well made objects, they are both a cut above the rest but there's something that can at times feel a little hollow about the lesser product. I'd never judge somebody for owning a Tudor just as I wouldn't judge somebody for owning an A Class, but if you really want the E Class or the Rolex they will be a hollow substitute.
@@Macca-95 Good approach but I would compare it to Porsche(Rolex) and Audi (Tudor). Both are part of VW Group(the same company), that more inline with narrative. About Patek as Rolls Royse totally agree =)
Me too i dont like crown guards...especially the ugly cyclops!!! If rolex make their gmt looks like this tudor i will buy it even if it price double!!@
No it doesn’t. No Tudor is better looking with those goofy hands. Saying so is always coming from what you know you can’t have what may be possible to own.
I have a Rolex Hulk..I like Tudor’s look compared to some Rolex’s. Varies from comparison to comparison. No doubt Rolex is an over hyped brand to the max. Tudor is more correctly priced for quality
@@esperoutdoors9421 No scratches so far. I guess as far as scratches go it all depends if you intend to sell on at some point. Personally I don't mind a few light scratches over time as it shows the watch has been on a journey with you. My Sub is for my son (eventually) and I will like the fact that it has a couple of dings and marks. It wouldn't be the same to hand over something that was "as new" and never been worn. So if you intend to keep it I wouldn't worry about the odd mark. They just add to the character (IMO).
@@esperoutdoors9421 I just bought the Tudor BB GMT and I intend to wear it under a variety of conditions. My late father-in-law owned an Omega from the early 80’s and wore it everywhere (driving a truck, farming, repairing heavy machinery, etc) for almost 40 years. The watch took quite a beating - the case and hesalite crystal were badly scratched and the bracelet was destroyed. When he passed away and willed the watch to my wife, we sent it to back to the factory to be refurbished. It is beautiful, but not perfect. But, most importantly, whenever my wife wears it, she thinks of her wonderful father and his love for her! And that is why my wife and I buy heirloom watches - they are something tangible we can pass on to our family when we die - something that they can wear on a regular basis and be reminded of our love for them. So, yes, my BB GMT will undoubtedly collect scratches and dings. But they won’t likely detract from the sentimental value. And if they do, the watch can be sent back to Tudor for refurbishing!
@@edelmar17 I think the Tudor’s crystal and metal bracelet will hold up better than the Omega’s hesalite crystal and leather strap. But I think the Omega’s quartz movement will hold up better than the automatic movement of the Tudor. Note, though, that my wife and I had the quartz movement of the Omega refurbished twice over a ten-year period.
WRONG...I can afford either and CHOSE the TUDOR. No ugly magnifier. If you need the magnifier, please don't drive as I certainly don't trust your eyesight. The glossiness of the Rolex is the same flaw that Omega has. The current Planet Ocean is also too glossy, although they don't have the almost obnoxious white enamel numerals on the bezel that Rolex has. The ceramic bezel with white numerals looks like an homage watch trying to be a Rolex...quite plastic looking. The more subdued Tudor bezel is more my taste, the lack of the ugly and superfluous "cyclops" magnifying lens is a BIG bonus! I also purchased the older Planet Ocean in 42 as the size and more subdued appearance appeals to me and as such, will likely never be made again. I could choose to afford either. People who say these things are more rich watch snobs than true aficionados. Rolex got my money either way. I'm sure they appreciate my "poorness". If you think a truly poor person can afford a TUDOR watch, you live in a strange reality.
After owning both watches, I must say that the Tudor is much more watch for the money. It comes down to aesthetics. I feel Tudor is a brand to be reckoned with in the future and much of that depends on the future models this brand can muster. It looks very promising.
@@louissiracusa8069 Going by your argument, my Seiko skx007 will also tick in 50 years given proper maintenance and it is extremely durable to wear and tear...still want to go by those arguments? Just FYI, I prefer the Tudor, it is just a better cleaner looking watch made with high quality parts.
"you've bought a Tudor before because you couldn't afford the Rolex but now now you might just buy the Tudor because you don't want the Rolex what do you think" True hahaha
I have a Tudor GMT I purchased about a year ago. Absolutely love the watch. It is a Rolex from stem to stern. Very, Very accurate. Very solid. And a very sharp and attractive watch. Dresses up or down. I added the leather strap as well and that looks sharp (and the Tudor Shield buckle looks outstanding.).
Understatement.... I buyed in 1988 a Tudor Submariner for about 1000,-DM ( approx. 500,-€ today) If you want to buy such a Tudor Submariner today (including box and papers) you have to pay some 6000...7000 ,-€ today.... I like both watches. I own both watches. I use both watches...
Yep. Rolex? Is it fake? A wannabe who got a loan just to buy it? Someone who thinks he could impress anyone with it? Rolex, sadly became the watch for people who want to impress, rather than have something of value. Sadly that goes for Patek and AP as well. Or the worst of the worst, Richard Mille.
Both are great watches, I have a Tudor GMT and a Rolex Daytona, but I think there are better watches out there in both price brackets, the difference is that these watches are far from the best in their price brackets, but both hold their value and both are sought after even though you can buy better for less! A comparison should be made between these and their competitors.
Brandon Collins, I think, as a redditor first, and an imgurian second, that this is a classy comment that we use to gain updoots, so I don't appreciate you coming in here and disrespecting us just because we are seeking some updoots.
Because Brandon, the content of Watchfinder's videos are always A+ material. You may not like some of the watches, but the editing, grammar, tone, history all make it worthwhile. Visit other watch channels and you will understand.
omg people I'm not talking about the content. Watchfinder is absolutely fantastic I know that, hence why I watch all of the videos. I'm talking about this cliché comment that appears in every video I watch, watchfinder or not
Second year with my Black Bay 58. It's a great watch. Great accuracy, movement, power reserve, solid, thin, comfortable and whisper quiet for a sports watch. It draws attention but still subtle enough to wear it daily. I couldn't go any other brand but Tudor and Rolex.
I like the less ostentatious look of the Tudor. A watch of the man that likes good quality watches rather than the man who likes quality watches but is driven by price /brand snobbery.
On wearing it my honest criticism is that the 15mm thick headcase adds weight. Unless the watch strap fits quite tight on your wrist it naturally slips down. After a while it can nark you. Fine when hotter as wrists expand a little when warmer. I say this as it's an honest gripe to consider. 😐
As an owner of the Tudor GMT I have two complaints that can both be solved by using the Black Bay 58' case. Its a little tall at 15mm and I'd prefer it was 38-40mm wide. I would love the Rolex but I also don't want to wait 3 years to own it or pay a huge mark up on the secondary market.
@@macrolabco I don't think it would be over for the Pepsi, similar to how the BB58 didn't spell the end of Submariner mark ups. The Rolex Pepsi is rare and desirable enough that there will still be people who will want and buy it because it looks and feels more premium, and it is, afterall, a status symbol among many. A BB58 Pepsi would certainly draw many people away from the Rolex, but I doubt it would be enough to drive the price or the waiting for the Rolex by any significant amount.
@@macrolabco Yeah, of course. But a single watch from Tudor isn't going to change that perspective that people have of Rolex sports watches. I agree (and earnestly hope) that there will be a time in the future where Rolex watches will once again see a decline in demand (probably followed by a period of high demand again), but I don't think one watch from Tudor will do the trick. However, if companies from all over start offering the visual and practical appeal of Rolexes at a much lower cost like the BB58 Pepsi would, I can see it happening.
Tudor is a cleaner design so i like it alot. But ofc true judgement is best served with both in hand. And this is no Versus. This is Rolex AND Tudor, father and son.
Wanted a GMT watch - proper GMT for world travel. Didn't want to spend £15K on the Rolex - although it's a fine watch. £3K on the Tudor - sorted. These are real world prices. It's a no brainer unless it's the brand you really want.
Michael Orme hmm not entirely. I personally prefer the bracelet to the Rolex, and the Rolex bezel is something many people have a love hate relationship with. Not a true red and blue. Finally the Tudor has improved waterproof rating. Personally I would take the Tudor, and put the money you save into a more justifiable Rolex. But that’s just my opinion.
+ Xianhong Meng Well even more reason not to buy one, especially as they will tank at some stage. Also there's a big difference between what some chancer wants for it and what it actually sells for.
Rolex will always have the stigma of being bought my jerks and showoffs, in short by obnoxious people. In getting a Tutor you avoid being in that circle and still get the Rolex style to a good extent.
Had the Tudor GMT for almost a year now and loving it! The subdued bezel colours are so much better than the Rolex I think - in fact I don't even care about Rolex anymore tbh!
Outspent agree more Paul. That being said, there are some models that have a nice look and it’s much better to lose a FXD to a robbery than my subs/Day Dates
I have owned both. I owned and wore Daily for two years the Rolex GMT II ceramic all-black. Then later, owned and wore daily for about three years The Rolex GMT II Batman. I liked them both: great watches, kept good time, reliable, comfortable. I bought the Tudor BB GMT, because I preferred the throwback looks or the much more understated looks. I particularly prefer the aesthetics of the Tudor dial. Additionally, one could buy two of the Tudor GMTs and still have money left over for every one of the Rolex GMTs. And of course, you can find the Tudor GMT at your local AD; while the Rolex GMTs are no longer available through normal processes. Unfortunately, one final thought: I mentioned that the Rolexes were reliable? Yes, they were and are. However, my Tudor GMT Was not. It has been back to Tudor-Rolex for a movement replacement in order to fix the original movement’s date-change-problem. We will see how the new movement does as the years go on. 🧐 I still love wearing the Tudor GMT. It feels great; looks great; keeps great time. I am wearing it now. Also own a 2016 Rolex Sea-Dweller 4000 (40mm ceramic). Great watch, a couple of nice quartz Seiko, and a couple of ETA-powered Weiss watches. 175cm, 6.9 inch wrist.
I like everything about the Rolex more, from the jubilee bracelet, bezel edge, hour hand, date magnification, crown guard. The Tudor is still very nice, I just dislike the hour hand on Tudor watches. That said, I would've liked to see a more vibrant blue and red like its predecessor, instead of the muted tones.
love the look of the Tudor just wished it was thinner and they make a Tudor b b 58 pepsi and then you can take my money . Hate the jubilee bracelet on the Rolex.
I was thinking the same at first but after looking into it more the thickness really doesn't bother me especially after watching this video it really convinced me that I need to own one myself.
The Tudor GMT is plenty watch for me. The timing wasright for me to get a good sports watch and I went in looking for a Rolex. Then I found out there was a years long waiting list ....or..... I could pay seven grand over retail to buy somebody's USED watch. That's a hard NO in my book. Not unless thewatch comes with box,papersand a free lunch with Jesus.
Brandon Collins I can’t agree more. Day and night, blue and black. Prefer the bracelet. I actually think it’s perfect and will become one of the most desirable Rolex watches in the future.
I have The Tudor GMT Pepsi & I'm thrilled with it. The ceramic bezel of the Rolex is appealing but not enough to change my mind even if I were the richest man on the face of this earth.
I would recommend the Tudor as the tool watch...... I have got a 1988 Tudor Submariner and the Rolex "Hulk" Submariner from 2017. Precesion per day is still the same.... Similar performance in the field of GMT Master?
With regards to your broad brushed statement on Tudors inferiority to Rolex, being watch specific, I have the Tudor blue Pelagos which I thoroughly enjoy, appreciate and value along with 12 other sport Rolex models I own. With Tudors in house movement, ceramic bezel, 70 hr. power reserve, impeccable finishing of the case and a bracelet that is superior to the submariner, I feel it more than holds its own with Rolex.
Dr. Raymond , and you would not think twice in using what it was intended to be used for...... a dive watch. Love Rolex (have a couple) but they lost their adventure tool appeal which Tudor picked up . That Pelagos clasp is awesome.
Rolex might have better fit and finish in general, which is to be expected considering the markup you pay, but not on this particular example. Just look at the sloppy paint job on the GMT hand.
Well. To Rolex owners, the Tudor will always be in the shadow of the older brother as the "the poor mans Rolex" because they cannot understand that anyone would choose anything but a Rolex. This douchebag trait of Rolex makes alot of us choose something else because we don't want that "douchebag" label to our name.
gardehusar24 Speaking only for myself, I don’t really agree (I own two Rolexes and a Tudor, among several other pieces). But for guys that only have one watch, and that watch is a Sub, I think you’re probably correct.
jason starek That's the great thing. We can actually dissagre and be civil 😉 It's just 90% of the Rolex guys I meet are the douchie type. Unfortunately.
I could have purchased a used Rolex Explorer 1 but I chose to go with the Tudor Northflag because its everything I was looking for in a watch. The perfect blend of sporty, dressy, and tool watch.
Has been a month since I bought my Tudor Pepsi GMT. I’ve noticed how similar it looks to the Rolex when looked at a distance, almost looks like the it itself. Loving the watch so far and have my eye on a BB 58 Solid Gold.
I find it funny that many people think that the BB does not have a ceramic bezel because of the cost, and derive a difference in quality from that. That's a design question and fits in with the heritage look. After all, a Certina Active Diver also has a ceramic bezel and costs only about €900.
I've owned the old rolex gmt 2 but had nothing but problems, I've wanted a tudor and like the tudor gmt look. Wanted to add a tudor to my collection. Great looking watch and easy to read with old eyes.
The problem with Tudor is it has no individuality. It just looks too much like a Rolex. If the could come up with their own brand look I'd probably get one, but whilst they look like a poor man's Rolex, I'll just stick to my Omega
I just came back from my local Rolex AD to have a look at the new Pepsi GMT. Once there, I asked to see the Tudor GMT, they had it in stainless steal bracelet and the leather Siena strap. It took me few minutes to get my opinion, attention and heart sold for the tudor on the leather strap! Unbelievable combination of style and presence.
6800£ for the Rolex seems like a bargain, I rarely ever see them for less then 8250£... Also, between these two, I think the Rolex is way better looking, this version of the GMT might be the most attractive Rolex of them all in my opinion.
The Tudor is rated to 200m, as a dive watch. For me, this punches 2 tickets, I can take it on travels, and feel comfortable diving with it. Before, I would have needed 2 watches. Kudos, Tudor!
I agree, I really want one now....it just looks so much cleaner looking than the GMT master...GMT master just looks too busy plus I don't care much for the cyclop.
As a modern man of 2018 I am sick of all the bourgeoisie reflected in this watch market and also why the hell do I have to be on a waiting list for years for something I can afford. My money is going else where.
I'm colourblind so the bezels confuse me so much. In certain lighting it almost looks like one colour! That said, the Tudor's bezel seems to be less "loud" and it looks like a better transition. The Tudor is certainly more watch for the money. Money no object, I'd just get a black bezel sub...
Well, I certainly prefer the ceramic bezel on the Rolex, but not at that huge price differential over the Tudor. But then I can get nicely executed ceramic bezels on Swiss GMT watches that cost way less than the Tudor - my Steinhart Batman GMT for example. Rolex seems to have a lock on the process to make red ceramic bezels, however, so there they seem to have us cornered.
I own a new ceramic Rolex sub (black) and a 2004 aluminum bluesy sub. I just purchased the Tudor bb gmt and I could not be more thrilled. It is chunky but it is a beautiful watch and true gmt.
As with the Tudor Pelagos vs the Submariner Date, it sounds like fantastic features for a fraction of the price but looks noticeably cheaper. I missed until a reviewer pointed it out about Tudor that they all have that after thought collar to disguise the crown as tube and fact that the crown doesn't screw flush to the case. Are they using a Rolex part designed for a Rolex case and have to use this cover to obscure otherwise visible threads of the crown tube.
Why didn’t you do a measure comparison? I bet if you measure up the hight including the bezel hight that the hight of both watches are comparable as the bezel of the Rolex is higher than the Tudor bezel evening out the difference of hight in the cases…would love to know that!
I bought the Tudor because I love the coloring and proportions. The Rolex turned me off because of the bling factor. I'm still going to be buying a couple Rolex watches, but they won't be modern day ones. I guess I like the more vintage look. Also, the Tudor is a strap monster! It looks good on such a wide variety of straps. Great video :)
I owned a DSSD & recently I purchased a Black bay rose..... apar5 from the movement, Tudor being flat on it underclass,,, sit very very comfortable on my wirst. Frankly I preferred it over my DSSD. To each of it own..... you hv to look at both as a totally different watch brand to judge which suits u.
I own two Rolexes, both bought from the same AD when you could just walk in & do that. A hulk submariner & the Batman GMT. I even got a small discount on that green dial Sub: no one was buying them in 2012. After I bought those I discovered Tudor, or more correctly I bought my wife one: the burgundy bezel black bay (eta). At that stage I realised how good they were & now I own six Tudors & my wife has 3. I just get so much more enjoyment from them.
I'd like to see a review of the Tudor Pelagos LHD or the Omega Planet Ocean 600m Steel. Thanks for the all the insights on the other watches. Great videos!
Honestly, i'd pick the Tudor every day. Just the fact that it lacks that fugly cyclops makes it a winner! That Rolex with the cyclops and that gawdy bracelet makes it look like a 1980s Florida pensioner's watch 😂😂 Tudor is so much cleaner and it looks STUNNING on a brown leather strap (available on purchase). On the bracelet gets washed out IMO
Le rerpule dino La swag Which reinforces my assumption that it's a pensioner's watch LOL If you can't see the date without x5 magnification maybe you shouldn't get into expensive watches
You hit the nail on the head. "Florida pensioners watch" this is how I perceive most Rolex's and I think they know they need to appeal to the under 50 crowd with a fresher, cleaner, less bling look.
If you like the looks of the Tudor over the Rolex, and one is one third the price with equal precision and quality than the other....the answer is obvious. In Rolex you are paying the advertising, the sponsorship and yes..the fame. But..honestly...do you think Tudor factory is going to compromise on purpose their manufacturing processes and quality just to be less expensive than Rolex? NO! They are built exactly by the same qualified watchmen, the same machines, with the same quality and the same control standards...difference in price is just explained by marketing expenses, ridiculous hype, desire and scarcity. Twenty years from now, the Tudor GMT will be a collector’s piece just by the fact that it somehow managed to "dent the famous crown".
I bought a Tudor GMT after having Rolex Sport Models after about 20 Years. I ordered all of them at the grey market with discount. For about two years it isn't possible to get the new Sea-Dweller or the new GMT to a normal price. Also the Tudor GMT will have waiting lists here in Germany. I like the watch and that for a very good price in my opinion...
I own a Tudor black bay. I do not own a Rolex. While price does play a significant role in purchasing, I paid $2000 for my Tudor as compared to what I would pay for a Rolex. The reason I love my Tudor beyond those gorgeous snowflake hands is when I tell a friend or an average joe that I have a Tudor, to them I might as well be wearing a cheap Walmart watch. Very few of my friends are into watches and wouldn’t know a Tudor if they saw one. However, it doesn’t matter if you’re into watches or not, everyone knows Rolex. While I hope to own a Rolex oyster perpetual 39mm one day, I love the anonymity of the Tudor. I like knowing that I have a luxury (to me) watch on my wrist and no one else has any idea.
I don't think one can go wrong with either, they are both hott looking pieces but money aside will hav to give the nod to the BLRO, hav to go with valuation
Rolex should have put the jubilee on the white gold version, in my opinion, because it’s less if a tool watch than the steel version. Vice versa the oyster bracelet suits the tool watch better.
Pasquale actually this is a pilots watch. This is inherently a tad dressy. The GMT Master originally came on the jubilee and this is a move back to its roots. Air travel was a luxurious activity in the 1950s and the pilots wore dressy watches with their uniforms.
I agree for the most part with you. I know the jubilee harks back to the first GMT Master, but to me it just doesn't seem right to put the oyster (albeit with classy polished center links) on the white gold version. In my opinion a white gold watch could never be a true tool watch. I associate the jubilee with gold or rolesor, thus making it dressier.
WF&co do you know if some new bezel color for Tudor GMT is coming in 2019? By the way, imho the last Rolex GMT ceramic seems a fake version of 90's Rolex GMT i found in china market 15years ago. Bezel colors are too vivid and luminova indicators too big. What do you think?
@@rousseau327 I’m with you on that too. I have skinny wrists. It does wear smaller weirdly though. The lugs are longer then a Rolex Pepsi but the end links are very supple in how the bracelet vertically drops from them (if that makes sense) they hug the wrist surprisingly well! What’s your ideal watch anyway my friend?
@@rousseau327 great watch, pre ceramic GMT’s I do love. I love the patina on the 1675 models of the older gen. What’s your favourite your own collection? Im very new to collecting. But am loving the hobby so far
We know you want more watches…. click here: linktr.ee/watchfinder
The best selling point of the tudor is, well, that you can get one
welp someone did not understand your point of Rolex scarcity.
I have a sub, but prefer the Tudor gmt to pepsi, the jubilee bracelet doesnt work on a sports watch
@@ET-dn2ik I'll give you money and you try walk into a Rolex AD and ask for the Rolex Pepsi GMT.
SlopedOtter actually it’s more like it’s a shorter waiting list - gave up and got mine from grey market. Paid a small premium but not I’m stuck with searching for the steel bracelet. It’s apparently a 3-4 month waiting period.
Carter Lamont actually if you theoretically gave him $100k to spend at an AD, they will magically conjure one out of their supposedly non existent vault at the back.
The overall perception is that Tudor is the smaller and thus a less wanted watch than the Rolex. I dont agree, whenever i see people driving a BMW i never think, 'looser, you cant affort the Rolls'. Same when people drive an Audi, couldn't the driver buy the Lamborghini instead. Maybe people make a choice based upon their feeling instead of their wallet. If i had to choose i'd go for the Tudor, it looks more like the old GMT Master11. The Tudor does everything the Rolex does but it is a bit less the star of the show. The watch is more 'what you see is what you get'. During a party or festival i dont want to stand in the middle of the crowd and jump like crazy, instead i like to look at the people having a great time and that's fine with me. Just like this Tudor GMT, we both look at the world and it is just fine.
Never a truer statement made 👌🏾
I don't really think your analogy is that fitting while I agree with the tone of it. No rolex made today is a rolls royce (That would be Patek sort of territory), nor a Lamborghini (That would be probably an RM).
I think that a more fitting comparison for Tudor and Rolex would be seen within car brands as opposed to between them. One could say that Tudor is the Mercedes A class to the Rolex E class, or the BMW 1 series to the Rolex 5 Series. They are both very well made objects, they are both a cut above the rest but there's something that can at times feel a little hollow about the lesser product.
I'd never judge somebody for owning a Tudor just as I wouldn't judge somebody for owning an A Class, but if you really want the E Class or the Rolex they will be a hollow substitute.
@@Macca-95 Good approach but I would compare it to Porsche(Rolex) and Audi (Tudor). Both are part of VW Group(the same company), that more inline with narrative. About Patek as Rolls Royse totally agree =)
Me too i dont like crown guards...especially the ugly cyclops!!! If rolex make their gmt looks like this tudor i will buy it even if it price double!!@
The tudor is just a more affordable option... Basically it is a homage to the true gmt
Tudor looks more clean
Yes you'e right.The Tudor really does have simpler lines, that gives it a more functional elegance.
more clean?...a true scholar
No it doesn’t. No Tudor is better looking with those goofy hands. Saying so is always coming from what you know you can’t have what may be possible to own.
I have a Rolex Hulk..I like Tudor’s look compared to some Rolex’s. Varies from comparison to comparison. No doubt Rolex is an over hyped brand to the max. Tudor is more correctly priced for quality
I've had the Tudor now for 2 months. It's absolutely beautiful - and I find myself choosing it over my Sub.
was wondering how your tudor gmt was doing with regards to bezel scratches etc?
@@esperoutdoors9421 No scratches so far. I guess as far as scratches go it all depends if you intend to sell on at some point. Personally I don't mind a few light scratches over time as it shows the watch has been on a journey with you. My Sub is for my son (eventually) and I will like the fact that it has a couple of dings and marks. It wouldn't be the same to hand over something that was "as new" and never been worn. So if you intend to keep it I wouldn't worry about the odd mark. They just add to the character (IMO).
@@esperoutdoors9421 I just bought the Tudor BB GMT and I intend to wear it under a variety of conditions. My late father-in-law owned an Omega from the early 80’s and wore it everywhere (driving a truck, farming, repairing heavy machinery, etc) for almost 40 years. The watch took quite a beating - the case and hesalite crystal were badly scratched and the bracelet was destroyed. When he passed away and willed the watch to my wife, we sent it to back to the factory to be refurbished. It is beautiful, but not perfect. But, most importantly, whenever my wife wears it, she thinks of her wonderful father and his love for her! And that is why my wife and I buy heirloom watches - they are something tangible we can pass on to our family when we die - something that they can wear on a regular basis and be reminded of our love for them. So, yes, my BB GMT will undoubtedly collect scratches and dings. But they won’t likely detract from the sentimental value. And if they do, the watch can be sent back to Tudor for refurbishing!
@@EliDeuce do you think the Tudor would hold up as well as the Omega for over 40 years?
@@edelmar17 I think the Tudor’s crystal and metal bracelet will hold up better than the Omega’s hesalite crystal and leather strap. But I think the Omega’s quartz movement will hold up better than the automatic movement of the Tudor.
Note, though, that my wife and I had the quartz movement of the Omega refurbished twice over a ten-year period.
I personally think the Tudor looks much more sophisticated and doesn’t have the garish “bling” look of the new ceramic Rolex GMT
Of course, there is the garish OG THE "rolex of the poor", which is worse!
WRONG...I can afford either and CHOSE the TUDOR. No ugly magnifier. If you need the magnifier, please don't drive as I certainly don't trust your eyesight. The glossiness of the Rolex is the same flaw that Omega has. The current Planet Ocean is also too glossy, although they don't have the almost obnoxious white enamel numerals on the bezel that Rolex has. The ceramic bezel with white numerals looks like an homage watch trying to be a Rolex...quite plastic looking. The more subdued Tudor bezel is more my taste, the lack of the ugly and superfluous "cyclops" magnifying lens is a BIG bonus! I also purchased the older Planet Ocean in 42 as the size and more subdued appearance appeals to me and as such, will likely never be made again. I could choose to afford either. People who say these things are more rich watch snobs than true aficionados. Rolex got my money either way. I'm sure they appreciate my "poorness". If you think a truly poor person can afford a TUDOR watch, you live in a strange reality.
I can highly recommend Specsavers.
I own a tudor black bay blue which I bought after my vintage Pepsi Rolex. I prefer the Tudor gmt to new Rolex and contemplating purchasing Tudor gmt
Love the tool watch look of the Tudor. Aluminium insert, snowflake hands, and no cyclops makes it so clean looking.
After owning both watches, I must say that the Tudor is much more watch for the money. It comes down to aesthetics. I feel Tudor is a brand to be reckoned with in the future and much of that depends on the future models this brand can muster. It looks very promising.
You could even sell snow to an eskimo
You mean yellow snow.
Or salt to a slug
Tudor looks more vintage but lack of crown gaurd bothers me.
Can i ask why? I love it for this reason?
Great analysis. I prefer Tudor.
My Rolex is 50 years old.... still ticking looks new so stay with the safe choice. Cheers
@@louissiracusa8069 Going by your argument, my Seiko skx007 will also tick in 50 years given proper maintenance and it is extremely durable to wear and tear...still want to go by those arguments? Just FYI, I prefer the Tudor, it is just a better cleaner looking watch made with high quality parts.
"you've bought a Tudor before because you couldn't afford the Rolex but now now you might just buy the Tudor because you don't want the Rolex what do you think" True hahaha
Today you buy the Tudor becasue you almost can not get the Rolex at retail price.
Great vid. Seems to me the Tudor is what Rolex was when it was coveted as a tool watch not a jewelry item. Both are great watches tho
This... Might just be the absolute perfect description of why they made it
Man, you should be replacing my Siri voice
I have a Tudor GMT I purchased about a year ago. Absolutely love the watch. It is a Rolex from stem to stern. Very, Very accurate. Very solid. And a very sharp and attractive watch. Dresses up or down. I added the leather strap as well and that looks sharp (and the Tudor Shield buckle looks outstanding.).
Love the understated Tudor.
Understatement....
I buyed in 1988 a Tudor Submariner for about 1000,-DM ( approx. 500,-€ today)
If you want to buy such a Tudor Submariner today (including box and papers) you have to pay some 6000...7000 ,-€ today....
I like both watches. I own both watches. I use both watches...
I think Tudor is like a butterfly that is coming out of its cocoon
I’m one of those that prefers the Tudor. Rolex is a perfect beautiful watch but Tudor is more my style. Less flashy.
I’d take the Tudor. A lot of negative preconceived notions that come with Rolex. Not to mention buying one at retail is nearly impossible.
Yep.
Rolex? Is it fake? A wannabe who got a loan just to buy it? Someone who thinks he could impress anyone with it?
Rolex, sadly became the watch for people who want to impress, rather than have something of value.
Sadly that goes for Patek and AP as well.
Or the worst of the worst, Richard Mille.
Both are great watches, I have a Tudor GMT and a Rolex Daytona, but I think there are better watches out there in both price brackets, the difference is that these watches are far from the best in their price brackets, but both hold their value and both are sought after even though you can buy better for less! A comparison should be made between these and their competitors.
I'm a simple man, I see *Watchfinder and co.* upload a new video, I hit like
Abhinay Raikar why do these stupid comments keep getting so many likes on every video
Brandon Collins, I think, as a redditor first, and an imgurian second, that this is a classy comment that we use to gain updoots, so I don't appreciate you coming in here and disrespecting us just because we are seeking some updoots.
Very simple. You should watch the video first.
Because Brandon, the content of Watchfinder's videos are always A+ material. You may not like some of the watches, but the editing, grammar, tone, history all make it worthwhile. Visit other watch channels and you will understand.
omg people I'm not talking about the content. Watchfinder is absolutely fantastic I know that, hence why I watch all of the videos. I'm talking about this cliché comment that appears in every video I watch, watchfinder or not
Second year with my Black Bay 58. It's a great watch. Great accuracy, movement, power reserve, solid, thin, comfortable and whisper quiet for a sports watch.
It draws attention but still subtle enough to wear it daily.
I couldn't go any other brand but Tudor and Rolex.
technically speaking the rolex is 5x as much concerning market pricing
I like the less ostentatious look of the Tudor.
A watch of the man that likes good quality watches rather than the man who likes quality watches but is driven by price /brand snobbery.
On wearing it my honest criticism is that the 15mm thick headcase adds weight. Unless the watch strap fits quite tight on your wrist it naturally slips down. After a while it can nark you. Fine when hotter as wrists expand a little when warmer.
I say this as it's an honest gripe to consider. 😐
As an owner of the Tudor GMT I have two complaints that can both be solved by using the Black Bay 58' case. Its a little tall at 15mm and I'd prefer it was 38-40mm wide. I would love the Rolex but I also don't want to wait 3 years to own it or pay a huge mark up on the secondary market.
Horology House I wouldn't say 100% game over... unless it also had the ceramic bezel too lol.
@@macrolabco I don't think it would be over for the Pepsi, similar to how the BB58 didn't spell the end of Submariner mark ups. The Rolex Pepsi is rare and desirable enough that there will still be people who will want and buy it because it looks and feels more premium, and it is, afterall, a status symbol among many.
A BB58 Pepsi would certainly draw many people away from the Rolex, but I doubt it would be enough to drive the price or the waiting for the Rolex by any significant amount.
@@macrolabco Yeah, of course. But a single watch from Tudor isn't going to change that perspective that people have of Rolex sports watches. I agree (and earnestly hope) that there will be a time in the future where Rolex watches will once again see a decline in demand (probably followed by a period of high demand again), but I don't think one watch from Tudor will do the trick. However, if companies from all over start offering the visual and practical appeal of Rolexes at a much lower cost like the BB58 Pepsi would, I can see it happening.
Tudor is a cleaner design so i like it alot. But ofc true judgement is best served with both in hand. And this is no Versus. This is Rolex AND Tudor, father and son.
Wanted a GMT watch - proper GMT for world travel. Didn't want to spend £15K on the Rolex - although it's a fine watch. £3K on the Tudor - sorted. These are real world prices. It's a no brainer unless it's the brand you really want.
I’ve always been more of a Tudor fan and I can’t explain why
This Tudor reminds me a young, fit and cool man, this Rolex reminds me an old, fat and rich man.
Tudor is the poor man's Rolex.
@@Iuckylukey tudor looks better than rolex...only the price makes rolex rich.....
Not so anymore.
@ Daniel D'Esposito ... so perfectly illustrates why I have never desired a Rolex.
@@Iuckylukey Tudor is more cool and fit
The main reason to get the Tudor is you are not prepared to spend 30% over list to own the Rolex any time soon.
Michael Orme hmm not entirely. I personally prefer the bracelet to the Rolex, and the Rolex bezel is something many people have a love hate relationship with. Not a true red and blue. Finally the Tudor has improved waterproof rating.
Personally I would take the Tudor, and put the money you save into a more justifiable Rolex. But that’s just my opinion.
30%? lol, they sell for AUD$35000 in second hand shops.
+ Xianhong Meng Well even more reason not to buy one, especially as they will tank at some stage. Also there's a big difference between what some chancer wants for it and what it actually sells for.
Sorry Herbert I was referring to Meng's comment. It means to take a steep downturn.
you can get them for 15-16 in sydney vintage dealers
Rolex will always have the stigma of being bought my jerks and showoffs, in short by obnoxious people. In getting a Tutor you avoid being in that circle and still get the Rolex style to a good extent.
Robert Sullivan a Tudor is still a Rolex. Just a least expensive model.
bngr bngr and without the social stigma.
dimitriis1337 ask someone about a Tudor and the word Rolex soon enters the conversation.
bngr bngr Yes it is but many won't make the connection, my opinion.
other than a sub most people would not even know what the gmt is. i have a explorer 216570 and no one knows its a rolex, thats why i bought it.
Had the Tudor GMT for almost a year now and loving it! The subdued bezel colours are so much better than the Rolex I think - in fact I don't even care about Rolex anymore tbh!
The tudor is the poor mans rolex.... That is what they were and always will be
@Grandma Pretentious only in sound and the truth in fact... And the Angels... they did sing
Outspent agree more Paul. That being said, there are some models that have a nice look and it’s much better to lose a FXD to a robbery than my subs/Day Dates
take a look at the newest speedmaster racing and compare its value with the OG speedy pls
I have owned both. I owned and wore Daily for two years the Rolex GMT II ceramic all-black. Then later, owned and wore daily for about three years The Rolex GMT II Batman. I liked them both: great watches, kept good time, reliable, comfortable. I bought the Tudor BB GMT, because I preferred the throwback looks or the much more understated looks. I particularly prefer the aesthetics of the Tudor dial. Additionally, one could buy two of the Tudor GMTs and still have money left over for every one of the Rolex GMTs. And of course, you can find the Tudor GMT at your local AD; while the Rolex GMTs are no longer available through normal processes.
Unfortunately, one final thought: I mentioned that the Rolexes were reliable? Yes, they were and are. However, my Tudor GMT Was not. It has been back to Tudor-Rolex for a movement replacement in order to fix the original movement’s date-change-problem. We will see how the new movement does as the years go on. 🧐
I still love wearing the Tudor GMT. It feels great; looks great; keeps great time. I am wearing it now.
Also own a 2016 Rolex Sea-Dweller 4000 (40mm ceramic). Great watch, a couple of nice quartz Seiko, and a couple of ETA-powered Weiss watches.
175cm, 6.9 inch wrist.
I like everything about the Rolex more, from the jubilee bracelet, bezel edge, hour hand, date magnification, crown guard. The Tudor is still very nice, I just dislike the hour hand on Tudor watches.
That said, I would've liked to see a more vibrant blue and red like its predecessor, instead of the muted tones.
greekatso the snow flake hand really puts me off owning a Tudor. For this reason alone its always going to push me towards the Rolex.
Yeah same here. I got my first Rolex this year, and love it.
greekatso Which Rolex did you get?
I got the Sea Dweller 43mm, 50th Anniversary.
greekatso Nice. Thanks.
love the look of the Tudor just wished it was thinner and they make a Tudor b b 58 pepsi and then you can take my money .
Hate the jubilee bracelet on the Rolex.
I was thinking the same at first but after looking into it more the thickness really doesn't bother me especially after watching this video it really convinced me that I need to own one myself.
The macro shoots in all your videos are “pure class”!
Man, this channel hates to waste peoples' time. Very informational and in under six minutes. No frills. Straight watch.
Thank you for a refreshing break in the middle of my hectic day!
What about date issue of Tudor GMT? Was the problem solved?
The Tudor GMT is plenty watch for me. The timing wasright for me to get a good sports watch and I went in looking for a Rolex. Then I found out there was a years long waiting list ....or..... I could pay seven grand over retail to buy somebody's USED watch. That's a hard NO in my book. Not unless thewatch comes with box,papersand a free lunch with Jesus.
Tudor has started to become a class of its own with time.
Honestly I like the batman the most
Brandon Collins I can’t agree more. Day and night, blue and black. Prefer the bracelet. I actually think it’s perfect and will become one of the most desirable Rolex watches in the future.
I'm with you on that one!
Agreed, I went with the Batman, and scratched the red bezel itch with a Heritage Black Bay (red bezel).
Brandon Collins Nigeria is better tho
Batman is the BEST GMT.....still.
Welp, I bought the Black Bay GMT. Super happy with it.
I have The Tudor GMT Pepsi & I'm thrilled with it. The ceramic bezel of the Rolex is appealing but not enough to change my mind even if I were the richest man on the face of this earth.
I would recommend the Tudor as the tool watch......
I have got a 1988 Tudor Submariner and the Rolex "Hulk" Submariner from 2017. Precesion per day is still the same....
Similar performance in the field of GMT Master?
With regards to your broad brushed statement on Tudors inferiority to Rolex, being watch specific, I have the Tudor blue Pelagos which I thoroughly enjoy, appreciate and value along with 12 other sport Rolex models I own. With Tudors in house movement, ceramic bezel, 70 hr. power reserve, impeccable finishing of the case and a bracelet that is superior to the submariner, I feel it more than holds its own with Rolex.
Dr. Raymond , and you would not think twice in using what it was intended to be used for...... a dive watch. Love Rolex (have a couple) but they lost their adventure tool appeal which Tudor picked up . That Pelagos clasp is awesome.
Rolex might have better fit and finish in general, which is to be expected considering the markup you pay, but not on this particular example. Just look at the sloppy paint job on the GMT hand.
Good point. I was wondering whether anyone else noticed that
1:42 - the red paint on the gmt hand is chipped?
Well. To Rolex owners, the Tudor will always be in the shadow of the older brother as the "the poor mans Rolex" because they cannot understand that anyone would choose anything but a Rolex.
This douchebag trait of Rolex makes alot of us choose something else because we don't want that "douchebag" label to our name.
gardehusar24 Speaking only for myself, I don’t really agree (I own two Rolexes and a Tudor, among several other pieces). But for guys that only have one watch, and that watch is a Sub, I think you’re probably correct.
jason starek That's the great thing. We can actually dissagre and be civil 😉
It's just 90% of the Rolex guys I meet are the douchie type. Unfortunately.
jason starek I have one Rolex, and it’s a Sub. I would own a Tudor. 🤷🏽♂️
I agree. I am a douchebag who own a few rolexes and a couple of tudor black bays. I ended up selling the tudors...🤷🏻♂️
I love rolex in every way design, looks, prestige. But There is something rebellious and scandalous about Tudor.
The Rolex Pepsi matched with jubilee bracelet looks weird.
BBnose, but I think that look has been made a bit easier to accept with the Seiko SKX009.
Agree. A sport watch case pair with dress watch bracelet, weird combination.
@Lucky Strike The problem isn't so much that they sell the GMT on Jubilee, the problem is that they don't sell it on Oyster as well.
How is the rolex's balance spring more advanced? The Tudor uses AMAGNETIC materials (i.e., silicon) not anti-magnetic.
Does the comparison still hold now that Tudor GMT costs around $4000 in May 2020?
I could have purchased a used Rolex Explorer 1 but I chose to go with the Tudor Northflag because its everything I was looking for in a watch. The perfect blend of sporty, dressy, and tool watch.
Can you please do e review of the frederique constant flyback chronograph manufacture?:)
Has been a month since I bought my Tudor Pepsi GMT. I’ve noticed how similar it looks to the Rolex when looked at a distance, almost looks like the it itself. Loving the watch so far and have my eye on a BB 58 Solid Gold.
I find it funny that many people think that the BB does not have a ceramic bezel because of the cost, and derive a difference in quality from that. That's a design question and fits in with the heritage look. After all, a Certina Active Diver also has a ceramic bezel and costs only about €900.
I've owned the old rolex gmt 2 but had nothing but problems, I've wanted a tudor and like the tudor gmt look. Wanted to add a tudor to my collection. Great looking watch and easy to read with old eyes.
The problem with Tudor is it has no individuality. It just looks too much like a Rolex. If the could come up with their own brand look I'd probably get one, but whilst they look like a poor man's Rolex, I'll just stick to my Omega
If only they made the Tudor GMT in a smaller case. If they used the BlackBay 58 case with the GMT bezel, I'd buy the Tudor GMT in a heartbeat.
I just came back from my local Rolex AD to have a look at the new Pepsi GMT. Once there, I asked to see the Tudor GMT, they had it in stainless steal bracelet and the leather Siena strap. It took me few minutes to get my opinion, attention and heart sold for the tudor on the leather strap! Unbelievable combination of style and presence.
6800£ for the Rolex seems like a bargain, I rarely ever see them for less then 8250£... Also, between these two, I think the Rolex is way better looking, this version of the GMT might be the most attractive Rolex of them all in my opinion.
Waited for this one for a while! You guys always post high quality videos
The Tudor is rated to 200m, as a dive watch. For me, this punches 2 tickets, I can take it on travels, and feel comfortable diving with it. Before, I would have needed 2 watches. Kudos, Tudor!
Do you dive at a depth of 200 meters?
@@Andre-hi9xn no, but 60 isn’t uncommon.
I’m so happy I actually genuinely like the Tudor better, even if price weren’t a factor
I agree, I really want one now....it just looks so much cleaner looking than the GMT master...GMT master just looks too busy plus I don't care much for the cyclop.
As a modern man of 2018 I am sick of all the bourgeoisie reflected in this watch market and also why the hell do I have to be on a waiting list for years for something I can afford. My money is going else where.
You should compare this Tudor GMT vs Rolex GMT Master II 16760, they are visually identical!! Thanks for your videos.
Include profile comparison shots please.
Just got mine today ! Tudor GmT, so happy with it.
I'm colourblind so the bezels confuse me so much. In certain lighting it almost looks like one colour! That said, the Tudor's bezel seems to be less "loud" and it looks like a better transition.
The Tudor is certainly more watch for the money. Money no object, I'd just get a black bezel sub...
Well, I certainly prefer the ceramic bezel on the Rolex, but not at that huge price differential over the Tudor. But then I can get nicely executed ceramic bezels on Swiss GMT watches that cost way less than the Tudor - my Steinhart Batman GMT for example. Rolex seems to have a lock on the process to make red ceramic bezels, however, so there they seem to have us cornered.
Can we have a Credor review?
I’d love to hear the history and review of the 1935 B-uhr watches, specifically the ones made by laco.
The ceramic in the Pespi isn't crisp. The red is not red and the blue is sort of muddy. For me. it's got to be pre-ceramic.
Are the prices for both pieces going to keep climbing beyond RRP?
I own a new ceramic Rolex sub (black) and a 2004 aluminum bluesy sub. I just purchased the Tudor bb gmt and I could not be more thrilled. It is chunky but it is a beautiful watch and true gmt.
As with the Tudor Pelagos vs the Submariner Date, it sounds like fantastic features for a fraction of the price but looks noticeably cheaper. I missed until a reviewer pointed it out about Tudor that they all have that after thought collar to disguise the crown as tube and fact that the crown doesn't screw flush to the case. Are they using a Rolex part designed for a Rolex case and have to use this cover to obscure otherwise visible threads of the crown tube.
Why didn’t you do a measure comparison? I bet if you measure up the hight including the bezel hight that the hight of both watches are comparable as the bezel of the Rolex is higher than the Tudor bezel evening out the difference of hight in the cases…would love to know that!
I bought the Tudor because I love the coloring and proportions. The Rolex turned me off because of the bling factor. I'm still going to be buying a couple Rolex watches, but they won't be modern day ones. I guess I like the more vintage look. Also, the Tudor is a strap monster! It looks good on such a wide variety of straps. Great video :)
The same could be said about all the watches having ceramic bezel, right?
I owned a DSSD & recently I purchased a Black bay rose..... apar5 from the movement, Tudor being flat on it underclass,,, sit very very comfortable on my wirst. Frankly I preferred it over my DSSD. To each of it own..... you hv to look at both as a totally different watch brand to judge which suits u.
Any chance of uploading in 4k?
Can you compare Rolex gmt master ii to Grand Seiko sbge201?, Since the two watches are in the same category.
Thanks.
I own two Rolexes, both bought from the same AD when you could just walk in & do that. A hulk submariner & the Batman GMT. I even got a small discount on that green dial
Sub: no one was buying them in 2012. After I bought those I discovered Tudor, or more correctly I bought my wife one: the burgundy bezel black bay (eta). At that stage I realised how good they were & now I own six Tudors & my wife has 3. I just get so much more enjoyment from them.
I'd like to see a review of the Tudor Pelagos LHD or the Omega Planet Ocean 600m Steel. Thanks for the all the insights on the other watches. Great videos!
I was waiting for this one for a while. Absolutely love your videos guys, don't stop making them!
Honestly, i'd pick the Tudor every day. Just the fact that it lacks that fugly cyclops makes it a winner!
That Rolex with the cyclops and that gawdy bracelet makes it look like a 1980s Florida pensioner's watch 😂😂
Tudor is so much cleaner and it looks STUNNING on a brown leather strap (available on purchase).
On the bracelet gets washed out IMO
SpaghettiKillah you’ll be needing that cyclops when your eyes go.
Agree....less is more and Tudors got it...
Le rerpule dino La swag
Which reinforces my assumption that it's a pensioner's watch LOL
If you can't see the date without x5 magnification maybe you shouldn't get into expensive watches
You hit the nail on the head. "Florida pensioners watch" this is how I perceive most Rolex's and I think they know they need to appeal to the under 50 crowd with a fresher, cleaner, less bling look.
"1980s Florida pensioner's watch" :D
If you like the looks of the Tudor over the Rolex, and one is one third the price with equal precision and quality than the other....the answer is obvious. In Rolex you are paying the advertising, the sponsorship and yes..the fame. But..honestly...do you think Tudor factory is going to compromise on purpose their manufacturing processes and quality just to be less expensive than Rolex? NO! They are built exactly by the same qualified watchmen, the same machines, with the same quality and the same control standards...difference in price is just explained by marketing expenses, ridiculous hype, desire and scarcity. Twenty years from now, the Tudor GMT will be a collector’s piece just by the fact that it somehow managed to "dent the famous crown".
I bought a Tudor GMT after having Rolex Sport Models after about 20 Years. I ordered all of them at the grey market with discount.
For about two years it isn't possible to get the new Sea-Dweller or the new GMT to a normal price.
Also the Tudor GMT will have waiting lists here in Germany.
I like the watch and that for a very good price in my opinion...
Please compare the new Seamaster 300M Professional to the Rolex Submariner. Would love to hear the comparisons from you.
I own a Tudor black bay. I do not own a Rolex. While price does play a significant role in purchasing, I paid $2000 for my Tudor as compared to what I would pay for a Rolex. The reason I love my Tudor beyond those gorgeous snowflake hands is when I tell a friend or an average joe that I have a Tudor, to them I might as well be wearing a cheap Walmart watch. Very few of my friends are into watches and wouldn’t know a Tudor if they saw one. However, it doesn’t matter if you’re into watches or not, everyone knows Rolex. While I hope to own a Rolex oyster perpetual 39mm one day, I love the anonymity of the Tudor. I like knowing that I have a luxury (to me) watch on my wrist and no one else has any idea.
I don't think one can go wrong with either, they are both hott looking pieces but money aside will hav to give the nod to the BLRO, hav to go with valuation
Rolex should have put the jubilee on the white gold version, in my opinion, because it’s less if a tool watch than the steel version. Vice versa the oyster bracelet suits the tool watch better.
Pasquale actually this is a pilots watch. This is inherently a tad dressy. The GMT Master originally came on the jubilee and this is a move back to its roots. Air travel was a luxurious activity in the 1950s and the pilots wore dressy watches with their uniforms.
I agree for the most part with you. I know the jubilee harks back to the first GMT Master, but to me it just doesn't seem right to put the oyster (albeit with classy polished center links) on the white gold version. In my opinion a white gold watch could never be a true tool watch.
I associate the jubilee with gold or rolesor, thus making it dressier.
Pasquale I totally agree!
4:48 Absolutely perfectly said!
Que cuesta y se consigue en Amazon
great analysis and conclusion. I want the 58 GMT
Can you buy an LHD Rolex ?
WF&co do you know if some new bezel color for Tudor GMT is coming in 2019? By the way, imho the last Rolex GMT ceramic seems a fake version of 90's Rolex GMT i found in china market 15years ago. Bezel colors are too vivid and luminova indicators too big. What do you think?
If Tudor made the Pepsi in a 39mm or 40mm, I'd buy it in a heartbeat
At 41 it’s a good size I think. Feels like a 40. It’s just the 15mm thickness that lets it down. Mine doesn’t slip under the cuff really
@@cfccorndawg 15mm thickness and the 50mm lug to lug for me
@@rousseau327 I’m with you on that too. I have skinny wrists. It does wear smaller weirdly though. The lugs are longer then a Rolex Pepsi but the end links are very supple in how the bracelet vertically drops from them (if that makes sense) they hug the wrist surprisingly well! What’s your ideal watch anyway my friend?
@@cfccorndawg 16710 GMT Master 2 is great imo. bracelet is definitely behind the times, but case shape and dimensions both make the watch wear so well
@@rousseau327 great watch, pre ceramic GMT’s I do love. I love the patina on the 1675 models of the older gen. What’s your favourite your own collection? Im very new to collecting. But am loving the hobby so far
I Bought A Pelagos over a Rolex. Thanks for the Videos!!
I was waiting for this for this SOOOO much...