# TUDOR and ROLEX



## Harris (Jan 30, 2006)

Can anyone speak to the quality of Tudor, particularly as compared with Rolex. I've heard that Tudor is owned by Rolex and the quality is just as high, but I'm eager to learn more. Thanks.


----------



## Foghorn (Feb 2, 2005)

Tudor is no longer marketed or sold (new) in the us. Supposedly to drive sales toward another Rolex model. Many of the newer movements are ETA make, not Rolex. ETA movements are fine, Omega & other high quality watch houses in Europe use them. Tudors are still sold in Europe & in Asian markets- rumor has it that they are to be discontinued. I dont know if this rumor is valid or not. I see very little difference in buying a Tudor sub and a Rolex sub. It is basically the same watch, with different dials. I can't speak to the other models, I am not familiar with them.
F


----------



## Topsider (Jul 9, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Harris_
> 
> Can anyone speak to the quality of Tudor, particularly as compared with Rolex. I've heard that Tudor is owned by Rolex and the quality is just as high, but I'm eager to learn more.


Foghorn is correct, although I hadn't heard about them being discontinued. Tudor is basically Rolex's downmarket brand. Many of their watches have used identical cases, bracelets, etc. as Rolex watches, notably the old Tudor Sub. The biggest difference is the use of outsourced (typically ETA) movements instead of Rolex's in-house movements. Tudor watches typically do not make as much use of precious metals as some Rolex models, either. The build quality is pretty much equal to a Rolex, and a properly cared-for Tudor could easily last a lifetime.


----------



## A.Squire (Apr 5, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by KentW_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks Kent.
Yet another reason for tuning into the trad forum.
I always assumed the Tudor and the Rolex were Twinkies in different wrappers.

Jonesing for a Twinkie now,
Allen


----------



## rip (Jul 13, 2005)

There's a very informative article on Tudors in the Spring 2006 issue of Vox, the Antiquorum magazine (for those not familiar with Antiquorum, they are the premier auction house devoted to timepieces). In my exprience with both Rolex and Tudor, the fit and finish of the cases and bracelets is just about equal. The earlier Tudors actually used Rolex cases and bracelets. The significant differences are to be found in the hand-finishing of the movements. It is instructive, I believe, that no Tudor is a certified chronometer, whereas almost all Rolex, excluding the Cellini line, are.

Tudors are certainly fine watches throughout their line, some quite collectible, and it is generally thought to be an excellent entry-level watch for a neophyte collector.

Train your eye! Then train your brain to trust your eye.


----------



## misterman (Feb 3, 2005)

tudor is the trad watch, in my opinion. rolex is bling nowadays.


----------



## Tom Buchanan (Nov 7, 2005)

I own a Tudor Submariner. It is the same case as the Rolex Submariner, but a different movement as stated above. I wanted the Rolex quality and heritage, but I did not want the Rolex baggage ("Is that a real rolex?). It is an ETA base movement, just like many (maybe most?) Swiss made automatics. From my point of view, you get the rock solid case of a Rolex, with a movement that any watchmaker can repair or service.

Tudor also has a rather distinguished history. Several militaries have issued Tudor subs through the years. 

But beware of who you purchase from. Fakes are rampant on eBay. Strangely enough, since Rolex enforces its trademarks and most people generally know what to look for in Rolexes, theives are producing fake vintage Tudors.


----------



## Harris (Jan 30, 2006)

https://www.tudorwatch.com/

From whom/where does one go about purchasing a Tudor in the USA?


----------



## EarnBeau (Nov 21, 2005)

Value seekers may want to consider the cost of service of Tudor and Rolex. The ubiquitous ETA 2824 many later Tudors use, the ones with shields on the dial at twelve o'clock, may cost $100 to $200 to service, perhaps less, depending on where you seek service. The upmarket Rolex may cost $500 to $1000 for service. Yes, I meant to type those numbers ! Rolex is a classic study in brand building, control of distribution, and trading-up the customer. They cost more to buy and keep running.


----------



## Foghorn (Feb 2, 2005)

Ok, I have a number of watches & if you would like I would be happy to offer my thoughts on Rolex. If you are a Rolex fan, this is not directed toward you- it is directed toward those considering purchasing a Rolex.
(Vintage & Sub models excluded)
1) Rolex controls the price of new & used watches. Rolex watches are all pre-sold. Pre-selling ensures that there is no surplus & no great flux in price. As they increase the new product prices it also increases the price on the pre-owned market. Rolex also buys back it's own watches & refurbishes them. They re-sell these refurb's as "certified" & give you a warranty. 
2) Cost of upkeep & maint on a Rolex is more expensive than the watch. The warranty is invalidated if a non "Rolex trained/authorized" watch repairer removes the case from the back of the watch. This is a costly process to attain this certification & that is why there is such an upcharge for authorized repair/maint. Dedicate a minimum of $1,400 for 
sevice during your 1st 10 years.
3) Recognition factor- I do not want need or want an ostentatious watch in my line of work. It could be professionally detremental to don a watch that says $$$$. My Omegas (Speedmaster & Seamaster) are high-functioning watches that do not draw attention to themselves but are very accurate chronometers(-/+ 3 sec per day). 
4) The message that a Rolex gives is not something I want to be associated with personally. It is an aspirational piece if you ask me & that really goes against all things trad (unless inherited).
That all being said if that's what you want, it should appreciate in value- along with inflation. I'm no investment counselor, but my money is better off in real property. I can afford one but, I do better with out such.

Is a Rolex watch really any better than any other watch? No, but they are very well marketed & widely regarded. Pierre Perignon could not have done for Dom, what Rolex has done for the watch industry. I respect Rolex watches, but am overall not so with _some _of their owners.

If you are seriously considering buying one buy a vintage Rolex, they are on the end of the boom. Vintage Rolex Subs & Rolex military really are worth more than their weight in gold these days. It is the trend, to see these watches increase in value with their popularity. If you want one, you will pay a heafty premium. My advice is to wait a few years for the boom/prices to subside

Regards,
F


----------



## Foghorn (Feb 2, 2005)

BTW: The gold Rolexes are going to be the real steal right now & I would advise you to take advantage if you MUST buy a Rolex.
F


----------



## fishertw (Jan 27, 2006)

All of the above is why I bought a Tag Heuer for myself some twenty years ago when I completed a second advanced degree. It is still keeping excellent time and the service by Tag and the jewler from whom I purchased it has been flawless. Even got a "Tag Heuer" ballcap at the "Rolex24" several years ago.


----------



## Harris (Jan 30, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by EarnBeau_
> 
> Value seekers may want to consider the cost of service of Tudor and Rolex. The ubiquitous ETA 2824 many later Tudors use, the ones with shields on the dial at twelve o'clock, may cost $100 to $200 to service, perhaps less, depending on where you seek service. The upmarket Rolex may cost $500 to $1000 for service. Yes, I meant to type those numbers ! Rolex is a classic study in brand building, control of distribution, and trading-up the customer. They cost more to buy and keep running.


Like this one?

https://www.orolus.com/images/tudor/72000-62450-WTE-ROM-SB.jpg


----------



## Topsider (Jul 9, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Harris_
> 
> Like this one?


Nice. That watch is just _begging_ for a grosgrain band. [8D]


----------



## Harris (Jan 30, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by KentW_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Agreed, Kent. See my post on the other forum about the quandary of finding a business that carries the Tudor line. Talk about a challenge.


----------



## wolfpacklaw (Apr 6, 2006)

Harris,

This is the number for the New York Tudor office. I'm sure they can help you out. They are only open from nine to five.

1-212-758-7700


----------



## Harris (Jan 30, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by wolfpacklaw_
> 
> Harris,
> 
> ...


Many thanks. I'll give a call next week. I've been hearing good things about Tudor as of late.


----------



## Pressfan (Aug 6, 2003)

*Advice Requested*

Well, today I ordered this Tudor Prince (34mm): 
The things I discover (or rediscover) from this forum! I remember seeing Tudor watches years ago in my hometown at a jeweller of German origin who also stocked Rolex. I hadn't thought of the brand in years until seeing it here!

Now, here is my question. Although Tudor is available at or through most Rolex dealers here in Canada (as opposed to the U.S.), when I inquired at a few dealers, I discovered that only a few models (if any) are kept in stock. Every single dealer I spoke to, while helpful, all tried to push me to buy a Rolex. While not entirely dismissive of Tudor, they all suggested that Rolex was by far the superior watch, that Rolex would maintain its value and that they really did not receive much call for Tudors.

After reviewing the catalogue, I was surprised to see the range of dial styles available: very comprehensive for the Prince, and all quite similar to what is available from Rolex. Although I chose the classic model, I must admit that I was tempted by this: 
The dealer checked with Rolex, and unfortunately there is no stock available, and the watch must be ordered from Switzerland. This will take 2-3 months.

The dealer had a similar Rolex Datejust available in stock: 
Of course, it was about three times the price of the Tudor (a 20% discount from list price was offered on both Tudor and Rolex). The dealer strongly encouraged the purchase of the Rolex.

I can't believe I am even considering the Rolex, but what do the watch experts think? I am not really looking for an heirloom and the indication of a higher service cost for the Rolex is a deterrent. Is there a reason why the Tudor is so "neglected" other than because it is not advertised (I can't ever remember seeing a Tudor ad). I am sure that the profit on the Rolex is an incentive to the dealer to encourage it, but is there anything else I should keep in mind. I have 2-3 months to change my mind!

On a side note, it is incredible that I now appreciate things I took for granted when I was growing up! My hometown has an Alden dealer, a couple of Samuelsohn dealers and from my childhood I remember my parents buying lots of Aquascutum, Jaeger, Burberry and Daks. At the time, I thought it was so terribly uncool. Why didn't our shops carry "modern" labels like Polo and Calvin Klein! I must be getting old as I have now become my parents!


----------



## shoefetish (Jan 15, 2006)

Rolex WAS an oustanding watch when there was a lot of handwork done. This peaked out in the 70s when production was still in the thousands per year.

Today sadly it has become a flaunter's timepiece. Production has passed the millionth mark per year and still Rolex talks about the handwork. So what are they using, Santa's elves?
There are enough Rolexes to satisfy demand but supply is controlled to push prices, sometimes to ridiculous heights.
In Asia the steel Daytona is always sold higher than full retail. Till recently all Daytona movements were the Rolex modified Zenith El Premero called the Rolex 4030 calibre. The newer P series have the in-house 4130 calibre but during the transition some 4030 were used and those command a premium. 
Also about Rolex's chronometer rating. After the 1 year warranty period the chronometer rating is void. Many brands meet chronometer standards but don't want to incur the extra expense of testing.
In another post I have mentioned of new Rolexes going in for service within the 1 year warranty period. 

Tudors are good watches for the money. The lack of publicity by Rolex has relegated them to a lower rung. Recent adverts featuring, for example, Tiger Woods has helped the brand. Older Tudors have the text 'original oyster case by Rolex Geneva' on the back. Their ETA movements are good, solid workhorses. As ETAs are generic, a Tudor repair can be as simple as replacing the whole movement for very little money.

I own both Rolex and Tudor watches and the Tudors are in no way inferior in performance. In fact the Tudor chronograph is, imo, better that the Daytona because of the inclusion of a date window and for a quarter the price.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

fishertw said:


> All of the above is why I bought a Tag Heuer for myself some twenty years ago when I completed a second advanced degree. It is still keeping excellent time and the service by Tag and the jewler from whom I purchased it has been flawless. Even got a "Tag Heuer" ballcap at the "Rolex24" several years ago.


My sentiments exactly. However, I have not been happy with the lack of durability I've experienced with the band on my "link series" Tag. Otherwise the watch is a great timepiece.


----------



## I_Should_Be_Working (Jun 23, 2005)

Regarding the estimated cost of service for a Rolex, I have had no work performed in over 12 years so far. This is for a Sub worn daily, and all that entails. 

Perhaps some one will chime in that I have missed something, and I can't really think of myself as someone who really knows watches. But, I'm not aware of any annual maintenance or routine service that has been skipped.


----------



## zegnamtl (Apr 19, 2005)

Years ago when I only had a rather loud Tag divers watch, 
I picked this Tudor up for a very reasonable amount.

I believe you can still find several of these around, with a fresh strap, off you go!

https://imageshack.us


----------



## JohnnyDeeper (Jul 22, 2006)

It's interesting that the yellow gold Rolex trades at a such a discount. I bought a yellow gold President in '98 for $6K because I thought it was a cool watch, and a good investment. I'm a contrarian, and at the time I thought that type of watch would come back into style with 80's nostalgia. However, the price has stayed flat, even with gold prices going up.



Foghorn said:


> BTW: The gold Rolexes are going to be the real steal right now & I would advise you to take advantage if you MUST buy a Rolex.
> F


----------



## shoefetish (Jan 15, 2006)

JohnnyDeeper said:


> It's interesting that the yellow gold Rolex trades at a such a discount. I bought a yellow gold President in '98 for $6K because I thought it was a cool watch, and a good investment. I'm a contrarian, and at the time I thought that type of watch would come back into style with 80's nostalgia. However, the price has stayed flat, even with gold prices going up.


Yellow Gold is most common amongst Presidents so prices have been pretty consistent for the last 20 years or so. Best time to dispose of them is when a Rolex price hike has been announced. There will be frantic buying for a while and then the dust will settle.


----------



## JohnnyDeeper (Jul 22, 2006)

I should probably dump my prez on your bookie friends! But they probably are fans of the platinum, or white gold version.


----------



## kitonbrioni (Sep 30, 2004)

Decades ago I looked at a Tudor and then got a Rolex which has been a workhorse--though I'm now wearing a Piaget in the summer and a Patek in cooler seasons with the Rolex resting the in the safety deposit box.


----------



## Spooter (Jul 15, 2006)

Foghorn said:


> BTW: The gold Rolexes are going to be the real steal right now & I would advise you to take advantage if you MUST buy a Rolex.
> F


Foghorn,

why are gold Rolexes a steal right now? Are you basing that on the current price of gold or the project rise of the metal or ???

Cordially,

Spooter.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

I came across this one at www.girards.com. Price: $350. Anyone have any experience with them?


----------



## Tom Buchanan (Nov 7, 2005)

Laxplayer said:


> I came across this one at www.girards.com. Price: $350. Anyone have any experience with them?


I have no knowledge of Girards, but the dial and hands on that watch are very poor fabrications. If the description of that watch on their site does not clearly disclose this, then I would stay far away.

That dial is a strange copy of the "California" dial used on certain old Tudors (which by itself is debated in Rolex circles), but rebadged as a Rolex tudor (no such thing, it is one or the other). The hands look like copies of the old Tudor Ranger hands.

I would suggest you steer clear of the watch. While it may be a good internal watch for $350, people who know rolex/tudor might view you as the type of guy who puts cheaply made, aftermarket Cadillac parts on a nice Buick. Nothing wrong with a Buick, and nothing wrong with a Cadillac, but very wrong to combine the two.


----------



## Topsider (Jul 9, 2005)

Tom Buchanan said:


> I have no knowledge of Girards, but the dial and hands on that watch are very poor fabrications. If the description of that watch on their site does not clearly disclose this, then I would stay far away.


Agreed. That's a definite Frankenwatch. Avoid.


----------



## R Rackley Adams (Jul 19, 2006)

Rolexes are a great watch brand rooted in wonderful history...the Submariner was originally a military watch...my father picked his up in the 60s for less than $500...still looks great and is amazing. This was James Bond's watch in the original Fleming novels, and not the Omega (current "Bond" endorsement deal). Obviously Omegas are amazing too...certainly not knocking them.

The GMT Master was originally a pilots watch, with the original coming in the Red/Blue "pepsi" bezel. I have this and love it. I steer far, far away from "bling", and am never mistaken for a bookie or used car salesman.

I also have a vintage 60s Rolex Airking datejust with a leather band...rare that an Airking (their lower line) was produced with the datejust option. Very understated.

YES - I agree that the gold versions (a la Alec Baldwin in Glengarry Glen Ross) are vulgar, as are many of the bejeweled, gold-laden versions currently available. The brand had deviated heavily from the origins in my opinion, but I still believe that certain stainless steel versions are timeless, classic and tasteful...a true man's watch.


----------



## JohnnyDeeper (Jul 22, 2006)

At which point does a "vulgar" gold rolex become "ironic"? 

In 1998, I thought the answer was 2000. 

However I am usually a 5-10 years early, so I would say 2012 is the year when the Rolex yellow gold president with bark finish bracelet , and black dial, becomes the must-have style item.


----------



## JohnnyDeeper (Jul 22, 2006)

Speaking of vulgar......

What do you guys think of the new stainless rolex oyster models, with fluted white gold bezel??

How about with a pink dial??? Too blingy, or tres cool?

Please do not answer this question if your wardrobe is dominated by J. Press, etc.


----------



## Mr. Chatterbox (May 1, 2005)

JohnnyDeeper said:


> At which point does a "vulgar" gold rolex become "ironic"?


The irony is lost on me. As for it becoming iconic, I think that's a bit of a stretch.


----------



## Tomasso (Aug 17, 2005)

Mr. Chatterbox said:


> As for it becoming iconic, I think that's a bit of a stretch.


I think that the Rolex President(YG) is THE iconic wristwatch on this planet. No?


----------



## tweedchap (Sep 13, 2005)

JohnnyDeeper said:


> Speaking of vulgar......
> 
> How about with a pink dial??? Too blingy, or tres cool?
> 
> .


I rather like rose dials on the stainless steel Air King models, with numerals at 12, 3, 6, and 9, and luminous batons at the other hour marks. Not "bling" at all, but nicely understated. I dislike anything but the plain SS Rolexes of any modern type, though.

I would wear a lot of J. Press if the thrift stores near me carried it! Harris tweeds and flannels for me....


----------

