Tudor Actually is Better Than Rolex

🙃

After comparing the FXD, Peli39 and the latest Sub.... the Sub is a Sub...a Rolex is a Rolex. The finishing and the materials used in a Rolex vs a Tudor is a notch or two higher. I thought that the Peli could replace the Sub but no, the Peli is essentially what the Submariner would have been if Rolex kept with the toolwatch aesthetics and didn't add stuff like white gold markers and hands and that ceramic bezel w platinum markers. And that glidelock bracelet is so good that it beats the Tudor T-fit overall.

You are also comparing a datejust to a toolwatch , so different. So much polish vs a titanium toolwatch designed for the military. When in doubt, Get both.

I guess what I’m saying is the toolish aspects and variety (and still good quality) beat out the tiny extra bit of refinement. And that’s before you ever consider the cost aspect.

Cost aside, a Rolex sports model is also a tool and has variety. If you're comparing a DJ to a FXD that should not be the case. Yes, the Tudor is a toolwatch and I love mine, but it isn't a placeholder for the Rolex. I thought the Pelagos 39 was a good replacement for my 14060 Sub, but after comparing it with a 124060 in terms of fit n finish, it just wasn't. The Tudors FXD and Pelagos 39 are both superb and have a place in my collection but vs the Sub, they are different and closer to the five digit Sub or like what it could bewith a ceramic bezel and different hands

I actually think the green OP alongside the FXD would make a great pairing. It’s not fair to compare them.

Now comparing the FXD to the Sub - you are entitled to your opinion of course. But to claim the Tudor is objectively as good as the Sub is a stretch. The price reflects the quality of materials and finish, as well as branding and history. But I agree the price also affects the perception of the watch. The Tudor naturally just feels like much better value which is sometimes misconstrued as better quality.

I absolutely love my Tudor’s and they’ll forever be in my collection, but ima have to disagree with you. Tudor is not better than Rolex.

Agreed.

My first serious watch purchases were a few different Rolex models including a 2T Datejust, Sub and eventually a gold D/D, I grew bored with the brand quickly moved on to more respected companies a true enthusiast was obligated to examine. Those earlier Rolex watches are not equal to the more luxurious objects today. I was delighted to buy multiple Tudor watches when the brand returned to North America but they are not meant to cover some longing for any models in the current Rolex catalogue. Very capable well manufactured watches from competing brands continue to keep my fascination with mechanical timepieces constant. Rolex and Rolex debates are less on my mind than a decent dinner with my picky wife. I would absolutely consider buying again from the brand but have no interest in wait lists or other acts that have been mentioned ad nauseam.

The shield protects the crown. the shield is not built like the crown regardless ehat you think. After wearing em all, I know how they feel and wear in the wrist. The shield is impressive for the price they are charging but the crown, feels superlative.

Tudor = Pre-ceramic Rolex in terms of vibe

Where I disagree with most of the comments on this post is measuring better purely through the narrow lens of "refinement".

Imagine two restaurants.

• One cooks food with technical quality 9/10. But the menu never changes, its expensive, and its a bit stuffy. You can hardly ever get a booking.

• The other cooks food with technical quality 8.5. But the menu is ever changing and original. Its got a cool vibe. The food excites you. Its way cheaper.

Which is the "better" restaurant?

The problem is that the cheaper restaurant takes most of its inspiration from the more expensive restaurant. Essentially the previous year's menu reinvented slightly. So you can indulge in both but must be aware of this one important little bit.

Takes its inspiration from - then goes in fantastic directions from it. Fixed lugs. Titanium. Ceramic. Fun colours.

To such an extent that the food is just so much more interesting, tasty, dare I say.. better..

That’s my perspective anyway! And I say this as someone who has owned far more Rolex than Tudor (so far) - but not for long!

This is very subjective. The 0.5 difference in technical quality at that end of the scale is huge. Those marginal gains take exponential cost and investment and it’s reflected in the end product. Hence why people will enjoy the cheaper restaurant but for special occasions will looks for the expensive one. It’s just that bit more special.

Spot on with thi post.

I am on the List for ab OP41. Yet i love my black bay pro and I would like to get my handy on an fxd. Somehow it would interest me more than a black submariner (even though i realize the class behind this watch.)

So glad we all have opinions ...I own both and feel that the Rolex is the better piece.I am not looking to add another Rolex to my collection until they get there head out of the butt and start treating there customers with some respect. My money will go elsewhere. .That being said my tudors are terrific tool watches also.. JMO

Not the enthusiasts, no, but there's no getting around a lot of people who are getting their hands on a Rolex are looking on it as an asset rather than something to be worn and enjoyed. Can't imagine anyone is thinking about the profit they'll make on flipping their Pelagos.

Rolex is Rolex … always better than Tudor

I have a BB58 and the latest sub. In your hand and on the wrist, you can feel the difference between the two. Edges are sharper on the Sub. The crown grooves are more precise. Does all that justify the cost??? I think the overall feel on the Sub made it worth the cost for me.

That doesn’t mean it beats the BB58 everywhere though. I much prefer how the lugs on the 58 curve downward to hug the wrist more that the lugs on the Sub.

I’ll be keeping both 😀

I prefer Tudor to Rolex as well. Even at the same price I'm taking a Black Bay or Pelagos over a Sub any day.

Tudor is easier to read.

It depends on the model.

Love my MN FXD. Had the 116710LN for a few years but got tired of the maxi bezel fonts, so moved that on for a 16570. Couldn’t be happier. The Tudor BB Pro doesn’t come close to the 5-digit Explorer, especially that thick slab.

So it all comes down to the model and not so much the brand.

Everything you’ve given as a reason is purely subjective. Just sayin’. Objectively, the facts will disagree with you when you compare a modern Tudor to a modern Rolex.

Agreed. I have a Pepsi but gravitate towards my Tudors mostly.

You can’t put cost aside because that’s where the difference comes from. You can compare whatever you want but if something costs double or more you can’t compare.

Was just replying. Cost is a big factor on why a Rolex is a Rolex and a Tudor isba Tudor in terms of finishing. Goes to everything good out there, shoes, tailored suits etc. No one sells anything cheaply these days. Even Tudor goes by a certain standard vs price and yes, the brand is what I like now in terms of price vs what is given. Rolex, adds an even larger level of luxury to the Tudor which you can do without for the premium. But it is, superlative.

I really like the redbull version. I'd be seriously considering it if I wasn't so against the snowflake hand

The FXD is brilliant imo. I just think it’s the better of two, price not withstanding. The sub will always be iconic but Tudor are doing some great things.

You forgot to add “for me” to the title

The Tudor highlight for me is the Pelagos line. To me, it is what Rolex would be if they were interested in modernizing the Sub for the purpose it was intended vs making it a luxury item. Titanium, fully lumed bezels, the P42 with the auto adjust clasp, the P39s and FXDs with ceramic block lume vs regular paint and gold surrounds. Tudor moving to Master Chronometer testing and greater protection against 🧲 with the new BB.