Which One and Why

https://youtu.be/_5Qx2OnJ0qc?si=278aYNuGyvBItvtH

Two different watches. One caller the other traveler, but both are very cool.

For me, it was easy: Monta. No, the movement is not a traveler (huge plus for me), but it is incredibly well made, has a better bracelet, clasp, and to me, better looking. Throw in the fact it has friendler proportions for smaller wrists, it is a home run. I am grateful I got the gen 1 Pepsi. It is a watch that could easily be a one watch solution.

Now I’m very biased to Monta. Haha But I do love Tudor as well. But I love my Monta. Amazing bracelet, brushing, and polish. I also have a Tudor Black Bay. But I feel that when I wear the Monta it starts more conversations about what it is because they can tell it’s special. Both great choices. 🍻

I would go for the Tudor if you have the wrist for it. I have seen the dial and had on wrist. Just a bit big for me.

Difficult to pick one. I got the Tudor. Love it. But the Monta looks good 🤷‍♂️

I like the Monta better. I love Tudors but I like the gold accents, the bezel design and the 6 O'clock date window on the Monta. Its an awseome watch. That being stated I still have to say I'm a huge fan of the Tudor hour hand its one if my favorite designs but on the other hand the Tudor minute hand is the most boring minute hand design out there in my personal opinion. I don't hate it but I don't love it.

The answer depends on what you are looking for. If this is your one and only luxury watch I would go with Tudor.

Russell, The Mad watch collector just reviewed both and said he thought Monta is better due to size and finishing.

Tudor because.... its Tudor?

If your wrist is sub 7 inches the Monta will fit better. The Tudor has the traveler GMT movement but its chunky and heavy.

Both seem to be good options. Just some differences to note, the Tudor's MT5652 (Kenissi) movement is "in-house" if that matters to you, compared to the Monta's M-23 which is an ETA caliber 2893-2 or Sellita SW330-1. The MT5652 also has a 70hr power reserve compared to the Monta's 56.

I’ve tried on the Tudor and personally I think it’s somewhat clunky and chunky. Perhaps it will fit your wrist better but I did not like how Tudor let their case get so big on this particular GMT

I like the Tudor more just because of their brand heritage and the fact that i already own a BB58 , doesn’t mean the monta isn’t good though but still I would prefer the Tudor

I prefer the Tudor of the two but I would buy the Monta. and almost bought one (a Tudor). Why not? Because they need to figure out the issues with that movement for f*ck sake. And this is coming from a Tudor fan.

Mad watch collector just did the exact comparison!

Personally, I favor traveler/true GMTs — it’s a far better proposition for frequent travelers in my opinion, so that would be my metric: if you travel a lot and don’t mind the relative bulk then Tudor easily. Otherwise the Monta is (subjectively) to me the more handsome watch.

Not really a fair comparison given their different price points.

Tudor, the heritage.

Tudor , I just like it better.

I’d get the non-gilt, coke version of the Monta. I like the watch more aesthetically. I don’t like the snowflake hand on the Tudor. I don’t like the rivets on the Tudor bracelet and the Tudor is materially thicker. I don’t have a preference for caller versus traveler style GMTs either. I like that the Monta date window is symmetrical at 6pm and framed. It just looks better. I also like that it’s nearly half the price.

I agree with Watchgeekery. They are simply not in the same tier. Tudor, I would qualify as luxury. Made by a company known worldwide. Monta does make a nice watch. I had the pleasure of handling one of these. It's very nice. I loved the size. However, the Tudor is just better. Better movement, better case finish, and despite the faux rivets on the bracelet is just better. But that is what you would expect spending over double for it.

I can’t do the Monta because of the gold #’s on the bezel

I'm not familiar with the Monta but I would like to see one. I have the Tudor and love it.

Some mention the weight or thickness of a watch as being a disadvantage. I think that's splitting things pretty thin. I don't notice the difference in weight between my various watches when I'm wearing them so some grams here and there are not a differentiating factor to me.

Same goes for the thickness. Yes the Tudor is a thick watch, but when I'm looking at it on my wrist, I can't see how thick it is when reading the time, I'm not looking at it from the side. I have a 6.5" wrist and it looks fine to me.

I would be more concerned if one of these watches had a lug to lug length or width that didn't fit your wrist as well as the other, because that's what you will see in your day to day wearing of the watch.

Long way of saying go for the one that catches your eye/heart and don't sweat the grams or millimeters too much.

Monta spent their whole budget in the quality of the parts at the cost of design.

I don’t find neither to be particularly good looking watches, but the Tudor is better balanced and consistent in the design choices.

If money is not a consideration, it must be the Tudor

Tudor

I contemplated the same choice and concluded that despite Tudor having the better movement, the Monta is just a much nicer watch to wear. The size is perfect, the bracelet is comfortable and adjust able on the fly, and the finishing on the Monta is superior in my opinion to the Tudor. Although Tudor has more brand recognition, the Monta is the better piece to wear.

I’d go for the Monta. It’s more different and unique not to mention that you get nearly as much watch (if not the same) for much less price.

Tudor, all day. But, I'm probably not going to spend over $1500 on a GMT until I get a Rolex Explorer II. But I'm in the market for a $1k Traveler GMT for the time being. Looking at the Traska Venturer II if they ever come back in stock.

My 2 cents, I don't like the cream colored numerals on the Monta.