Which Tudor would solve that Submariner itch for you ? until you actually get one lol

Many aspire to own a Rolex Submariner at one point of our long watch collecting journeys. We tend to collect Tudors on the way . Which of these three Tudor options might resolve that yearning for the Submariner ?

411 votes ·
Reply
·

Just an opinion, but why bother with the Rolex? They’re common and not very intrinsically interesting. I think they serve a weird social function; more of a status symbol than anything else.

The Tudor is, admittedly, knocking on the Rolex door, but it has less freight. I also think it is better looking than the Submariner.

People may think that I’m just down on Rolex for reasons of some sort of personal animus. Maybe I don’t care for them because they’re expensive (more expensive than they’re worth). No, none of those. I think Rolex is the blown-out windsock of watches; running on recycled ideas and well into the ‘Malibu Stacey New Hat’ rut. Boring!

End of rant.

🙄

·

I've never had a Submariner itch, nor will I ever get one. It's a nice watch don't get me wrong. I just feel it's become the modern day equivalent of how the Datejust was in the 80s. If you want to be seen as successful, someone to be respected, put a Submariner on your wrist & everyone will know "you've made it".

That's just my perception. I've always viewed Rolex in this context & therefore always strived for something different should I decide to spend £10,000+ on a watch.

The monochrome Tudor however is a watch I'm going to buy when the opportunity presents itself. I think it's a stunning watch. The added benefit to me is that this watch isn't making the same statement to others that the Submariner does, at least in my head.

·
tiffer

I've never had a Submariner itch, nor will I ever get one. It's a nice watch don't get me wrong. I just feel it's become the modern day equivalent of how the Datejust was in the 80s. If you want to be seen as successful, someone to be respected, put a Submariner on your wrist & everyone will know "you've made it".

That's just my perception. I've always viewed Rolex in this context & therefore always strived for something different should I decide to spend £10,000+ on a watch.

The monochrome Tudor however is a watch I'm going to buy when the opportunity presents itself. I think it's a stunning watch. The added benefit to me is that this watch isn't making the same statement to others that the Submariner does, at least in my head.

Right on!

·

I would go for the gilted 58 any day every day

·

I got my 14060m Sub in 2005. Then I got the Peli 39 when it launched as a sort of placeholder for the Sub (first or second chap to get it at my AD). Almost the same look in terms of case size diameter n thickness everything, and how it actually wore in the wrist. The titanium lightness actually made it feel like I was wearing the old Subbie, somehow closely mimicking the hollow end links, stamped clasp bracelet because of its weight.

Image

Then, end last year the AD called and I got the current 124060 Sub. So, that now sits in the collection and it does not feel like my old Subbie or the Peli 39. This has one or two extra levels of build quality, from the dial finish to the braceless (glidelock is marvelous).

I also recently tried the Burgundy BB metas which is the new BB monochrome with gilt and that reddish bezel. It looks more like a vintage SuB big crown aka the one used by Sean Connery in Goldfinger but in that modern 41mm size. I need to see the new monochrome in person to judge but I now feel it is a thicker watch and less elegant than the peli39 case or even the current 41mm 124060 sub. The new Sub is 12.5mm I think and wears pretty flat on d wrist.

Image

I don't know whether these Tudors are placeholders to the Rolex sub as they have their own character with rolex touches on them.

Also, check out my previous post in the Peli 39 vs the Yacht master 42 titanium, that it blows the heck out of the fantastic Tudor build quality .. titanium vs titanium the Rolex is so darn good.

If someone says owning a Rolex has made it in life, then I must've made it way back in 2005 . I beg to differ as compared to me now I don't think I was anyone fabulous back then or had anything worth being overly proud of except state that watches have been a hobby since before then.

I don't know whether you can really have a placeholder even though Tudor is Rolex's sister brand ( please dont say poor man's Rolex as poor men don't sponsor yacht teams or cycling teams). They have so much Rolex DNA and shared history and with the current crop of Tudors looking more and more like Rolex from 30 yrs ago, i feel they stand on their own in terms of ownership pleasure. I personally have so many more Tudor than any other brand these days because of this.

·
tiffer

I've never had a Submariner itch, nor will I ever get one. It's a nice watch don't get me wrong. I just feel it's become the modern day equivalent of how the Datejust was in the 80s. If you want to be seen as successful, someone to be respected, put a Submariner on your wrist & everyone will know "you've made it".

That's just my perception. I've always viewed Rolex in this context & therefore always strived for something different should I decide to spend £10,000+ on a watch.

The monochrome Tudor however is a watch I'm going to buy when the opportunity presents itself. I think it's a stunning watch. The added benefit to me is that this watch isn't making the same statement to others that the Submariner does, at least in my head.

I agree with you totally .

·
Balanced

Just an opinion, but why bother with the Rolex? They’re common and not very intrinsically interesting. I think they serve a weird social function; more of a status symbol than anything else.

The Tudor is, admittedly, knocking on the Rolex door, but it has less freight. I also think it is better looking than the Submariner.

People may think that I’m just down on Rolex for reasons of some sort of personal animus. Maybe I don’t care for them because they’re expensive (more expensive than they’re worth). No, none of those. I think Rolex is the blown-out windsock of watches; running on recycled ideas and well into the ‘Malibu Stacey New Hat’ rut. Boring!

End of rant.

🙄

I agree. Buy 2/3 different Tudor instead and have different looks. The law of diminishing returns deffo applies to watches, is there really £5k worth of difference in quality between a Tudor and a Rolex?

·

I was torn between the BB54 and P39. When I held the 2 side by side in the AD I was blown away with the BB54, it's proportions are perfect and it is so slim. I am not sure why but when I held the BB54 next to the P39 it made hour markers look too small for the dial (on the P39). So I went for the BB54 and love it.

·

I like the 39 because lumed ceramic bezel. I like the 41 for the master chronometer spec.

·
DixieDean

I was torn between the BB54 and P39. When I held the 2 side by side in the AD I was blown away with the BB54, it's proportions are perfect and it is so slim. I am not sure why but when I held the BB54 next to the P39 it made hour markers look too small for the dial (on the P39). So I went for the BB54 and love it.

I own both