Future of Tudor?
Adrian Barker just posted his tour of the new Tudor Factory and it had me wondering…
Given the highly-commercialized factory being able to produce high quality watches at affordable prices, do you ever see Tudor moving up-market in the years to come like Rolex did over the last few decades? Or do you think they’ll stay at an appropriate price point because of the robotics keeping costs down, also as to differentiate themselves from Rolex? Maybe Rolex won’t let them compete in the high-end luxury category? Maybe Rolex wants Tudor to be its primary competitor to Omega? What say you?
I just have to try on the Tudor BB58 Blue every time I go to an AD! I’m saving up for it! Love that watch!
Disciple of Christ, Husband, Father, Son, Brother, Cousin, Nephew, Uncle… Air Force Veteran, Space Nerd, Watch Enthusiast, Pianist, and Baseball junkie.
Given what Hans Wildorf created Tudor to be I hope they keep to his dream ,an affordable quality watch for the average person
I think Tudor will go higher in price and will challange Omega in the future but remaining a little under omega pricing as it will increase as well.
This is such an interesting question. With the micro scene getting better and better, Tudors place as affordable high quality has basically been seeded already. So they could ride the wave upwards. But my guess is they will stay at the coat tails of Omega.
I think its hilarious that this ridicules narrative of Tudor and Omega being in the same league is even still being mentioned.
It just seems like people who cant afford Omega are trying to hype up Tudor to be on the same level as it has become a more popular brand recently.
I remember when everyone was trying to do this with Tag some time ago when they were in fasion.
I think Tudor is really owning the entire 3-5k market between the Black Bay and Pelagos models. It would seem silly to abandon that and try and compete with a higher price tier, especially when Rolex already owns that price tier pretty firmly. Of course I’m speculating completely but that my guess.
Tudor will increase in price and remain more ‘affordable and obtainable’ than Rolex. That said, they will have to clean up their current offerings more and simultaneously introduce/reintroduce other lines to make themselves even more desirable AND provide better clarity to consumers. I don’t know if that means creating better distinction amongst Black Bay offering and/or sunseting 1926 and Glamour, but something needs to be done.
Yeah, I didn’t mean it in the sense of catching up. But your probably right.
I think its hilarious that this ridicules narrative of Tudor and Omega being in the same league is even still being mentioned.
It just seems like people who cant afford Omega are trying to hype up Tudor to be on the same level as it has become a more popular brand recently.
I remember when everyone was trying to do this with Tag some time ago when they were in fasion.
Curious if you consider the same thing to be happening with people who can’t afford Rolex and buy an Omega. Or for that matter, can’t afford Tudor so buy Hamilton, or Seiko, or Mido, or….
Curious if you consider the same thing to be happening with people who can’t afford Rolex and buy an Omega. Or for that matter, can’t afford Tudor so buy Hamilton, or Seiko, or Mido, or….
People who can afford an Omega could also get a Rolex, it would just take longer without a purchase history.
At least the Omega fanboys just admit they like trolling Rolex lol
I think its hilarious that this ridicules narrative of Tudor and Omega being in the same league is even still being mentioned.
It just seems like people who cant afford Omega are trying to hype up Tudor to be on the same level as it has become a more popular brand recently.
I remember when everyone was trying to do this with Tag some time ago when they were in fasion.
Honestly. I thought this was a place where watch snobs weren't allowed.... seems not🤔
HWF will always keep Tudor in the exact market spot they are in…to undercut Omega, IWC, etc every step of the way so those brands are forced to compete with Tudor vs. going after the flagship. They are also letting their movement arm slowly and slowly build momentum. It has been a successful strategy and this thread is evidence of so. Talk to any AD that sells both and they will say the same thing, people are not cross shopping Omega with Rolex anymore, those day’s are long gone. Some folks may go in asking for a Rolex and walk out with something else as a consolation, but that is not cross shopping. We can argue quality, brand, technical specs all day, but marketing and dollar spend drives the market position, not enthusiasts.
People with means will buy what they want. Some might settle, others will not. I have several Tudors, Omegas, and Rolexes. Never once considered cross shopped Omega with Rolex. I break it down by the following: If I am shopping in the $3-5K range, I am shopping for the likes of Tudor, IWC, GS, and Omega. Does GS, IWC, and Omega make higher priced models than that? Absolutely, but their main lineup is in that $5k range, especially after the greys get involved.
If I am shopping for $10K watch, those brands never enter the equation. Sure, it may start with Rolex, but there are others like GO, VC, some JLC models, used Moser, etc.
To each their own I say, but HWF Tudor strategy has been pretty straight forward and one only has to compare the growth charts for evidence.
HWF will always keep Tudor in the exact market spot they are in…to undercut Omega, IWC, etc every step of the way so those brands are forced to compete with Tudor vs. going after the flagship. They are also letting their movement arm slowly and slowly build momentum. It has been a successful strategy and this thread is evidence of so. Talk to any AD that sells both and they will say the same thing, people are not cross shopping Omega with Rolex anymore, those day’s are long gone. Some folks may go in asking for a Rolex and walk out with something else as a consolation, but that is not cross shopping. We can argue quality, brand, technical specs all day, but marketing and dollar spend drives the market position, not enthusiasts.
People with means will buy what they want. Some might settle, others will not. I have several Tudors, Omegas, and Rolexes. Never once considered cross shopped Omega with Rolex. I break it down by the following: If I am shopping in the $3-5K range, I am shopping for the likes of Tudor, IWC, GS, and Omega. Does GS, IWC, and Omega make higher priced models than that? Absolutely, but their main lineup is in that $5k range, especially after the greys get involved.
If I am shopping for $10K watch, those brands never enter the equation. Sure, it may start with Rolex, but there are others like GO, VC, some JLC models, used Moser, etc.
To each their own I say, but HWF Tudor strategy has been pretty straight forward and one only has to compare the growth charts for evidence.
Agree with your assessment completely. Rolex, Omega and Tudor are all making great watches, but they are for different people with different taste and budget.
I and many watch loving friends I know will NOT cross shopping among these three brands. Myself have collected watches for over twenty years and might get one Omega Seamaster Planet Ocean some day, the reason being Rolex, Tudor and many other brands such as GS have produced better products for my taste and preference in recent years. In addition the amount of discount for new Omega watches is somewhat concerning for me, Swatch claims Omega produces around 500K units per year, but based on the # of new Omega mechanical watches for sale on the grey market with 1/3 or more discount from MSRP, the claimed annual production feature is in question, especially when you compare with Rolex’s annual production of 800K to 1 million units, the demand/supply equation for Omega is way off.
Honestly. I thought this was a place where watch snobs weren't allowed.... seems not🤔
I dnt think its being a snob to say , admittedly in a very sassy manner that I dnt agree with the narrative I described.
Thank you for sharing this Tudor factory (assembly line) video. It is remarkable Tudor took this open door approach where as Rolex guards its factory and everything else like a fortress.
I think Tudor will go higher in price and will challange Omega in the future but remaining a little under omega pricing as it will increase as well.
I agree that’s mostly likely. Especially with them now doing METAS certification.
Interesting. I thought cross-shopping, for example, a Daytona and Speedmaster in 18k on rubber would make a lot of sense.
Now I am definitely not a Rolex hater but if you ask me, once you remove the bracelet from the equation I think Omega makes the better product here and the Speedmaster is a strong sub-brand (I think they went on the moon or something... crazy 😉?!). Especially Rolex dials are inferior to Omega in my experience. I have seen (far too many) messy and "scratched" sunburst, i.e. significant irregularities in the depth and direction of brush marks, a few marked and dusty indexes and on one occasion some imperfections in the glossy surfaces. Branding or not, watch person or not, on a watch that expensive I'd be annoyed if it isn't as good as it "could" be. Granted that isn't stuff you see right away (unless you take a magnifier and some guidance from a watch person) but once you see it you can never un-see it... Now even disregarding quality, I can't see how you'd ignore the golden Speedmaster if you're looking at the golden Daytona.
That's the high end stuff, okay. But even on the lower end, a Tudor looks rather bland compared to most Omega. Grand Seiko and Omega, now that I can see.
You bring up a good point when comparing precious metal variants and that would ultimately come down to personal preference. There are some gorgeous PM Speedies for certain and I could choose both brands depending on the dial configuration.
I am not sure I would go as far to say they are inferior dials. I much prefer the Daytona dial to the Speedy, at least my two models. Could that change if they were in PM? Perhaps, but my Sapphire Sandwich vs. the LN steel? Taking the Daytona dial every time.
To my earlier point, I personally would not put most of the Tudor lineup in the same category as Omega or GS, but whether you and I agree on that does not mean the general watch shoppers will know or care about the nuances, but many are choosing Tudor first.
Interesting. I thought cross-shopping, for example, a Daytona and Speedmaster in 18k on rubber would make a lot of sense.
Now I am definitely not a Rolex hater but if you ask me, once you remove the bracelet from the equation I think Omega makes the better product here and the Speedmaster is a strong sub-brand (I think they went on the moon or something... crazy 😉?!). Especially Rolex dials are inferior to Omega in my experience. I have seen (far too many) messy and "scratched" sunburst, i.e. significant irregularities in the depth and direction of brush marks, a few marked and dusty indexes and on one occasion some imperfections in the glossy surfaces. Branding or not, watch person or not, on a watch that expensive I'd be annoyed if it isn't as good as it "could" be. Granted that isn't stuff you see right away (unless you take a magnifier and some guidance from a watch person) but once you see it you can never un-see it... Now even disregarding quality, I can't see how you'd ignore the golden Speedmaster if you're looking at the golden Daytona.
That's the high end stuff, okay. But even on the lower end, a Tudor looks rather bland compared to most Omega. Grand Seiko and Omega, now that I can see.
This is quite a strong statement to make re comparison of Speedy and Daytona. I am neither Omega hater or Rolex fanboy but being realistic here in my opinion the Daytona is superior in any of the variants ( handeld both watches ). Disregarding design preferences ( personally design from Daytona is better ) and hype status we can't neglect certain facts in favour of Daytona ( especially compared to pre METAS/3861 Speedy's ):
Smaller size that is much more wearable, not mentioning the SS or gold bracelet quality
Auto movement and despite that still has slimmer case
Higher WR
More accurate ( pre METAS Speedy was not even COSC??? )
Better power reserve
More premium materials used on dial
Ceramic bezel
IMO better overall fit and finish
Now we could argue that price is double in SS version and gold Speedy is even more expensive but that was not the point here/would be seperate discussion.
HWF will always keep Tudor in the exact market spot they are in…to undercut Omega, IWC, etc every step of the way so those brands are forced to compete with Tudor vs. going after the flagship. They are also letting their movement arm slowly and slowly build momentum. It has been a successful strategy and this thread is evidence of so. Talk to any AD that sells both and they will say the same thing, people are not cross shopping Omega with Rolex anymore, those day’s are long gone. Some folks may go in asking for a Rolex and walk out with something else as a consolation, but that is not cross shopping. We can argue quality, brand, technical specs all day, but marketing and dollar spend drives the market position, not enthusiasts.
People with means will buy what they want. Some might settle, others will not. I have several Tudors, Omegas, and Rolexes. Never once considered cross shopped Omega with Rolex. I break it down by the following: If I am shopping in the $3-5K range, I am shopping for the likes of Tudor, IWC, GS, and Omega. Does GS, IWC, and Omega make higher priced models than that? Absolutely, but their main lineup is in that $5k range, especially after the greys get involved.
If I am shopping for $10K watch, those brands never enter the equation. Sure, it may start with Rolex, but there are others like GO, VC, some JLC models, used Moser, etc.
To each their own I say, but HWF Tudor strategy has been pretty straight forward and one only has to compare the growth charts for evidence.
Excellent points! Although for the average Rolex customer, since Rolex has 29% of the Swiss watch market, they probably aren’t a watch enthusiast like we are. So I think that adds a curveball. They will probably wait or pay over retail just to get a Rolex. They probably don’t really know about or want to purchase a JLC, VC…
Agreed. There will always be the enthusiast and fan crowd of certain brands that will not cross shop other brands. An enthusiast set on an Omega PO, isn’t going to necessarily look at a Pelagos, nor will the GS fan look at the Tudor lineup. However, the mass watch shopping audience will.
As Tudor makes their lineup Metas certified, I think many Omega fans, specifically of the SMP300 variety will pay more attention.
That said, the beauty of life is there are few absolutes. These get along just fine in the box.
So which Tudor baby is your favorite? 😂
I think Tudor will follow Rolexes lead and rerelease the same watches in different sizes and colors. Great watches but boring. Rolex only gets away with boring because their watches don’t need to change. They sell out no matter what. Tudor won’t do anything really exciting unless Rolex wants to test the waters of something new before it goes on a new Rolex release. I believe Tudor will stay just behind Omega in price and snipping that at their toes.
Have you seen any watches from Norqain? They use Tudor’s Kenissi movements. They’re beautiful, interesting and fresh. The fit and finish is outstanding. I saw them at the Windup watch fair a few weeks ago in San Francisco. Norqain took the show for me. I should have bought one. My bad. Tudor needs to look behind them because the independent watch makers are coming fast and they’re delivering the goods for about the same price.
I have not seen a Norqain in person yet but I do know about them and they are definitely worth looking into. You’re absolutely right about the microbrands moving up fast! See my video above from Max!
This is not a slight on your comment, but I find it utterly laughable that a Tudor watch can be considered for "Every man".
I think only Casio could have that title.
Well I was referring to the original purpose of Tudor, being a more affordable brand but of the same quality as Rolex when it was originally founded; predating Casio and the invention of the quartz watch. Certainly nowadays, for most people, watches are not a necessity so it’s almost always superfluous. Tudor is certainly a luxury brand today but it wasn’t originally meant to be that. But certainly in the luxury watch segment, Tudor is still more affordable than Rolex and the quality gap is ever decreasing.
I'd argue any watch over 1000 Is out of reach for most people. Agree that Tudor is most definitely not the everymans watch brand.
Not anymore, but originally it was, hence the issuing to military forces, etc.
So which Tudor baby is your favorite? 😂
Always the Pelagos. :-)
This is quite a strong statement to make re comparison of Speedy and Daytona. I am neither Omega hater or Rolex fanboy but being realistic here in my opinion the Daytona is superior in any of the variants ( handeld both watches ). Disregarding design preferences ( personally design from Daytona is better ) and hype status we can't neglect certain facts in favour of Daytona ( especially compared to pre METAS/3861 Speedy's ):
Smaller size that is much more wearable, not mentioning the SS or gold bracelet quality
Auto movement and despite that still has slimmer case
Higher WR
More accurate ( pre METAS Speedy was not even COSC??? )
Better power reserve
More premium materials used on dial
Ceramic bezel
IMO better overall fit and finish
Now we could argue that price is double in SS version and gold Speedy is even more expensive but that was not the point here/would be seperate discussion.
Well, as I was primarily gunning for the gold ones on rubber (no bracelet, those are much better on Rolex) I'll try with these.
Yes, but it's a minor difference. The gold Daytonas always had thicker lugs and the Oysterflex band is a little awkward. If you can wear you can wear the other. Also, if you're after a small watch in gold of that price you're doing it wrong 😉 Also, it is never the fault of the watch but the wrist. In order words, if you have small wrist like me you can't ever wear that because it looks as if you're overcompensating very, very hard.
Yes but again the Speedmaster wears it's thickness quite well.
Some of the Gold Speedmaster were actually COSC (even the manual MoonWatch), starting in 1993 with the 50th anniversary LE of the 321 movement and its skeleton variant. But the certifications are not common. That said, the movement in the Speedmaster was bulletproof and all things equal in reality I doubt the Daytona was more accurate by any appreciable amount. Older Speedmaster movements, especially the gold ones, had really nice movements with some hand finishing touches even plus manually wound Chronographs look bad ass 😀
Yes. If that's something you value. I think that's well overblown especially on automatics (which the Speedmaster is not). Here the Daytona has an edge.
I don't think that's true for the gold ones, should be primarily gold in both instances for the hardware, no? Also, as I said earlier, in my experience the sunburst can be rather dodgy with Rolex. My Datejust does that as well...
Ceramic is not expsnsive and a matter of personal preference. Much like sapphire.
IMO not, the bracelet is considerably better but I think it mostly ends there. So we'll have to agree to disagree on that one.
Now more importantly there is the brand strength of the sub models to consider here. The Speedmaster went to the moon but still is arguably not quite as strong and that's perhaps the biggest issue. Vintage Speedmaster market is big but Daytona has it beat, same with the new models. There are some special edition Speedmaster that sell for expsnsive but not as broadly hyped as the Daytona. Still, if there's one watch that competes with a gold Daytona then it's a Speedmaster and unless your mind is dead set on buying a Daytona I can't see how the first thing that comes up when asking "is there something else I should have a look at?" wouldn't be a gold Speedmaster. That was the point of my comment. 🍻
Well, as I was primarily gunning for the gold ones on rubber (no bracelet, those are much better on Rolex) I'll try with these.
Yes, but it's a minor difference. The gold Daytonas always had thicker lugs and the Oysterflex band is a little awkward. If you can wear you can wear the other. Also, if you're after a small watch in gold of that price you're doing it wrong 😉 Also, it is never the fault of the watch but the wrist. In order words, if you have small wrist like me you can't ever wear that because it looks as if you're overcompensating very, very hard.
Yes but again the Speedmaster wears it's thickness quite well.
Some of the Gold Speedmaster were actually COSC (even the manual MoonWatch), starting in 1993 with the 50th anniversary LE of the 321 movement and its skeleton variant. But the certifications are not common. That said, the movement in the Speedmaster was bulletproof and all things equal in reality I doubt the Daytona was more accurate by any appreciable amount. Older Speedmaster movements, especially the gold ones, had really nice movements with some hand finishing touches even plus manually wound Chronographs look bad ass 😀
Yes. If that's something you value. I think that's well overblown especially on automatics (which the Speedmaster is not). Here the Daytona has an edge.
I don't think that's true for the gold ones, should be primarily gold in both instances for the hardware, no? Also, as I said earlier, in my experience the sunburst can be rather dodgy with Rolex. My Datejust does that as well...
Ceramic is not expsnsive and a matter of personal preference. Much like sapphire.
IMO not, the bracelet is considerably better but I think it mostly ends there. So we'll have to agree to disagree on that one.
Now more importantly there is the brand strength of the sub models to consider here. The Speedmaster went to the moon but still is arguably not quite as strong and that's perhaps the biggest issue. Vintage Speedmaster market is big but Daytona has it beat, same with the new models. There are some special edition Speedmaster that sell for expsnsive but not as broadly hyped as the Daytona. Still, if there's one watch that competes with a gold Daytona then it's a Speedmaster and unless your mind is dead set on buying a Daytona I can't see how the first thing that comes up when asking "is there something else I should have a look at?" wouldn't be a gold Speedmaster. That was the point of my comment. 🍻
I was reffering in general on both models but can also apply only to golden. Never understood rubber on these watches, gold watch should be on gold bracelet. My answers in bold ( not shouting just to be more clear 😉 ):
Smaller size that is much more wearable, not mentioning the SS or gold bracelet quality
Yes, but it's a minor difference. The gold Daytonas always had thicker lugs and the Oysterflex band is a little awkward. If you can wear you can wear the other. Also, if you're after a small watch in gold of that price you're doing it wrong 😉 Also, it is never the fault of the watch but the wrist. In order words, if you have small wrist like me you can't ever wear that because it looks as if you're overcompensating very, very hard.
I was reffering more to general wearing experience ( not just size specs ) and Daytona is miles better, my oppinion. Have no issues with wrist size, 19,5cm is more than good for both.
Auto movement and despite that still has slimmer case
Yes but again the Speedmaster wears it's thickness quite well.
It doesn't sorry, it is a bulky watch for manual chrono matching or exceeding thickness of way inferior watches/movements
More accurate ( pre METAS Speedy was not even COSC??? )
Some of the Gold Speedmaster were actually COSC (even the manual MoonWatch), starting in 1993 with the 50th anniversary LE of the 321 movement and its skeleton variant. But the certifications are not common. That said, the movement in the Speedmaster was bulletproof and all things equal in reality I doubt the Daytona was more accurate by any appreciable amount. Older Speedmaster movements, especially the gold ones, had really nice movements with some hand finishing touches even plus manually wound Chronographs look bad ass 😀
I assumed we are talikng about new gold Speedy moon and not all historical/vintage models. As far as I know currently there is only c. 3861 available, not the 321 ( unless we are talikng about Canopus Gold model for 85.000€ ). I can agree 321 movement is great but not applicable here. Accuracy wise 3861 is close to Rolex but not there, facts. The esthetics of Omega movment is far superior, can agree here.
Better power reserve
Yes. If that's something you value. I think that's well overblown especially on automatics (which the Speedmaster is not). Here the Daytona has an edge.
Yes I do, and even if not it is factually superior. And at least I expect more than 50h, especially paying so much for a watch
More premium materials used on dial
I don't think that's true for the gold ones, should be primarily gold in both instances for the hardware, no? Also, as I said earlier, in my experience the sunburst can be rather dodgy with Rolex. My Datejust does that as well...
Agree for gold models, not for SS
Ceramic bezel
Ceramic is not expsnsive and a matter of personal preference. Much like sapphire.
Again don't agree here. Firstly, gold Omega has also ceramic bezel so on gold models let's call it equal. Secondly, for SS models please explain to me in which universe is Aluminum printed bezel insert same cost as engraved ceramic ( leave your preference aside )
IMO better overall fit and finish
IMO not, the bracelet is considerably better but I think it mostly ends there. So we'll have to agree to disagree on that one.
Agree to disagree😀
Now more importantly there is the brand strength of the sub models to consider here. The Speedmaster went to the moon but still is arguably not quite as strong and that's perhaps the biggest issue. Vintage Speedmaster market is big but Daytona has it beat, same with the new models. There are some special edition Speedmaster that sell for expsnsive but not as broadly hyped as the Daytona. Still, if there's one watch that competes with a gold Daytona then it's a Speedmaster and unless your mind is dead set on buying a Daytona I can't see how the first thing that comes up when asking "is there something else I should have a look at?" wouldn't be a gold Speedmaster. That was the point of my comment. 🍻
Agree it is a somewhat of contender in gold version but much less than you think, especially outside watch nerds environment. I am really curious how many people consider gold Speedy ( in general, not just as Daytona replacement ) as I never seen one in flesh ( but seen gazilion of SS ), golden Daytonas I seen dozens if not more. I believe if we focus soley on gold models there is not so many buyers on Speedy, especially with same movement as in 6.000€ watch ( almost 24.000€ premium for some gold ??? ). Daytona is a total hyped flex and that is why people opt for it, not for what it offers. Omega doesn't have that gold panache as it had in 50's/60's, the tables have turned. When people are buying expensive +30.000€ ( gold ) watches rarely any Omega comes into consideration ( except 321 models for hard enthusiasts ), that was my point🍻 And if I had to pick one of both ( I wouldn't have none at these prices, many better options out there ) it would be an easy choice, Daytona all day long.
I'd argue any watch over 1000 Is out of reach for most people. Agree that Tudor is most definitely not the everymans watch brand.
I don’t think $1000 is out of reach for most people. A lot of folks spend that much on their cell phone, iPad, computer, or other hobbies. I think it’s more of most people aren’t willing to spend more than $1000 on a watch since it’s definitely a luxury item at that point and they may not consider it worth their money. Whereas for us watch enthusiasts, that’s just the starting point!
Watchgecko did an interesting video about pricing recently. One of the guys mentioned paying just under £1000 for his first Rolex. And that the inflation adjusted price would be around 2.5k
Sub 3k as a luxury, well-built tool watch SEEMS about right. If you take it as the old "one month's salary" adage.
Tudor are already creeping out of that segment.
And that's a shame. Because there's nobody there.
Whilst over 1k is a lot for the majority. 1 - 3k again SEEMS like enough of a stretch to be an "achievement" worthy of celebration. But also remains within reach for almost any motivated person with a job.
I hope Tudor stays where it is. And doubles down on that segment.
Exactly! I just posted the WatchGecko video above! Like minds!
Tudor's created a unique position in the market - highly respected, great design, in-house movements with very competitive pricing. Automation and improved manufacturing facilities will serve to maintain that competitive pricing structure. It's hard to find as strong a package elsewhere.
Omega's pricing is creeping up, somewhat unjustifiably. I can't help but feel they're losing their way a little with their branding. Which is a shame because their movements are awesome.
As a case in point, the Seamaster Heritage models are arguably going up against the Tudor Blackbay, but they're priced at £6.5k!!! Twice the price of a Tudor BlackBay 58..
You’re spot on!
More than half of the world's population lives on less than 10 dollars a day. An F91W would be a stretch, never mind a Tudor.
Totally fair. But don’t forget we are in a watch bubble! My premise tends to focus more on the watch enthusiast world or at least people that like to buy watches vs. the general population.
This is quite a strong statement to make re comparison of Speedy and Daytona. I am neither Omega hater or Rolex fanboy but being realistic here in my opinion the Daytona is superior in any of the variants ( handeld both watches ). Disregarding design preferences ( personally design from Daytona is better ) and hype status we can't neglect certain facts in favour of Daytona ( especially compared to pre METAS/3861 Speedy's ):
Smaller size that is much more wearable, not mentioning the SS or gold bracelet quality
Auto movement and despite that still has slimmer case
Higher WR
More accurate ( pre METAS Speedy was not even COSC??? )
Better power reserve
More premium materials used on dial
Ceramic bezel
IMO better overall fit and finish
Now we could argue that price is double in SS version and gold Speedy is even more expensive but that was not the point here/would be seperate discussion.
Specs-wise, certainly the Daytona would beat the pre-METAS Speedy. But I’m sure we can all agree that specs are always what captures our hearts. I think that’s a great pole idea. Would folks pick the current Speedy or the current Daytona in steel, ignoring the prices/resale value/availability?