Reliability Tudor Black Bay 39 vs Rolex Datejust 36 (2010)

Hi All. A bit of background before my question. Started collecting during the Pandemi, with a few Seiko that led to more Seiko, Tissot, and topping the spending on a couple of Tudors. That's a whole other story. Now I'm at a point in considering letting go of most of them, to go for a 2010 Rolex Datejust 36. Need input on reliability consideration, my current Tudor Black Bay 39 (bought new in 2023), vs a used 2010 Rolex Datejust 36. Which has the best movement that will more likely last longer? Hope the more seasoned watch enthusiasts here can help me. Thank you.


2004 Rolex GMT M2, was my daily for 15 years, serviced at year 17, kept great time but was losing power reserve. Came back looking brand new.

2021 Tudor GMT, was great for a year, until the movement complete crapped out. Sent back to Tudor, returned with a new movement. Going well for over a year. Hope it doesn鈥檛 crap out again on the 1826 day or later.

Safe to say that Rolex is better and more reliable than a Tudor.

I own 3 Tudors and have owned two Rolex (still own one). All of my Tudors have been more accurate than my Rolex.

A 2010 watch of any kind is likely due service. The movement will be made to a higher quality than the Tudor, but assuming serviced, both should last your lifetime.

My Tudor Pelagos 39 is losing five seconds, a week.

I have the ETA Black Bay 36, honestly it runs to chronometer spec. It鈥檚 great on the one hand, on the other it鈥檚 made it difficult to justify trading up to an Explorer!

Everyone鈥檚 mileage will vary, but Drew鈥檚 experience is one I鈥檝e heard on movements. Less so the unreliability, more so the replacement of movements at servicing. Allegedly, Tudor aren鈥檛 quite 鈥榝ixing鈥 things within warranty when they鈥檙e at capacity. They鈥檙e simply replacing entire movements. I鈥檝e been advised to send it in and complain it鈥檚 not keeping time just before the warranty expires for that reason 馃槄 it鈥檚 mine though, don鈥檛 wanna chance it and get a less accurate one!