Tudor is just Diet Rolex
I was chatting with a friend, and of course we discussed time pieces, the obvious subject of Rolex vs. Omega came up (we happen to love both, and have pieces from both brands), but somehow he asked me about the Pelagos.
I know the history of Tudor, but it is not a brand that I have bought before (the Harrods looks very cool, would I buy it? No.) so I said ‘hmm not sure never had it on wrist…’
To which his response was ‘I don’t blame you, Tudor is just a diet Rolex.’
I do see the similarity in case and dial designs…and of course the history behind Tudor, but where do you stand on Tudor, is it a diet Rolex? Or is it its own brand with its own style, and history?
I know the history of Tudor, but it is not a brand that I have bought before (the Harrods looks very cool, would I buy it? No.) so I said ‘hmm not sure never had it on wrist…’
To which his response was ‘I don’t blame you, Tudor is just a diet Rolex.’
I do see the similarity in case and dial designs…and of course the history behind Tudor, but where do you stand on Tudor, is it a diet Rolex? Or is it its own brand with its own style, and history?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
41 - 60 of 204 Posts
I've tried with Tudor...only their Advisor actually looks good. I tried the Pelagos, but it feels awful on the wrist. I tried a few of their other models, but they're either too tall or just unrefined when compared with Rolex.
I will never begrudge someone wearing what they love; that's my rule, of course: 'Buy what you love, and to hell with the rest'. My personal opinion on the brand however is not in the 'positive' column. I don't love Tudor as a brand, nor do I find their design aesthetic attractive or compelling in the least.
I fall quite happily in the camp of people who, if given a free choice between a Rolex and its Tudor counterpart, I'd choose the Rolex every time. Then again, I seem to choose Omega over Rolex every time too...so I guess I don't have a horse in the race.
I haven't seen anyone say anything controversial in this thread...so perhaps the popcorn should wait. Maybe I should try...
"Tudor will always be a budget step down from Rolex, and Rolex will ensure that this relationship stays this way forever."
How about that?
I will never begrudge someone wearing what they love; that's my rule, of course: 'Buy what you love, and to hell with the rest'. My personal opinion on the brand however is not in the 'positive' column. I don't love Tudor as a brand, nor do I find their design aesthetic attractive or compelling in the least.
I fall quite happily in the camp of people who, if given a free choice between a Rolex and its Tudor counterpart, I'd choose the Rolex every time. Then again, I seem to choose Omega over Rolex every time too...so I guess I don't have a horse in the race.
I haven't seen anyone say anything controversial in this thread...so perhaps the popcorn should wait. Maybe I should try...
"Tudor will always be a budget step down from Rolex, and Rolex will ensure that this relationship stays this way forever."
How about that?
100% agree. Great watches you mentioned there, very interesting and compelling, while Rolex makes a left hand watch... After they saw the success of the Pelagos Left-hander...When a man is right a man is right. A 925 bb and Pelagos fxd are more compelling to me than anything in what feels like an antiquated and stodgy Rolex catalog. I don’t even like current Rolex as much as 20 years ago Rolex. I don’t even understand current Rolex at all. They’re all overly shiny and missing that toolish cool factor that they were supposed to be the best at.
So Rolex IS diet San Martin?I've tried with Tudor...only their Advisor actually looks good. I tried the Pelagos, but it feels awful on the wrist. I tried a few of their other models, but they're either too tall or just unrefined when compared with Rolex.
I will never begrudge someone wearing what they love; that's my rule, of course: 'Buy what you love, and to hell with the rest'. My personal opinion on the brand however is not in the 'positive' column. I don't love Tudor as a brand, nor do I find their design aesthetic attractive or compelling in the least.
I fall quite happily in the camp of people who, if given a free choice between a Rolex and its Tudor counterpart, I'd choose the Rolex every time. Then again, I seem to choose Omega over Rolex every time too...so I guess I don't have a horse in the race.
I haven't seen anyone say anything controversial in this thread...so perhaps the popcorn should wait. Maybe I should try...
"Tudor will always be a budget step down from Rolex, and Rolex will ensure that this relationship stays this way forever."
How about that?
Naw, it's a poor-man's Rolex.
I still can't get over the clown laughing at me. Prolly never will.
I still can't get over the clown laughing at me. Prolly never will.
Tudor is to Rolex what Chevy is to Cadillac.
Yes AND no.
Before Tudor pulled away from most of Europe and the N. American market, when Tudor used/shared Rolex cases/bracelets/crowns, absolutely! It was "Rolex Lite", as Hans positioned it to be.
Now, especially after the launch of their own in-house movements, no...it certainly is not. If nothing else it's going where Rolex is not dipping their toes into, both in terms of designs (Monte Carlo, P01, Glamour double-date...) and material (silicon balance spring, bronze/silver/ceramic cases) use.
Before Tudor pulled away from most of Europe and the N. American market, when Tudor used/shared Rolex cases/bracelets/crowns, absolutely! It was "Rolex Lite", as Hans positioned it to be.
Now, especially after the launch of their own in-house movements, no...it certainly is not. If nothing else it's going where Rolex is not dipping their toes into, both in terms of designs (Monte Carlo, P01, Glamour double-date...) and material (silicon balance spring, bronze/silver/ceramic cases) use.
Diet. Hans specifically developed Tudor to be the cheaper alternative to Rolex. His vision was if you can‘t afford Rolex, choose Tudor.
In the modern era Tudor has had the flexibility to get a bit more . . . creative, which is good. In addition, they‘ve always been good value for money, since Tudor SA has never manufactured a single watch component. They‘re good at assembly and testing, though. And were smart enough to be a part of Kenissi.
At this point they are a fine brand on their own.
In the modern era Tudor has had the flexibility to get a bit more . . . creative, which is good. In addition, they‘ve always been good value for money, since Tudor SA has never manufactured a single watch component. They‘re good at assembly and testing, though. And were smart enough to be a part of Kenissi.
At this point they are a fine brand on their own.
I thought Rolex is a fattened up San Martin?Omega is diet Rolex.
Rolex is diet San Martin
Ah... the Black Bay Watch Co.Maybe once upon a time Tudor was Rolex-lite, but I don't think you can say that anymore.
The modern Tudor, built around the success of the Black Bay, has built a brand identity over the past 10 years that many watch companies would be jealous of.
A Tudor is a Rolex.
A Rolex is not a Tudor.
A Rolex is not a Tudor.
Tudor is Tudor.
Rolex is Rolex.
Yeah, I love their Sweet Chilli and Sour Cream chips.Ah... the Black Bay Watch Co.
I voted “no” but it is hard to deny that that is the reputation Tudor had for many years and still has with the bigger audience, including some collectors.
It is also undeniable the big effort of the recent times (let’s say last 10 years?) to start building a proper image with more personal design and image. So hopefully in the near future this will finally change.
It is also undeniable the big effort of the recent times (let’s say last 10 years?) to start building a proper image with more personal design and image. So hopefully in the near future this will finally change.
It's funny how many Rolex owners firmly believe that Rolex is the be-all end-all of watches. There is no other watch fanbase that enjoys ragging on other brands as much as Rolex'.
Would Tudor be what it is today if by associated with Rolex, doubtful. Calling it diet/poor mans Rolex though is a stretch IMO.
Would Tudor be what it is today if by associated with Rolex, doubtful. Calling it diet/poor mans Rolex though is a stretch IMO.
As a brand , yes Tudor is "Rolex lite" that was kinda the whole point since the companies inception, but the watches are certainly not today and if you consider yourself an enthusiast that is what should matter.
Mine is German, but I definitely accept and approve of your post.ah, a Frenchy skin(ny) diver
View attachment 17186292
ah yes, Pforzheim - its a beautyMine is German, but I definitely accept and approve of your post.
41 - 60 of 204 Posts
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
WatchUSeek Watch Forums
A forum community dedicated to watch owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about watch collections, displays, watch winders, accessories, classifieds, and more! We welcome all manufacturers including Casio G-Shock, OMEGA, Rolex, Breitling, Rolex and Tudor, Seiko, Grand Seiko and others.
Full Forum Listing
Top Contributors this Month
View All
Russ1965
2941 Replies
bigclive2011
1691 Replies
Nokie
1632 Replies
Recommended Communities
