Tudor - do some models hold their money?
Discussion
Tudor is a odd one for me, I bought one 2nd hand lucky enough and sold it and bought a Rolex.
Most people seem to think it's a cheap Rolex so try them, and the brand was aimed at people who could not afford a Rolex (NOT my words) Rolex owners words, but to me they seem a bit cheaply made for the Money, but they are not that cheap to buy.
Omega wins hands down for build at the same price point imo and by some margin, so I don't get the brand or the hour hand snowflake.
And to me it always feels like a cheap Rolex. (which really it is)
Most people seem to think it's a cheap Rolex so try them, and the brand was aimed at people who could not afford a Rolex (NOT my words) Rolex owners words, but to me they seem a bit cheaply made for the Money, but they are not that cheap to buy.
Omega wins hands down for build at the same price point imo and by some margin, so I don't get the brand or the hour hand snowflake.
And to me it always feels like a cheap Rolex. (which really it is)
Porsche911R said:
Tudor is a odd one for me, I bought one 2nd hand lucky enough and sold it and bought a Rolex.
Most people seem to think it's a cheap Rolex so try them, and the brand was aimed at people who could not afford a Rolex (NOT my words) Rolex owners words, but to me they seem a bit cheaply made for the Money, but they are not that cheap to buy.
Omega wins hands down for build at the same price point imo and by some margin, so I don't get the brand or the hour hand snowflake.
And to me it always feels like a cheap Rolex. (which really it is)
Ouch! I'd run and hide now. ;-)Most people seem to think it's a cheap Rolex so try them, and the brand was aimed at people who could not afford a Rolex (NOT my words) Rolex owners words, but to me they seem a bit cheaply made for the Money, but they are not that cheap to buy.
Omega wins hands down for build at the same price point imo and by some margin, so I don't get the brand or the hour hand snowflake.
And to me it always feels like a cheap Rolex. (which really it is)
Mike
lol just my view and Hans Wilsdorf view.
As I said I tried one, thought it felt a bit cheap for £3k worth of watch vs an Omega at the same price.
And it was launched as Rolex 2nd brand ie a cheaper market segment.
Not sure how it can upset any one those are the facts :-)
I told a mate of mine to get a Tudor, his 1st words were "people at my office will think I cannot afford a Rolex" lol again not my words
I think for £3k you get a better built watch if you go Omega.
As I said I tried one, thought it felt a bit cheap for £3k worth of watch vs an Omega at the same price.
And it was launched as Rolex 2nd brand ie a cheaper market segment.
Not sure how it can upset any one those are the facts :-)
I told a mate of mine to get a Tudor, his 1st words were "people at my office will think I cannot afford a Rolex" lol again not my words
I think for £3k you get a better built watch if you go Omega.
I own a Tudor Heritage Chrono, and have done for a few years now. Picked up second hand for sensible money it was immaculate.
To be completely honest, I love the look but the quality just isn't there. In 3 years, the badge infills have fallen out of the crown and the bezel is badly chipped.
Compare that to my 20 year old Breitling (which did daily service for 15 of those years!) and it's very cheaply built. As above, not a patch on my Omegas either.
To be completely honest, I love the look but the quality just isn't there. In 3 years, the badge infills have fallen out of the crown and the bezel is badly chipped.
Compare that to my 20 year old Breitling (which did daily service for 15 of those years!) and it's very cheaply built. As above, not a patch on my Omegas either.
Interesting, my experience has been almost the opposite.
Other than the fact Tudor was/is the intro/lesser brand to Rolex I've not noticed any detrimental build issues.
My 29mm Prince Oyster date was bought new by my grandad in the 40's and still keeps excellent time and looks/feels special.
My recent Grantour flyback, has yet to mark during daily wear, feels quality and keeps excellent time.
I had an Omega for a while and was it always referred to as the Bond watch... which was tiring in the extreme...great watch though, just has a few image issues.
Other than the fact Tudor was/is the intro/lesser brand to Rolex I've not noticed any detrimental build issues.
My 29mm Prince Oyster date was bought new by my grandad in the 40's and still keeps excellent time and looks/feels special.
My recent Grantour flyback, has yet to mark during daily wear, feels quality and keeps excellent time.
I had an Omega for a while and was it always referred to as the Bond watch... which was tiring in the extreme...great watch though, just has a few image issues.
Podie said:
I own a Tudor Heritage Chrono, and have done for a few years now. Picked up second hand for sensible money it was immaculate.
To be completely honest, I love the look but the quality just isn't there. In 3 years, the badge infills have fallen out of the crown and the bezel is badly chipped.
Compare that to my 20 year old Breitling (which did daily service for 15 of those years!) and it's very cheaply built. As above, not a patch on my Omegas either.
Come and see me, I'll buy the coffee... To be completely honest, I love the look but the quality just isn't there. In 3 years, the badge infills have fallen out of the crown and the bezel is badly chipped.
Compare that to my 20 year old Breitling (which did daily service for 15 of those years!) and it's very cheaply built. As above, not a patch on my Omegas either.
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff