Houston
Sponsored by

High-end Watches Locally?

1,994,843 Views | 16134 Replies | Last: 13 hrs ago by Tex117
MemorialTXAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to AgLA06 • 12:55p, 9/3/21
AgLA06 said:
Texicurean said:
I know there is a lot of love for Tudors on this thread. I don't care for the blockiness/squarness? of the hands. I guess I prefer more arrow/pointy hands.
I know this is just my opinion.
I get it. I'd rather the Rolex hands, but I think that's the point.

Tudor is literally the closest thing you can get to a Rolex not only in looks, but in design, ownership, and history. And they're a 1/3 of the price. The one hand is really the only difference in looks.

You're basically buying the prince instead of the king. And the price and one small design differentiator reflects that.


The only reason why we are even discussing Tudor is Rolex unavailability. People who can't obtain Rolex have convinced themselves that Tudor is a perfect substitute. It's not and never will be.

It's a cheap design knock off with a pedestrian ETA movement you ver in watches that cost $400.

Tudor was an afterthought 3 years ago and hopefully will become one very soon again.
Reply Quote
1 edit
Joe Boudain
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MemorialTXAg • 12:58p, 9/3/21
Octavarium said:
AgLA06 said:
Texicurean said:
I know there is a lot of love for Tudors on this thread. I don't care for the blockiness/squarness? of the hands. I guess I prefer more arrow/pointy hands.
I know this is just my opinion.
I get it. I'd rather the Rolex hands, but I think that's the point.

Tudor is literally the closest thing you can get to a Rolex not only in looks, but in design, ownership, and history. And they're a 1/3 of the price. The one hand is really the only difference in looks.

You're basically buying the prince instead of the king. And the price and one small design differentiator reflects that.


The only reason why we are even discussing Tudor is Rolex unavailability. People who can't obtain Rolex have convinced themselves that Tudor is a perfect substitute. It's not and never will be. Tudor was an afterthought 3 years ago and hopefully will become one very soon.
That's a little much. Tudor isn't Rolex, no one should think Tudor is the same as Rolex, but it's a fantastic watch, at a pretty decent price.

The pelagos is a really nice diver, especially with how useful the spring loaded clasp is in keeping the watch comfortable.
Reply Quote
2
AgLA06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MemorialTXAg • 1:00p, 9/3/21
AG
Octavarium said:
AgLA06 said:
Texicurean said:
I know there is a lot of love for Tudors on this thread. I don't care for the blockiness/squarness? of the hands. I guess I prefer more arrow/pointy hands.
I know this is just my opinion.
I get it. I'd rather the Rolex hands, but I think that's the point.

Tudor is literally the closest thing you can get to a Rolex not only in looks, but in design, ownership, and history. And they're a 1/3 of the price. The one hand is really the only difference in looks.

You're basically buying the prince instead of the king. And the price and one small design differentiator reflects that.


The only reason why we are even discussing Tudor is Rolex unavailability. People who can't obtain Rolex have convinced themselves that Tudor is a perfect substitute. It's not and never will be. Tudor was an afterthought 3 years ago and hopefully will become one very soon.


I have a hard time believing someone not worried about dropping $15k or more is settling for a Tudor because of lack of Rolex availability. We're discussing them because of what they are and the niche they are designed to fill. This has just been the best free PR for them since Rolex us failing as a manufacturer for it's crown jewel brand.

Reply Quote
4
MemorialTXAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:01p, 9/3/21
And in before someone chimes in about in-house Tudor movements, which are about 3 parts different than the ETA they fully ripped off.
Reply Quote
1
MemorialTXAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to AgLA06 • 1:10p, 9/3/21
AgLA06 said:
Octavarium said:
AgLA06 said:
Texicurean said:
I know there is a lot of love for Tudors on this thread. I don't care for the blockiness/squarness? of the hands. I guess I prefer more arrow/pointy hands.
I know this is just my opinion.
I get it. I'd rather the Rolex hands, but I think that's the point.

Tudor is literally the closest thing you can get to a Rolex not only in looks, but in design, ownership, and history. And they're a 1/3 of the price. The one hand is really the only difference in looks.

You're basically buying the prince instead of the king. And the price and one small design differentiator reflects that.


The only reason why we are even discussing Tudor is Rolex unavailability. People who can't obtain Rolex have convinced themselves that Tudor is a perfect substitute. It's not and never will be. Tudor was an afterthought 3 years ago and hopefully will become one very soon.


I have a hard time believing someone not worried about dropping $15k or more is settling for a Tudor because of lack of Rolex availability.



I don't disagree. Those who can't obtain Rolex because of the price are in the same camp as those who can but can't get one as far as the Tudor hype goes.

But if someone has better theories how Tudor got to its hype within the last few years I'm willing to listen.
Reply Quote
1
Farmer1906
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TarponChaser • 1:13p, 9/3/21
AG
TarponChaser said:
Farmer1906 said:
AgLA06 said:
I know It's selfish and wrong and a bad biased take on my part.

When I see someone with a smart watch I think less of them. And I know lots of very successful people who wear them. Many more successful than me, because I'm not.

It's fleeting technology of today. It had no real history or tradition, it won't stand the test of time, and it hints at someone who can't appreciate the success they so desperately want. And it indicates to me it's more about a dollar and fame than the good done and that legacy.

I guess that makes me just a regular guy with both a nostalgic side and I hope I can someday leave a legacy for the right reasons.

I don't judge someone wearing a smart watch and even though I now wear my Apple watch more than anything I still prefer my Seamaster.

However, as much as I love the Seamaster it can't track my exercise routines and activity which is why I have/wear the Apple watch.

edit: I really don't use a single app on my Apple watch other than the fitness tracker and I actually have the watch face set as a GMT so I don't feel like such a nerd wearing it. I also have it in a pretty clunky, Rhino Band so from a short distance it looks more like what a G-Shock would look like if it were rectangular.
I have never owned a smartwatch and don't plan to, but I do have a Whoop Band. Like you, the fitness data is important to me. There is a very obvious functionality to smartwatches so I would never fault anyone for wearing one. It's the same reason most of us don't care about quartz watches. The ability to keep the most precise time isn't the #1 factor. We're buying for the craftsmanship, history, mechanical ingenuity, fine materials, and the fact that it's a keepsake that could last a lifetime and more.
Reply Quote
2
AgLA06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MemorialTXAg • 1:18p, 9/3/21
AG
Octavarium said:
AgLA06 said:
Octavarium said:
AgLA06 said:
Texicurean said:
I know there is a lot of love for Tudors on this thread. I don't care for the blockiness/squarness? of the hands. I guess I prefer more arrow/pointy hands.
I know this is just my opinion.
I get it. I'd rather the Rolex hands, but I think that's the point.

Tudor is literally the closest thing you can get to a Rolex not only in looks, but in design, ownership, and history. And they're a 1/3 of the price. The one hand is really the only difference in looks.

You're basically buying the prince instead of the king. And the price and one small design differentiator reflects that.


The only reason why we are even discussing Tudor is Rolex unavailability. People who can't obtain Rolex have convinced themselves that Tudor is a perfect substitute. It's not and never will be. Tudor was an afterthought 3 years ago and hopefully will become one very soon.


I have a hard time believing someone not worried about dropping $15k or more is settling for a Tudor because of lack of Rolex availability.



I don't disagree. Those who can't obtain Rolex because of the price are in the same camp as those who can but can't get one as far as the Tudor hype goes.

But if someone has better theories how Tudor got to its hype within the last few years I'm willing to listen.


The "hype" started long before the last couple of years. It started 100 years ago when the owner / creator of Rolex started the company to fill the niche between middle class brands and Rolex. I'm not understanding your issue here. It's not Rolex, but it's quickly backfilling the void left by Rolex as they continue to push the brand(and price point) higher into the tier 1 luxury segment of the market. Exactly what Tudor is supposed to be.

You know why it has succeeded when all the other brands the Rolex creator started didn't? Because with Tudor he finally stopped trying to create unrelated brands and modeled Tudor as a more budget friendly Rolex for the middle and upper middle class. That's why it's successful. As Rolex continues to rise in popularity, it pulls Tudor up with it just as they intended.
Reply Quote
6
Farmer1906
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MemorialTXAg • 1:20p, 9/3/21
AG
Octavarium said:
AgLA06 said:
Octavarium said:
AgLA06 said:
Texicurean said:
I know there is a lot of love for Tudors on this thread. I don't care for the blockiness/squarness? of the hands. I guess I prefer more arrow/pointy hands.
I know this is just my opinion.
I get it. I'd rather the Rolex hands, but I think that's the point.

Tudor is literally the closest thing you can get to a Rolex not only in looks, but in design, ownership, and history. And they're a 1/3 of the price. The one hand is really the only difference in looks.

You're basically buying the prince instead of the king. And the price and one small design differentiator reflects that.


The only reason why we are even discussing Tudor is Rolex unavailability. People who can't obtain Rolex have convinced themselves that Tudor is a perfect substitute. It's not and never will be. Tudor was an afterthought 3 years ago and hopefully will become one very soon.


I have a hard time believing someone not worried about dropping $15k or more is settling for a Tudor because of lack of Rolex availability.



I don't disagree. Those who can't obtain Rolex because of the price are in the same camp as those who can but can't get one as far as the Tudor hype goes.

But if someone has better theories how Tudor got to its hype within the last few years I'm willing to listen.
I can agree you listed the #1 reason, but they've made some major strides to establish themselves as top-tier watchmaker and not just another MFG who builds a case and throws an ETA in it. They've developed several in-house movements for multiple lines. They're a quality maker with pretty rugged watches and solid bracelets and straps.
Reply Quote
2
Serotonin
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MemorialTXAg • 2:14p, 9/3/21
AG
If I could get one watch it would be a Rolex sub.

But I like Tudor. You can say that the Black Bay is overpriced by $2k because of the movement, but it's a good build quality and very clean aesthetic.

If you have a budget of under $10k and can't get a Rolex, what are you going to go with for a diver?
Reply Quote
1
BoDog
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:30p, 9/3/21
AG
If you must stay under $10k for your diver look very very hard at a Glashutte SeaQ (Blue Dial). David SW has one on his site now.

Amazing fit and finish. Personally though I would just save a little longer until I could afford a Sub. Timeless watch you could have forever.
Reply Quote
2
MemorialTXAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Serotonin • 2:42p, 9/3/21
Serotonin said:
If I could get one watch it would be a Rolex sub.

But I like Tudor. You can say that the Black Bay is overpriced by $2k because of the movement, but it's a good build quality and very clean aesthetic.

If you have a budget of under $10k and can't get a Rolex, what are you going to go with for a diver?


Personally, for a diver under 10k, I would look at Omega. But I do understand that everyone prefers different things design wise. Quality wise, Omega vs Tudor isn't debatable.

Other divers under 10k you could probably score a Blancpain, although the Bathyscaphe design isn't for everyone and Fifty Fathoms probably costs quite a bit more than the sub (and outside of few special editions like the mil-spec which is an insane diver, doesn't hold value as much as a sub). Fifty Fathoms and the sub were the first two modern dive watches so you can also have some historical significance if you are into that.
Reply Quote
1
Farmer1906
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MemorialTXAg • 2:47p, 9/3/21
AG
Octavarium said:
Serotonin said:
If I could get one watch it would be a Rolex sub.

But I like Tudor. You can say that the Black Bay is overpriced by $2k because of the movement, but it's a good build quality and very clean aesthetic.

If you have a budget of under $10k and can't get a Rolex, what are you going to go with for a diver?


Personally, for a diver under 10k, I would look at Omega. But I do understand that everyone prefers different things design wise. Quality wise, Omega vs Tudor isn't debatable.

Other divers under 10k you could probably score a Blancpain, although the Bathyscaphe design isn't for everyone and Fifty Fathoms probably costs quite a bit more than the sub (and outside of few special editions like the mil-spec which is an insane diver, doesn't hold value as much as a sub). Fifty Fathoms and the sub were the first two modern dive watches so you can also have some historical significance if you are into that.
It isn't?
Reply Quote
5
BoDog
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:50p, 9/3/21
AG
Its very debatable. I would personally take a newer Tudor over an Omega in most cases.
Reply Quote
2
MemorialTXAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BoDog • 2:55p, 9/3/21
BoDog said:
Its very debatable. I would personally take a newer Tudor over an Omega in most cases.


Poor choice. But as you say it's a personal decision. The two aren't close.
Reply Quote
5
MemorialTXAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:59p, 9/3/21
Tag is closer to Tudor than Tudor to omega.
Reply Quote
5
Diggity
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:09p, 9/3/21
AG
HBS needs to do a case study on the brilliance of sliding Tudor into the former Rolex price point and convincing people it was a good value.
Reply Quote
8
schmendeler
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:14p, 9/3/21
AG
Movement finishing is better with Omega no question.
Reply Quote
4
schmendeler
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Serotonin • 3:16p, 9/3/21
AG
Serotonin said:
If you have a budget of under $10k and can't get a Rolex, what are you going to go with for a diver?



Reply Quote
10
Farmer1906
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MemorialTXAg • 3:19p, 9/3/21
AG
Octavarium said:
Tag is closer to Tudor than Tudor to omega.
Reply Quote
6
Serotonin
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BoDog • 3:22p, 9/3/21
AG
Glasshutte is one of those brands that's not on my radar but should be. That SeaQ is very nice.
Reply Quote
5
TheOC16
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:38p, 9/3/21
AG
This debate is fun to follow right as I'm going to the shop in a few minutes to look at a Tudor GMT to add to the list of considerations for my first +$200 watch.
Reply Quote
6
Serotonin
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:53p, 9/3/21
AG
Tudor is more of a niche in terms of price range and as noted above Omega has the better movements.

IMO Omega's one of the few brands that can go up against Rolex with their history and brand.

But Omega's also a completely different aesthetic and I think if you're going for a certain style then Tudor fits the bill well. Apparently they've had some quality issues in the past but that seems to have been cleaned up.
Reply Quote
6
AgLA06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to schmendeler • 5:12p, 9/3/21
AG
schmendeler said:
Serotonin said:
If you have a budget of under $10k and can't get a Rolex, what are you going to go with for a diver?





Better power reserve and enough money left over for a vacation since James Bond doesn't get a sizable commission.
Reply Quote
8
schmendeler
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to AgLA06 • 5:19p, 9/3/21
AG
I know it's a great watch but it looks like a Seiko to me.
Reply Quote
5
TulaneAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:45p, 9/3/21
I have a Glashutte Senator PR and I love it. Glad to see some love for the brand here but don't love that diver. Just my opinion.
Reply Quote
2
lb sand
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TulaneAg • 5:50p, 9/3/21
AG
TulaneAg said:
I have a Glashutte Senator PR and I love it. Glad to see some love for the brand here but don't love that diver. Just my opinion.


I want a new watch and am considering either the glashutte senator or Cartier Tank MC.
Reply Quote
TulaneAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to lb sand • 5:57p, 9/3/21
Texicurean said:
TulaneAg said:
I have a Glashutte Senator PR and I love it. Glad to see some love for the brand here but don't love that diver. Just my opinion.


I want a new watch and am considering either the glashutte senator or Cartier Tank MC.

We have similar tastes because I was thinking about adding a Tank MC or Santos to the collection recently as well.
Reply Quote
JSKolache
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to AgLA06 • 10:39p, 9/3/21
AG
AgLA06 said:
schmendeler said:
Serotonin said:
If you have a budget of under $10k and can't get a Rolex, what are you going to go with for a diver?





Better power reserve and enough money left over for a vacation since James Bond doesn't get a sizable commission.
Have the blue. I like the matte black ceramic, its different than gloss black, almost a gray. Not a fan of the gloss on most bezels of all brands.
Reply Quote
1
BBRex
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MemorialTXAg • 11:40p, 9/3/21
AG
Octavarium said:
AgLA06 said:
Texicurean said:
I know there is a lot of love for Tudors on this thread. I don't care for the blockiness/squarness? of the hands. I guess I prefer more arrow/pointy hands.
I know this is just my opinion.
I get it. I'd rather the Rolex hands, but I think that's the point.

Tudor is literally the closest thing you can get to a Rolex not only in looks, but in design, ownership, and history. And they're a 1/3 of the price. The one hand is really the only difference in looks.

You're basically buying the prince instead of the king. And the price and one small design differentiator reflects that.


The only reason why we are even discussing Tudor is Rolex unavailability. People who can't obtain Rolex have convinced themselves that Tudor is a perfect substitute. It's not and never will be.

It's a cheap design knock off with a pedestrian ETA movement you ver in watches that cost $400.

Tudor was an afterthought 3 years ago and hopefully will become one very soon again.


I fully admit that price and availability are keeping me more in the Tudor market than Rolex. But this sort b.s. turns a lot of people off of the Rolex brand, me included. Not that Rolex cares. But I know Rolex wearers who have no interest in anything other than wearing a status symbol. You won't find many Tudor wearers like that.
Reply Quote
8
Joe Boudain
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BBRex • 9:28a, 9/4/21
I have 4 rolexes, and there is a lot of truth to that statement. The watches are great, but lacking in a few areas mainly regarding power reserve and more importantly, adjustable bracelets.

Omega's adjustable bracelet is 10x better than the glidelock or hidden link versions that Rolex has.

Reply Quote
4
Serotonin
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Joe Boudain • 9:40a, 9/4/21
AG
There is even a lot of frustration on the Rolex forums about the popularity. There are lots of guys like you who appreciate the watch as a tool but are getting annoyed with the wait times, speculators, and gray market profiteering.

It's going to be a challenge for Rolex since they don't want to alienate their base and cut off new enthusiasts, but that's what's happening.
Reply Quote
2
TarponChaser
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Serotonin • 10:03a, 9/4/21
Serotonin said:
Tudor is more of a niche in terms of price range and as noted above Omega has the better movements.

IMO Omega's one of the few brands that can go up against Rolex with their history and brand.

But Omega's also a completely different aesthetic and I think if you're going for a certain style then Tudor fits the bill well. Apparently they've had some quality issues in the past but that seems to have been cleaned up.


Agree about Omega.

To me, the big Seamasters just look and feel more rugged but with the same level of craftsmanship and refinement (at least in the movements). Plus, and I know some of y'all don't believe me but being a big dude, anything smaller than 44mm looks really small on my wrist.
Reply Quote
Joe Boudain
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Serotonin • 10:12a, 9/4/21
Serotonin said:
There is even a lot of frustration on the Rolex forums about the popularity. There are lots of guys like you who appreciate the watch as a tool but are getting annoyed with the wait times, speculators, and gray market profiteering.

It's going to be a challenge for Rolex since they don't want to alienate their base and cut off new enthusiasts, but that's what's happening.


They need to raise their prices. Ridiculous that a BLRO has an MSRP of $9300 or whatever and sells for $23k on the grey market. If you're lucky enough to get a Daytona, you can make an easy $20k on it in a second.
Reply Quote
Serotonin
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Joe Boudain • 10:23a, 9/4/21
AG
Yes, waaay past time.
Reply Quote
BBRex
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Joe Boudain • 10:27a, 9/4/21
AG
I think Rolex wants the scarcity, mainly because they want to be an exclusive brand. They are already selling everything they make, and at a great profit, I'm sure. My guess is that price increases will happen, but a little more of a frog-in-the-boiling-pot way to keep their customers from checking out other brands.
Reply Quote
1
First Page Last Page
Page 116 of 461 ▼
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.