BLRO vs. BB GMT

[vandyologist]

I'm sure it's been discussed on here before, but I'm new so forgive me...

I picked up a BB GMT in December after I sold my 116710LN in September. I really love the Tudor but do find the bracelet to be less comfortable than my Rolex bracelets so I generally wear it on leather. I will "probably" be able to get a BLRO later in the year at retail price (according to my AD who's treated me well in the past). Is it worth it? I wouldn't buy it to flip it.

Does anyone who has both prefer the Tudor?

[chazadams]

Right now I am wearing the Tudor GMT much much more. That will probably change at some point......I think.

They are two entirely different watches in my opinion. The BLRO is sexy, beautiful and some bling on the wrist while the Tudor is a more casual, tool like, and subdued.

Keep the Tudor and rock it on leather or nato! The BLRO on jubilee will be a totally different feel and watch. So......BOTH

[samson66]

I have had both, but not at the same time. As the poster above me states, two very different watches. The Rolex is the blingier of the two, especially the bracelet. The Tudor is the toolier of the two. If you want a shiny ceramic bezel and glistening bracelet go Rolex. If you prefer a more muted, vintage look go with the Tudor. The Tudor is also a larger watch than the BLRO, so depends on your wrist size and what you prefer. For me the Tudor won out.

[watchwatcher]

Originally Posted by chazadams

Right now I am wearing the Tudor GMT much much more. That will probably change at some point......I think.

They are two entirely different watches in my opinion. The BLRO is sexy, beautiful and some bling on the wrist while the Tudor is a more casual, tool like, and subdued.

Keep the Tudor and rock it on leather or nato! The BLRO on jubilee will be a totally different feel and watch. So......BOTH

I would agree with these thoughts. Put it this way, if you can get your hands on a BLRO, then I wouldn't let the fact you've got the Tudor dissuade you.

[Stevec14]

The third option is to go in between and go for a 16710. I like the Tudor. It has a do anything type vibe that I like. I think there is certainly room for more than one gmt in a collection.

[vipereaper30]

Very different watches each with their own place so I say get both. If forced to chose I prefer the Tudor. It's more casual/vintage and feels better on my wrist. Only downside is it keeps getting noticed and the comments are "nice Rolex" so kinda awkward.

[travisb]

I agree that they can co exist if that's an option. Definitely get the BLRO though when the opportunity comes.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by vipereaper30

Very different watches each with their own place so I say get both. If forced to chose I prefer the Tudor. It's more casual/vintage and feels better on my wrist. Only downside is it keeps getting noticed and the comments are "nice Rolex" so kinda awkward.

Great comparison shot

[sensui]

It'd be a closer race if the Tudor wore close to as slim/comfortable as the BLRO....that really is the issue for me when comparing the 2. Would prefer the Rolex in this case.

[Likestheshiny]

I love the Black Bay line, but it just doesn't compare favorably to a sub or GMT. That's hardly unexpected, given the price difference. But if you put a BLRO next to a BB GMT, the BB definitely comes off as underwhelming.

(I remember being excited about picking up a BB steel and gold, but then I made the mistake of holding it next to a two-tone sub, and I lost interest in the BB almost immediately.)

[MickCollins1916]

I’ve yet to see the new BLRO in person (though I own/have owned previous generations of them), so I’ll confine this post to the Tudor GMT. I had no intention of buying this model, but once I tried it on, I was smitten.

The bevels on the underside of the case plus the added thickness of the in-house movement made all the difference for me fit-wise on the bracelet. The ETA BB was never comfortable for me on bracelet.

I really enjoy wearing the GMT and with 200m WR and the GMT/date functions, it ticks a lot of boxes for me. It’s a very cool watch and at the price point, huge fan.

If you’re comparing them without price being a factor, it’s likely not a close race for many people, but the value you get with the Tudor version’s pretty great IMO, and that carries some weight for me.

[watchamatic]

I don’t own any of the two but put myself on the list for the Tudor GMT but not for the BLRO. I just like the looks of the Tudor much better. I don’t like how the BLRO looks on a jubillee. But that is just me. Your mileage may vary.

[1William]

Very different watches and I think both can exist in a collection.

[Raku]

Originally Posted by vipereaper30

Very different watches each with their own place so I say get both. If forced to chose I prefer the Tudor. It's more casual/vintage and feels better on my wrist. Only downside is it keeps getting noticed and the comments are "nice Rolex" so kinda awkward.

The Tudor looks so much bigger in this picture.

[samson66]

I still can't get past the crowded bezel on the Rolex. Those numbers just look HUGE. I think the thinner bezel/numbers, smaller markers, larger dial just are more pleasing to the eye on the Tudor.