Differences between Rolex and Tudor Movements

[Acidstain]

Originally Posted by 77T

Welcome to the forum.
Yes, a side benefit is no OEM parts in the marketplace.

But it doesn’t stop fakir’s from making them. All they need to do is disassemble one movement for each unique caliber in the Tudor lineup.

I believe Ashton gave the actual reason - control over the service channel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Thank you.

True true. A movement refurbished and recertified (?) from the factory guarantees service quality. Also translate to faster service times. Say, 30 minutes to swap out a complete movement versus 3 hours for a conplete teardown.

[Tools]

Originally Posted by Jostack

I get the argument for the independent watchmaker, and I agree. But swapping a movement vs ‘servicing’ YOUR movement? What is the difference in the end? Is there an emotional attachment to the movement or certain parts within a movement? Isn’t YOUR movement fundamentally changed when it is serviced? Worn parts are replaced. Good parts are cleaned/lubed and reassembled.
. . .

I agree with you.

This is very common throughout the world now days as there are very few new-generation individuals who want to learn a trade.

Circuit boards, mechanical parts, generators, compressors, motors; almost nobody will rebuild these, they are all "core" products swapped-out and sent back for rebuild.

[Jostack]

I do highly regard the skill set of watchmakers and any skilled trade in any industry.

In most places today, efficiency overrules personal ‘touch’.

To some degree we all accept the low cost/efficiency benefit of Walmart type businesses. Right? Amazon? Anyone?

I’m not saying I like it, but damn is it convenient?...

I don’t like that the Tudor ‘in house’ movement is not serviced traditionally, but I’m not sure it would have effected my decision at the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[watchmavan]

Originally Posted by Jostack

I do highly regard the skill set of watchmakers and any skilled trade in any industry.

In most places today, efficiency overrules personal ‘touch’.

To some degree we all accept the low cost/efficiency benefit of Walmart type businesses. Right? Amazon? Anyone?

I’m not saying I like it, but damn is it convenient?...

I don’t like that the Tudor ‘in house’ movement is not serviced traditionally, but I’m not sure it would have effected my decision at the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Is there confusion here? Swapping a movement doesn't mean the calibre is not serviced. I can't imaging Tudor would be disposing these movements.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Jostack]

Originally Posted by watchmavan

Is there confusion here? Swapping a movement doesn't mean the calibre is not serviced. I can't imaging Tudor would be disposing these movements.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

No confusion as far as I can tell. The movements are being serviced, just not by traditional processes/methods.

It seems (and I don’t Know 100%), an existing movement is removed and replaced with a movement that has already been serviced.

It is just a different, potentially more cost effective way of providing service efficiently.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Swashplate]

This is not uncommon for any machine. Replace or overhaul. Sometimes it makes sense to go one way or the other. It doesn't mean one option is better than the other. I have personally made $500,000 replacements vs $50,000 repairs and feel fine with both as the end product is identical in performance.

[SOG DIVER]

An ongoing problem is developing, particularly for vintage Rolex references. If the Rolex parts accounts are cancelled for independents, then the uninitiated have a greater chance
of having their dials, hands and cases replaced without a vote by an RSC.
No OEM parts in the marketplace is a two-edged sword and the watch owner may be injured by either edge.
As for my drilled-lug Submariners, they will be serviced by a CW 21 sans RSC.

[tgoose1]

So, are you receiving a "brand new" Tudor movement at "service/swap" time, or a prior re-built one? I would suspect that Tudor is not throwing away a repurposeable item that can be overhauled at their leisure or by subcontractors. Don't know what a new Tudor watch movement warranty is, but guess the service-swap item does not carry same.

[gunhose]

If I wanted Tudor I would get an older one with ETA movement !!!!!

[JParm]

Originally Posted by SOG DIVER

An ongoing problem is developing, particularly for vintage Rolex references. If the Rolex parts accounts are cancelled for independents, then the uninitiated have a greater chance
of having their dials, hands and cases replaced without a vote by an RSC.
No OEM parts in the marketplace is a two-edged sword and the watch owner may be injured by either edge.
As for my drilled-lug Submariners, they will be serviced by a CW 21 sans RSC.

That's who I go with too.

[Finslayer83]

Originally Posted by SOG DIVER

An ongoing problem is developing, particularly for vintage Rolex references. If the Rolex parts accounts are cancelled for independents, then the uninitiated have a greater chance
of having their dials, hands and cases replaced without a vote by an RSC.
No OEM parts in the marketplace is a two-edged sword and the watch owner may be injured by either edge.
As for my drilled-lug Submariners, they will be serviced by a CW 21 sans RSC.

this.

[mfm22]

My Pelagos has been on & off wrist for the last 8 days - set at Atomic time
Gained 5 seconds in 8 days = .625 sec / day - I'll take that as far as accuracy !

Haven't tried any positions at rest other than face up .

I'm wondering How much Service cost's for RSC for Tutors ??

[CedCraig]

Regarding the servicing of the Kenissi MT movements, it’s interesting to learn they swap out the movement rather than repairing the original movement. Given the extremely high cost of labor in Switzerland, it’s pretty conceivable that Tudor sends the movements in need of repair to a subsidiary, maybe in Eastern Europe or Portugal, for refurbishment. Cheaper labor spruces up the returned movement, which is then ready to be swapped into the next Tudor that needs to be serviced. I’m curious if this will be the same for Norquain watches and presumably other brands that will use Kenissi movements in the future.

The need to replace parts rather than repair them is one criticism of the new Rolex 32xx movements. Because of the thin walls of the new barrels, the mainspring and barrel must be replaced in whole, rather than repaired as needed with the 31xx movements. (Bhi dot co dot uk)

To reply to the original question, one source says “The specs of the Cal. MT5621 are identical to the smaller Rolex 3255 in the Rolex Day-Date 40 introduced at Baselworld in 2015.” (Watch-wiki dot net)

It makes sense that Tudor would use the vast movement knowledge of Rolex to design a less expensive movement that’s based on a venerable Rolex design. Once ETA said it would no longer supply movements to all and sundry, watch companies had to come up with a new plan. And since Tudor itself doesn’t make its own components, setting up Kenissi as a movement manufacturer was the next logical step.

I tried to include links to the sources, but since I don’t have 10 posts, I can’t provide the full links.

[daysky1]

How do you know you're not exchanging a newer movement for a older refurbished one?