Tudor GMT Pepsi Thoughts

[junamuan]

I like it per se but I won't buy it. It seems like a wannabe.

[watchwatcher]

Originally Posted by Dan Pierce

Maybe for the unenlightened.
dP

x2.

Since Rolex kind of left me cold this year, I'm considering this one. Already have my eye on another Tudor from last year, so this might make a nice companion set.

The only thing is, I'm not sure I understand how that rivet bracelet works...

[capote]

Its a nice looking watch. I hope the GMT hand isn’t independent like the pre 3185 movements so you actually need to rotate the bezel to track a second time zone and that the bezel is aluminum.

[sensui]

Great looking watch.....my only concern is the thickness being around the same as the current black bays with the in house movement.....certainly not a fan of that. And I'm not 100% convinced of having the GMT hand as snowflake also......somewhat seems crowded and a bit odd.

[Shaky]

Originally Posted by DKRanger22

Thanks Andrew. Jut what I was looking for, and it muddy’s the waters even more for me as I look at the Rolex and think is there an extra £4000 in it ??

On the wrist will be the only way tbh. I don’t hate the rivet bracelet but I would get that version and prob put it on a nice leather strap anyway.

[DKRanger22]

Originally Posted by junamuan

I like it per se but I won't buy it. It seems like a wannabe.

You could say the same about some vintage Tudor subs - some of which have become highly desirable in recent years.

[crazycarlitos]

Not bad..

But gonna have to see it in person to judge the size and true color.

[ras47]

The Tudor doesn't look right to me without the cyclops.

[Hands90]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

It is the only modern GMT made by the Rolex organization which I'd consider owning. I like the better night legibility, far better coloring, and size. The new movement is a plus as well. Pricing makes it better yet. The only thing lacking in my mind is a cyclops and that can be easily remedied. I'm looking forward to trying one on providing it doesn't become so popular that it creates the need for wait lists.

Could I get someone to just add a cyclops?

[4BostonB]

Originally Posted by capote

Its a nice looking watch. I hope the GMT hand isn’t independent like the pre 3185 movements so you actually need to rotate the bezel to track a second time zone and that the bezel is aluminum.

The GMT function works just like the GMTII - hour hand is independently adjustable (which is definitely better than the ETA implementation where the GMT hand is adjustable instead).

[4BostonB]

Originally Posted by ras47

The Tudor doesn't look right to me without the cyclops.

I think the date is too far towards the edge of the dial. Wouldn't it look better if it lined up with the pips for the hours? I don't think it needs a cyclops by any means but I do agree that the date looks weird.

[The Joker]

Originally Posted by Cato

Aside from cost, I don't really see the point of Tudor. And, cost is an issue, you might as well go with a Casio.

Originally Posted by Easy E

In an open forum riddled with ridiculous comments I submit this may very well be one of the most ridiculous comments I have read in a while.

E-

Agree, such a ridiculous argument.

[Polarbears]

Wow there are some picky thinkers...

[Etschell]

Originally Posted by ak797

i do like it but not if the thickness is over 14mm.

14.6

[VicLeChic]

I can't get passed the snowflake hands. Total deal breaker for me.

[doboy007]

Originally Posted by VicLeChic

I can't get passed the snowflake hands. Total deal breaker for me.

This is my biggest issue with Tudor

[Etschell]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=s8McMoTbPT8

[MCO1]

I have never seriously considered a Tudor. I have tried one on multiple times after being excited by pictures but have in the past been underwhelmed in the flesh. I could see this one and Tudor in general as being what Rolex used to be before they went so up-market. These could be one heck of an adventure/travel watch which duty usually goes to my Explorer 39.

[Etschell]

some more

https://www.instagram.com/p/BgpZGPhFRLu/
https://www.instagram.com/p/BgpU3peH5l-/
https://www.instagram.com/p/BgpUOPNFBEm/

[Rebel]

Originally Posted by Cato

Aside from cost, I don't really see the point of Tudor. And, cost is an issue, you might as well go with a Casio.

What was Hans Wildorf thinking?????

[Etschell]

Originally Posted by Spikedlee

The blue is bit too dark in the videos I have seen of the watch. Makes it look more black. I wish they lightened it up just a bit.

its from the black bay blue.

if they went 16710 blue everyone would scream.

[vukotab]

Being well versed in the quality of Tudor watches (I owned a lot of them back in the day...), I find this new GMT simply awesome. Why? Well, because it is much, much cheaper than it's Rolex counterpart, and just as well designed and executed.
Would I rather have it than Rolex GMT Master II, if money is not an issue? Probably not. But being more than 50% less expensive, this Tudor presents a viable option for a wide audience that simply cannot afford a 7000$+ watch.
On its own merits, I think it looks really good, it has an in-house movement and its no-crown guards case design I really appreciate.
For me, it is a clear winner for Tudor. I could live without this year's 1926 and Black Bay 1958 models (the later being really just a rehash of already existing, albeit larger model), but this GMT ticks all the boxes for me.

[No SUBctitute]

Originally Posted by warrior

Gotcha—the most I’ll go is a Sub-c level of thickness.

The GMT is 1.6mm thicker than the SubC. If the crystal is used to calculate thickness, then the cases may be similar thicknesses.

[arosado]

$3,900 it is a no-brainer. All in!!!

[Etschell]

Originally Posted by No SUBctitute

The GMT is 1.6mm thicker than the SubC. If the crystal is used to calculate thickness, then the cases may be similar thicknesses.

crystal counts.

[landroverking]

I like it, but just not a fan of snow flake hands. That probably puts it the way down the buy list for me.

[actionkwj]

Originally Posted by breitlings

I really love the new GMT II Pepsi from Rolex, but there was a Pepsi GMT also released from Tudor which is a very beautiful reference as well. I haven't seen much discussion of it on here.

https://www.tudorwatch.com/watches/n.../m79830rb-0001

https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/tu...mt-introducing

It's a beautiful watch a new tudor GMT movement, great colors, great 41mm size, oyster style rivet bracelet, oh yeah an amazing price MSRP $3900.

For GMT lovers I think this was a great set of Basel releases.

Not a big fan if Tudor but at least the got the Pepsi bezel colors right and it looks like a nice tool watch and not a shing bling thing!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[50hz]

The GMT seems perfectly fine, but I'm too busy pining for a BB58 to care. 39mm and 11.9mm height is more like it for me personally.

[Sade]

Originally Posted by actionkwj

Not a big fan if Tudor but at least the got the Pepsi bezel colors right and it looks like a nice tool watch and not a shing bling thing!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Correct, they got the colors right. There are so many watches I love and I always take into consideration the resale value. I would guess the new Tudor Pepsi would retain more of it's value than the SS Rolex Pepsi. Plus, you have to love the Jubliee cause that's what your stuck with.

Sent from my MHA-L29 using Tapatalk

[Chaching]

No