Price difference

[WWC]

The Price difference between a Tudor vs. Rolex can be up to 3-4 times!

Since it seems that these two lines are produced under the same company, I assume that the quality plays a big on the $$$?

Not knowing so much as to the history of the Tudor line, but making a "cheaper" line as compared to Rolex, but with great quality movements, is it really worth the bucks to get the "crown"?


How did the Tudor line emerge since I was not able to find that much history. Is the quality worth 3-4 times the $$$ as compared to a Rolex?

Any thoughts?

[padi56]

Originally Posted by WWC

The Price difference between a Tudor vs. Rolex can be up to 3-4 times!

Since it seems that these two lines are produced under the same company, I assume that the quality plays a big on the $$$?

Not knowing so much as to the history of the Tudor line, but making a "cheaper" line as compared to Rolex, but with great quality movements, is it really worth the bucks to get the "crown"?


How did the Tudor line emerge since I was not able to find that much history. Is the quality worth 3-4 times the $$$ as compared to a Rolex?

Any thoughts?

Hans Wilsdorf of the RWC now Rolex first opened Tudor watch production in 1946. And one of the main reasons why he chose the brand name Tudor, was that he wanted to pay tribute to the Tudor history period of old England.

The Tudor line prior to around 1990 was all Rolex except for movement,and the only step down in quality was the price IMO.Then the only main difference Tudor used a top range Chronometer grade ETA a first class all in-house built movement, in watches like the Tudor Prince they used a light Oyster on Subs they used the heavy Oyster bracelet.Now today the Tudor line has quite a heritage with Hans Wilsdorf the founder of Rolex.

In todays market quite a few vintage Tudor watches command higher prices than there Rolex brothers.The Tudor line are still made in the same now highly automated factory as Rolex.While now would agree the Aeronaut,Hydronaut range are not quite as good cases as the Oyster cased ones but its still very very close.Tudor are still a very important part of the Rolex history,and quite a few countries chose the Tudor Subs for military use instead of its Rolex brother, because they passed all there very demanding tests.The Tudor range IMHO are rightfully part of the Rolex line up and history in the making of todays Rolex company.

[sakuraba]

My guess is that installing modified ETA movements would account for the price disparity.

IMHO the quality is very typical of Rolex. Excellent all the way!

[WWC]

Thanks Padi! Great info!@

Jib, does Tudor still use ETA movements vs Rolex's in-house?

[padi56]

Originally Posted by WWC

Thanks Padi! Great info!@

Jib, does Tudor still use ETA movements vs Rolex's in-house?

Yes they still use movements from ETA as many of the very high brands did over the years.ETA is now owned by the Swatch group and they make every thing in-house too.Swatch group owns Nivorax the makers of hairsprings
and escapement parts that have been used by the whole Swiss watch manufacturers for decades including Rolex.

[sakuraba]

Originally Posted by WWC

Thanks Padi! Great info!@

Jib, does Tudor still use ETA movements vs Rolex's in-house?

Sorry, bro. Not sure if they've already started to use in-house movements.

Ooops! Didn't see Peter's reply.

[chris russell]

Sometimes the last increment of quality costs a substantial percentage of the total. In the case of Rolex vs. Tudor, the latter use mass-produced ETA movements without decoration or finishing, (though they do use the top models of the line). They work well, but do not have costly extras like hand-formed overcoil hairsprings, nor does Rolex put the research dollars into to defining, smelting, drawing and forming the hairsprings from a proprietary non-magnetic alloy as they are now doing with Rolex movements. They don't put big research dollars into the shock-absorption system as they do with Rolex-branded movments. All the above is largely invisible to the customer except for the performance and longevity improvements it engenders, but it costs money. Rolex's research costs millions per year, but they are not hesitant to do it because they can recapture the costs on the Rolex brand. Not so with Tudor, it's deliberately priced quite a bit lower.

[GradyPhilpott]

What happens to Tudor when Swatch pulls the plug on distribution of ETA movements?

[Tools]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

What happens to Tudor when Swatch pulls the plug on distribution of ETA movements?

A year or so ago, Rolex is rumored to have purchased the stock of spare wheels and parts from Sellita. Sellita has been making parts for ETA movements, as well as their own SW300 movements for years; which use completely interchangeable parts..

I'm sure that they are poised to use these identical movements if necessary...

[EchoBlueUK]

Originally Posted by padi56

Hans Wilsdorf of the RWC now Rolex first opened Tudor watch production in 1946. And one of the main reasons why he chose the brand name Tudor, was that he wanted to pay tribute to the Tudor history period of old England.

The Tudor line prior to around 1990 was all Rolex except for movement,and the only step down in quality was the price IMO.Then the only main difference Tudor used a top range Chronometer grade ETA a first class all in-house built movement, in watches like the Tudor Prince they used a light Oyster on Subs they used the heavy Oyster bracelet.Now today the Tudor line has quite a heritage with Hans Wilsdorf the founder of Rolex.

In todays market quite a few vintage Tudor watches command higher prices than there Rolex brothers.The Tudor line are still made in the same now highly automated factory as Rolex.While now would agree the Aeronaut,Hydronaut range are not quite as good cases as the Oyster cased ones but its still very very close.Tudor are still a very important part of the Rolex history,and quite a few countries chose the Tudor Subs for military use instead of its Rolex brother, because they passed all there very demanding tests.The Tudor range IMHO are rightfully part of the Rolex line up and history in the making of todays Rolex company.

And yet you can't buy them here. What's that all about?

[Tools]

As to "price differences"

-It's:

Rolex is to Tudor as is,

Cadillac to Chevy

Lincoln to Ford

Volkswagen to Bentley

BMW to Mini Cooper..

And so forth................

[The GMT Master]

Originally Posted by Tools

As to "price differences"

-It's:

Rolex is to Tudor as is,

Cadillac to Chevy

Lincoln to Ford

Volkswagen to Bentley

BMW to Mini Cooper..

And so forth................

Agreed - and for a watch industry analogy, Breguet to Omega, or any other brand in the Swatch Group. Just because they're run by the same parent company doesn't mean they're on a par - Tudors are fine watches in their own right, but I feel they would do better if they weren't constantly compared to Rolex. Just my

[steubi1]

Price has nothing to do with cost.

Price is what the market (the customers) is willing to pay for a product.

It seems that the brand "Rolex" has much more value than the brand "Tudor".

Both watches are good products, and the ETA movement is as reliable and precise as the Rolex movement....

But it is all about perception, and history, and feelings, and and and...

Tom