Need help deciding between a Submariner 114060 and a Black Bay Steel 79730

[cwyyz]

Hello All,

I have been doing research in the past couple weeks to decide on my first purchase. Personally, I’m not a big fan of the iconic cyclops and I have got a relatively small wrist. That narrowed my options down to the Rolex Submariner 114060 and Tudor Heritage Black Bay Steel 79730. However, it is a difficult decision to make, and I’m hoping to get some advice/ suggestions from your expertise. I have listed some of the major differences/ concerns between the two to ease the comparison. Any input is very much appreciated!

Design

The Submariner (especially this no date model) is probably one of the most classic, versatile and timeless design on the market, full of history. The laser engraved flange ring also completes the design. It’s a Rolex!! No further explanation is required I guess.

The Black Bay seems to be a more modern/technical design which is worth mentioning, the military style really gives it a robust, aggressive and unique appearance. On a side note, as an “only watch”, the date window is very convenient but the overall casual design is not as versatile as the Sub. I have also heard the minor details are not too perfect/ aligned, but I’m not sure if that’s a frequent issue.

I know this might come down to personal preference, but a second opinion always helps to provide an all-around perspective.

Movement

Submariner: Calibre3130, 48-hour Power Reserve, -2/+2 sec/day
Black Bay: MT5612, 70-hour Power Reserve, -4/+6 sec/day

The Sub seems to have a much more accurate/premium movement but the Black Bay’s Power Reserve is almost 1 day longer. Do you think this difference is significant when it comes to a practical measure? Do you recommend to use a watch winder when it’s unworn?

Bezel

Ceramic vs. Steel. I’m wondering if someone can share their experience about the materials. Although the ceramic bezel is more scratch-resistant, is it more fragile at the same time? Is it going to crack/shatter easily? For the steel bezel, I guess scratches and dings are inevitable? But that doesn’t really concern me as much unless they appear to be super significant.

Bracelet

This is a no-brainer for me, the Glidelock system is definitely one of the x-factors and makes a world of a difference. Having said that, are the 3-hole increments good enough for day-to-day use in your experience?

Price

Submariner: Approx. $7500
Black Bay: Approx: $3500

Even though I’m not planning to flip it at all as this is going to be my first watch, but there is a big difference in the price. Considering the Black Bay costs less than half of the Sub, I’m uncertain if the overall performance differentiates that much. On the other hand, if I do decide to purchase the other one as well later on, the price increase of the Sub will definitely be much more significant than the Black Bay. What do you guys think?


Many Thanks in advance for your kind response, advice and guidance! Please also let me know if there are other important areas should be considered in the decision making process.

Cheers!

[soundserious]

Didn’t read any of your post, just the title: Sub.

Seriously, don’t overthink it.

[hbombkid]

If you can afford the sub do it now. Save for something additional later on.

Nothing against Tudor I actually like the bronze, but buying one vs a Rolex would never happen.

[JacksonStone]

Originally Posted by cwyyz

However, it is a difficult decision to make, and I’m hoping to get some advice/ suggestions from your expertise.

I don't mean to sound flip, but taking cost out of the equation, I don't see what's so difficult about it. The Sub is a classic, and it will hold its value. Nothing against Tudor, but I don't think there is a comparison. That said, let's look at your criteria:

Design: Rolex wins. Next...

Movement: Yeah, 70 hours power reserve is nice. To me, it doesn't make the sale. I have an Omega with an 8400 movement, which has a 60 hour power reserve, is beautifully finished, antimagnetic, etc. I thought the 3135 in the Sub Date was going to feel like a comedown. It's not at all. It is extremely accurate - much more so than the Omega - and it winds as smooth as butter. It powers the watch, and does it exceedingly well. That's good enough for me.

Bezel: Honestly, I think the steel bezel makes the BB look generic and anonymous. Any other of the BB bezels look better, imo. The Rolex bezel is in another league completely.

Something that doesn't get talked about a lot here is just how legible the Rolex bezel is. The engraved numbers embedded with platinum powder refract the light extremely well, and pop from any angle. The black ceramic is also great looking. As for breakage, it shouldn't be a big risk unless you're going to be knocking the watch around a lot.

Bracelet: You called it. Rolex all the way. Three drilled adjustment holes are minimally functional, but the Glidelock is a game changer. If you get it, you will wonder why you ever asked the question.

Price: This is what it comes down to. If you're considering both, I'm assuming you can afford the Rolex. Given that, I believe you will consider it money well spent. It's a chunk of change that some people consider absurd for something that just tells the time, but the Sub offers satisfaction. Resale is also good, especially if the long-rumored price increase happens after you buy it.

Consider this, too: if you really want the Sub, getting it now will actually save you money over the long run. Take it from someone who kept buying and flipping less expensive watches trying to get something approximating Sub satisfaction without getting the Sub. I'd be dollars ahead now if I'd just bitten the bullet and gotten it first.

Good luck with your decision.

[Krash]

Get the sub now, buy the Tudor next year.

[Rogdogg]

Personally I would go with the Submariner first, however I would try to add the Black Bay at some later date as well. I love the Blue one myself!

With all of the uncertainty on the supply/possible price increases etc. that is being discussed lately I'd go with the Sub first. I'd actually always go with the Sub first but if there is possibly something happening around the corner you'll have wished you got the sub I think.
Both are great watches. You won't be disappointed with either. I guess it's just down to which you are happier paying for.

[Brny11]

Tudor vs. Rolex, huh? I know Tudor is a good brand, but not vs. Rolex. If budget is the issue, it’s a fine choice. Otherwise, get a sub.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[meganfox17]

Originally Posted by cwyyz

It’s a Rolex!!

So It Shall Be Written, So It Shall Be Done

[RightYouAreKen]

Sub by a mile. Have you tried both on? To me, while the Tudor has a lot going for it when viewed straight on, from the side the huge slab sides are a big turnoff to me. Because the sides extend all the way down to the wrist it makes the watch look much thicker and blockier. Add to that that the bracelet seems to connect to the watch at the bottom, rather than at the midpoint on the case, makes it seem even thicker. In reality it’s not much thicker than the Sub, but it’s design really makes it look it. A total deal breaker for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RollieRoll]

Sub without a doubt, if the wallet allows.

[stratguy]

I bought and sold the Tudor, and now I have the 114060. It's not a fair comparison. If you have the money, get the Sub.

[Gentleman10]

Sub

[lord91]

Originally Posted by soundserious

Didn’t read any of your post, just the title: Sub.

Seriously, don’t overthink it.

Same here.

[mikeps2006]

I’d go with the sub


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[henrylee]

Sub
/thread

[oldman2005]

No need to over analyse it: Get a Sub and call it a day!

[Justindo]

If you like and can afford the Submariner, get it. If you compare the two watches side by side, there's a huge difference in quality between the two. Yes, the Rolex is double the price but resale, and pretty much everything else, is on its side. If you can't afford the Rolex, I'd look at an Omega Seamaster, as I think they are much more comparable to Rolex in quality for around the price of a Tudor.

[cfjan]

I thought this video does a pretty good job comparing the two:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMPGFWtmTeM&t=6s

[run23]

They are both great watches, so fo with whatever one feels better on your wrist. Honestly, if the black bay were a little smaller I’d probably take it over the 114060. But given the actual reality of both watches, Sub for me.

[CPRWATCH]

I have a BBS & its a great watch . But I would go with the Sub all day long if its your first watch , as there really is no comparison . Don't get me wrong the BBS is a great watch, but just isn't in the same class as the Sub , and you can always add the BBS further down the line if you still hanker after one .

Not enough pictures on this thread so ,

[JacksonStone]

I was reviewing your initial post again, and see that you mentioned the date in the BB as a plus. I agree. My Omega is a no-date diver, and although it's great in its own right, I do find it frustrating at times not being able to tell the date by looking at it. Since this is going to be your first and (so far) only watch, the date/no date consideration is not trivial. I know you said you don't like the cyclops, but have you absolutely ruled out the Sub Date? If so, then I would consider the inclusion of a date feature as a point in the Tudor's favor. It still doesn't change my vote for which model is the overall more solid choice. That said, I went with the Sub Date when making my own choice between the two.

[HogwldFLTR]

It's funny, I like the comfort of my BBR and BBN on the wrist more than I did my 114060. I may be the only one who finds the glide lock over engineered. In general, for my watches, I set them up the way I want them and wear them like that. The odd exception is when a watch was sized to tight to begin with. Let's see +/- 4secs vs +/-2secs? Either are fine in my book. 70 hours power reserve sounds good. Having a date is something I really like on a watch. It is almost a show stopper for me to have a watch without one. Half price seems like a no brainer. Rather than risk ostracization I'll go along with the crowd and say get the Rolex. Of course it's much better to have a watch that is held in high esteem then one that is more practical.

[Rashid.bk]

Sub.

[cwyyz]

Thank you so so much everyone! Your excellent feedback does mean a lot and helps a ton!

The only reason I compared with the steel version instead of the colored aluminum is the militaristic feel that really catches me. As many have said, the best decision for now is probably get the sub for now, and consider another later on. In that case, I guess I will probably choose between the Speedmaster 57/ Black Bay Chrono, which there's a date window.

I'm somewhat worried about the durability of the ceramic bezel as I've heard stories that it got shattered etc... Can you share some experience on that note? I would certainly be as careful as possible, although some bangs and slams are inevitable in the long run, a crack is too much imo. I do plan to keep it for as long as possible but I haven't found a detailed review of long-term use. Again, many thanks and any input is much appreciated! :)

[amh]

I like Tudor but if you have the funds get the Sub. You won't regret it.

Don't worry about the ceramic bezel. If you're doing something really rough, either take off the watch or buy yourself a beater (Seiko, G-shock etc.) In normal use the bezel will be fine.

[Rsubnodate]

Sub. I have owned both and I no longer own the BB but still own my sub...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[encarter13]

Sub! IMHO, if you can only have one watch, it needs to be a Sub. If you can afford to have a collection of watches, you should have a Sub....basically everyone needs a Sub!

[meganfox17]

Originally Posted by cwyyz

I will probably choose between the Speedmaster 57/ Black Bay Chrono, which there's a date window

Please search for a thread entitled Tudor Sports Chrono 20300 questions (and newer Tudor chrono models).Just read what I have to say about the Tudor chrono 22 hours ago. There are more than 50 threads on Ceramic watch topics on the Omega Forum.I suggest that you start your research there

[yannis]

Sub.

[jctrolex]

I went through the same thing and bought the Black Bay because it seems to be the logical choice given the price difference. Two years later I bought the Sub because I couldn’t get it out of my mind. Now I have both there is no comparison the Sub wins by a mile and it’s always on my wrist. I can list the many differences here but you’ll get it once it’s on your wrist for a couple of days. I should have bought the Sub in the first place and save myself a few thousand dollars. Don’t get me wrong the Black Bay is a great watch and great value for the price point, in fact I don’t see any other watches even come close to having such value proposition but it’s no Sub. If price is not the determining factor get the Sub. Btw don’t worry about the ceramic bazel I’ve own the GMT II for 5 years and the sub for 2 and I’ve banged both a few times and it’ll stand up to normal use. I put on a Seiko or some other cheaper watches when I do heavy work.