Ginger v Mary Ann- ? Rolex v Tudor?

[Sub737]

Alright, so couldn't sleep so looking about and happened to once again see a few vintage Tudor Submariners, and got to thinking about the age old comparison between Rolex and Tudor. The price for say a 79090 is not that far off from Rolex 16610 or 14060. I have heard great things about the Tudor of course, but the movement always makes me think I'd be settling for less, but am I being ridiculous, is the ETA or modified ETA still solid enough, and therefore not of concern? I have not seen in person the Tudor sub, and so maybe owners of this watch could respond about their experience. Is the concept of Tudor being lesser, or the sister of Rolex just a figment of our imaginations? I grew up watching Gilligan's island, and I am sure many of you did as well, so the comparison with that show's female characters seemed just right! Maybe we all would have just fine riding off into the sunset with either one!

[mui.richard]

Personally I think the difference is superficial. My 1995 Submariner (mine is a 75090, big watches weren't exactly the thing back then) is still running within COSC despite it's only been serviced twice in the 25 years I've had it since new. Casework, bracelet, dial, hands are probably of equal quality anyways. So if accuracy, robustness of the movements are almost equal I just don't see that much difference in them.

But at the end of the day, Rolex will always be the big brother.

[interestedwatcher]

You can get a mint box and papers 79090 for the same price you'd get a ratty 16610.

You can get a nice 79090 for 30 - 40 percent less than a 16610.

Far less Tudor submariners are around today, compared to the 16610.

The market for Tudor Submariners is a lot smaller, but so is the supply. They command a good price for what they are, and they have a unique charm that you need to see and hold to understand.

[Sub737]

I just found a 79090 for about 7100 dollars , and same site, 16610 for 7850. Maybe I am not comparing two most similar models, most would tend to compare the 79090 to maybe the 16800, but similar era watches none the less. Of course prices will vary on location, and both Rolex and Tudor submariners have seen substantial increases in price over the last several year, but the Tudors appear to be catching up, commanding prices not quite Rolex levels, but getting closer. Maybe as "interested watcher" mentions this may be partial due to the smaller supply of the Tudors. Maybe in the end we are beating a proverbial dead horse on this topic, but I just find the comparison between the two watches hard to ignore, and I remain interested how others feel. Happy New Year everyone, by the way, and hope this year is better for all, and hope all remain safe.

[interestedwatcher]

Not all Rolex people are Tudor people, but all Tudor people are Rolex people.

I wish I was collecting 10 years ago, when Tudor was very much in the shadow of its bigger brother, I think today the market is recognising what they missed before.

[Sub737]

Originally Posted by interestedwatcher

Not all Rolex people are Tudor people, but all Tudor people are Rolex people.

I wish I was collecting 10 years ago, when Tudor was very much in the shadow of its bigger brother, I think today the market is recognising what they missed before.

I totally agree, but isn't that true of so many things!!! I'd pay the years ago prices for Tudor in a second, just have a more difficult time paying for Tudor at Rolex prices, but the market is just what it is. People are very passionate about Tudor watches, so there has to be something to it. I remain interested in getting a Tudor, but probably have to act fast, prices are going up and up.

[brandrea]

So which one in the analogy is Ginger and which one is Mary Ann?

[motoikkyu]

Not to stretch analogies too much, but a lot of Forumites are also vintage car enthusiasts. For some vintage car guys, it's all about the look of the vehicle, the evocation of bygone times, while for others, it's all about the guts, the raw energy and exuberance of the engine and drivetrain. So, too, the Submariners. There's no arguing with the Rolex drivetrain, and there's no Rolex equivalent to a snowflake hour hand. What matters more to you? I know that when I want to wear a vintage watch with both day and date visible, the President is the icon, but often I want the larger size and stainless flash of the Jumbo Date Day. Remember, convertible versions of 60s-70s muscle cars often came with tamer 6-cylinder engines, which hasn't hurt value because the heart wants what the heart wants.

[Sub737]

Originally Posted by motoikkyu

Not to stretch analogies too much, but a lot of Forumites are also vintage car enthusiasts. For some vintage car guys, it's all about the look of the vehicle, the evocation of bygone times, while for others, it's all about the guts, the raw energy and exuberance of the engine and drivetrain. So, too, the Submariners. There's no arguing with the Rolex drivetrain, and there's no Rolex equivalent to a snowflake hour hand. What matters more to you? I know that when I want to wear a vintage watch with both day and date visible, the President is the icon, but often I want the larger size and stainless flash of the Jumbo Date Day. Remember, convertible versions of 60s-70s muscle cars often came with tamer 6-cylinder engines, which hasn't hurt value because the heart wants what the heart wants.

The car analogy does apply, and reminds me of the Porsche 924 and 944, the 924 having a (heaven forbid) Audi engine.

[BrazenC5]

I would hazzard a guess that the leading thought of purchasing Rolex or Tudor is not the movement.

Would you not buy a Rolex 6263 because it has a Valjoux movement?

ETA is beyond solid as a movement and easy to service also.

Sent from my SM-G781U1 using Tapatalk

[motoikkyu]

BrazenC5, you are correct, of course BUT reading on this Forum, there are a lot of movement-savvy enthusiasts. I have a Calibre 12 Dugena that runs better than any of my Calibre 12 Heuers, but will never achieve 1/4 of the value, branding (which gets argued as "style"). But vintage value is more than the sum of the component parts, which is what makes all of this so much fun. It's loving a look, or a feel, or an aspiration, or a memory of an aspiration enough to put a cash value on it. One-of-a-kind examples are hard to value in terms of dollars, but some are amazing and others just exist.

[Filipão]

Originally Posted by Sub737

The car analogy does apply, and reminds me of the Porsche 924 and 944, the 924 having a (heaven forbid) Audi engine.

How things have NOT changed! Nowadays Porsche has Audi engines. In fact it is part of the same group.

So go for the Tudor you like best!

For your eyes only, forget what the others like.

[Sub737]

Originally Posted by Filipão

How things have NOT changed! Nowadays Porsche has Audi engines. In fact it is part of the same group.

So go for the Tudor you like best!

For your eyes only, forget what the others like.

Well said, excellent point.

[winst]

Originally Posted by Sub737

The car analogy does apply, and reminds me of the Porsche 924 and 944, the 924 having a (heaven forbid) Audi engine.

Not the 924 Carrera GT though - I believe that used a Porsche engine and had greatly enhanced performance, 924S used a 944 derived Porsche engine as well?

[Sub737]

Originally Posted by BrazenC5

I would hazzard a guess that the leading thought of purchasing Rolex or Tudor is not the movement.

Would you not buy a Rolex 6263 because it has a Valjoux movement?

ETA is beyond solid as a movement and easy to service also.

Sent from my SM-G781U1 using Tapatalk

Well said, thank you for your Input, much appreciated

[Sub737]

Originally Posted by winst

Not the 924 Carrera GT though - I believe that used a Porsche engine and had greatly enhanced performance, 924S used a 944 derived Porsche engine as well?

Yes the turbo was a Porsche engine, and actually the 924S was apparently a decent car to drive, with some modifications making it lighter, better drive. I was reading about these cars and came across a statement from an owner about his car, but thought it could be applied to watches as well.

"I've always liked the 924's pure, thin, uncluttered body shape, before all of the lumps and flares of the 944 (which I also like). I'd had this pitifully underpowered little brown 924 for five years, and for some reason, I loved it--I enjoyed taking it to shows and hearing people say, 'Why did somebody save one of these cars?' "

[winst]

Originally Posted by Sub737

Yes the turbo was a Porsche engine, and actually the 924S was apparently a decent car to drive, with some modifications making it lighter, better drive. I was reading about these cars and came across a statement from an owner about his car, but thought it could be applied to watches as well.

"I've always liked the 924's pure, thin, uncluttered body shape, before all of the lumps and flares of the 944 (which I also like). I'd had this pitifully underpowered little brown 924 for five years, and for some reason, I loved it--I enjoyed taking it to shows and hearing people say, 'Why did somebody save one of these cars?' "

My Dad isn’t really a car fanatic like me but he always fancied a 924 for exactly what you pointed out - the ‘thin, uncluttered body shape’. I always thought the seats looked great in them as well, especially the ones with the psychedelic fabric on.

[996marty]

Originally Posted by Sub737

The car analogy does apply, and reminds me of the Porsche 924 and 944, the 924 having a (heaven forbid) Audi engine.

And now the 924 is becoming a collectable car even with the Audi engine 😆 obviously like the Tudor watch

[Treborian]

I like both of mine. Very different but still similar on the wrist. I think they complements each other pretty good...