Tudor 'Heritage' Chronograph
Discussion
OK, piquetuk you absolute nightmare, 
I reckon this deserves its own thread.
For those who don't get the above comment, the aforementioned gentleman piquetuk cruised into the Real or Fake thread when the OP had raised the worry that he'd get a fake foisted on him when buying a 'decent watch' with five grand he'd fortunately acquired, and being a Rolexophile, piquetuk suggested a vintage Submariner. Good, solid, reliable watch, won't lose any money, no bling, sensible suggestion.
Then I pointed out that 70's Subs are full-on investment pieces these days and some may be worried to use it as a daily beater. I didn't get into the usual BS about how Rolexes are the most widely faked watch, and you need to be a Rolex expert to spot the difference on some, high quality, replicas - we've had that thread many, many times. I got rightly slapped for suggesting that 'investment' watches may not be worn regularly, and of course a Rolex Sub has its reputation only *because* so many have been worn as daily beaters for 40 years and *still* work perfectly (the lack of bearings on the automatic winding rotor could be an issue for some, esp. if servicing and lubrication isn't regularly performed, but I know the current 3135 uses bearings on the rotor and can't remember when Rolex brought them in - it'd only be an issue for those considering a Sub made *before* Rolex fitted the auto rotor with ball bearings, and even then, unlubricated ball bearings can wear the carriages and result in similar 'grinding' noises when rotating... anyway I digress).
I bemoaned that Rolex's Daytona (which I'd owned a few years back as my 'grail watch', due to the motorsport connection and the classic, superb, design - mine had a white face and looked fantastic) didn't have a date function. And that put me off suggesting one as a perfect high-quality daily-wear. The lack of date eventually wound me up
- I'll be honest - the reason I sold mine was because I ran into financial trouble and needed money quickly (and Rolexes are *great* for that, there's always a ready and sensible market for steel sports Rolex), and not because the lack of date was annoying me. But it was getting less wrist time as a result - from being my daily watch, to being a special 'Saturday night' watch only.
Piquetuk then posted up pictures of the new Tudor 'Heritage' Chronograph, which was shown at the recent 2010 Baselworld trade show. And that's why he's an 'absolute nightmare' as per my first sentence Basically, I want one. Badly. So f
king badly that I'm now desperately trying NOT to do something stupid and pay over the odds for one.
Here is the watch in question:
Basically it's a Rolex-made case (I can't find anywhere which grade of stainless steel they use - one of the only ways to spot a fake from a genuine Rolex (in steel) is the grade of stainless, since Rolex use a special high-grade steel whereas everyone else (and all the replica guys) uses 316L steel), with a Rolex-made Oyster bracelet, screw-down crown and screw-down chrono pushers (as per the Daytona, and as per the original 1970s Tudor Chrono), so 150m water resistance (i.e. good enough for me, which includes watersports, falling off waterskis, etc. - I don't dive but it's dynamic pressure that's the worry). The bezel rotates, bi-directionally, so useful for dual time zone calculations.
Most crucially - it's a chronograph, but it *has a date complication* which the bloody Daytona, otherwise the 'perfect daily watch', doesn't. And whilst there's a lot of shared DNA between Tudor and Rolex (Tudor being the 'entry-level' brand for Rolex, of course, and in general tend to be third-party movements in Rolex-designed and Rolex-made cases, built to Rolex standards), this particular watch allegedly has its own motorsport heritage, the link being with Porsche....
Yummy yummy - this watch is pressing ALL the right buttons (I'm currently a Lotus driver and I'd say that my eligibility for self-description as a 'Lotus Enthusiast' is only limited by the fact that I've always *also* been a 'Porsche Enthusiast'... there's a lot of partisanship between the two marques, but historically, I've owned 3 Porsches and 4 Lotuses - if you count the VX220 as a Lotus, which I do
). So I've done a bit more digging - it appears that even in Tudor's press release, Tudor only claim to a relationship with Porsche from 2009, when Tudor entered into the 'powerful TUDOR-Porsche partnership' by becoming 'Timing Partner' for the 'one-make cups' (presumably the Carrera Cup racing, national and international - both popular GT racing series). I can't see anything about Tudor being involved with Porsche back in 1970 when the original watch was made.
Indeed, the cliché is of the chap driving his 911 whilst wearing a steel Rolex Daytona, a cliché I happily perpetuated at the time, blithely indifferent to the embarrassment I'd suffer now Also, it is Rolex who sponsor the big international GT races, with the Rolex 24 Hours of Daytona (they'd have to, really), and from what I can tell, they also are 'official timing' for the 24 Heures du Mans too. For the 'overall' FIA 'official timing' sponsor for GT racing internationally, it appears Blancpain have jumped in for 2010. So whilst Tudor may very well be represented at national Porsche Cup one-make series and the Supercup international series since 2009, their 'motorsport heritage' smells *incredibly* of marketing BS to me. And I desperately want this watch, so I'm not as cynical as I'm sure some could be.
Hell, I like the idea of a link between this Tudor watch and Porsche. Whilst currently Lotus fit my driving excitement needs much better than Porsche (I still hanker after air-cooled cars, and the *fast* air-cooled cars are now silly-money collector's-item money, but I'd happily take a GT3 of any age... but they're so damn fast these days that you can't have much fun on the road before losing your licence), I still love Porsche - their GT racing heritage is virtually without parallel, and I love the unique 911 driving style. The trouble is that the 'link' is a year old, and Tudor are marketing the watch as if the 'motorsport heritage' of Tudor goes back to the 70s when the 'old' version of this Chronograph was sold. It's a bit fishy, and whilst I'm a sucker for the motorsport connection - it was the reason I bought a Daytona, after all, and sadly I didn't get 'trade price' or survived a waiting list, but paid London dealer money for mine - this time round I'm not going to pay above RRP for something with *dubious* motorsport heritage in the first place...
Next up is the movement. Now I'm not going to be a moron and complain that the Tudor isn't using an in-house movement - Tudor *are* the entry-level 'brand' for Rolex, after all, and it is Rolex you buy if you want the full in-house manufacture. The Tudor costs significantly less than any comparable Rolex, too. More importantly, and IMO absolutely essentially, it's utterly irrelevant regardless - since Rolex themselves don't have any movement they could use anyway. The original issue for me was that Rolex's Daytona - in all other respects, my 'perfect daily-wear watch' - didn't have a date complication. This is because Rolex didn't design one into their in-house movement when the manufacture decided to switch away from using the underclocked Zenith El Primero. As you all know, the Daytona originally used a Zenith El Primero movement - seen by many as the finest automatic chronograph, running at 36,000 bpm - slowed down for 'reliability'. It was the only Rolex that used outsourced parts, and Rolex, as a company, like to be completely independent and make *everything* themselves, like Seiko. The oft-quoted example of Seiko developing its own lubricants is a philosophy pioneered by Rolex - Rolex even have a bunch of metallurgists developing their own alloys (the odd 'Everose' gold is an example, whilst Rolex claim that most rose gold alloys fade to yellow gold over the years and through wear (I've never seen or heard of this before Rolex said so), they developed a new alloy that apparently doesn't - it does look nice though and is different to most other rose golds).
Why Rolex didn't future-proof their new Daytona movement with a date complication, I don't know. Perhaps they are, and as soon as I buy this new Tudor, Rolex will announce a new Daytona with a date, just to wind me up But currently, even if Tudor wanted one, they can't have a Rolex movement that satisfies the requirements. The El Primero, however, *is* available with a date complication.... I'd absolutely *love* that movement in a Tudor. It'd be more expensive than a Rolex though! 
Anyway, my initial thoughts on seeing the watch were that it'd be using a version of the tried-and-tested Valjoux 7750. Yes, this movement guarantees that the 'replica' guys, the counterfeiters, will be able to have a micron-perfect replica of the new Tudor available immediately if there's demand (hopefully the Tudor brand would prevent counterfeit demand, which would be cool), but the benefit of the 7750 is that it's very widely used in lots of high-end watches, is reliable, well known and available IIRC in chronometer-grade versions.
However the Tudor *doesn't* use the 7750. The press release, weirdly, only talks about the movement used in the *old* 1970s version - the Valjoux 7734, and doesn't mention what's used in the *new* watch. A bit of googling resulted in finding out that the *new* watch uses a standard ETA 2892, with a Dubois-Dépraz 2054 chronograph module bolted on. The lack of Tudor claims for the watch meeting 'officially certified chronometer' status implies that the 'chronometer' grade ETA 2892 hasn't been used (the 2892 is available in many grades and prices, with a 'proper' chronometer-certified grade at the top). One forum I stumbled across in researching this watch slammed the movement entirely - one moderator with a watch on order cancelled his order and took his deposit back, on the basis that the Dubois-Dépraz module is 'riveted' together and cannot be serviced, only replaced entirely, at a cost of around $25 (in other words, it's cheap unserviceable rubbish).
The thing is that the combination of the ETA 2892 and the Dubois-Dépraz chrono module isn't some weird never-seen-before lash-up. Ulysse Nardin use exactly this combination in their Marine Chronograph, which is well regarded. My Omega Speedy Reduced (the Schumacher 2000 edition) uses the same movement IIRC. Many Breitling chronos use this combo as well. No, it's not up there with the El Primero and the Rolex chrono movement, but the watch *is* a lot cheaper.
Most of the bad attitude on the forums regarding the 2892-DD combination is down to the DD module being hard to service, with most watchmakers preferring to just throw away the module and buy a new one. This calls the longevity of the watch into question. Whilst Rolex watches usually last a lifetime, part of the appeal of the Tudor is the Rolex DNA and the chances that it will, also, be dependable.
I'm looking at this watch as an everyday wear with a bit of specialness to it - I can't see it being massively popular amongst the City crew, who'd generally *require* the Rolex label - and the fact that it's as close to a Daytona with a Date as I'm going to get. I particularly love the case and bracelet design (well, it's a Rolex Oyster isn't it...) and would definitely go for the grey dial version and keep it on a bracelet.
So - having discovered which movement this watch actually uses, and the dubiousness of the Porsche 'heritage' - I still want one, and will be looking out for one. I won't be paying a premium though. What does this esteemed forum think though? The list price, according to piquetuk, will be £2500, but LukeBird reckons I can find one in Paris at a decent discount. Given the *very* ordinary movement, does anyone else think that this watch is massively overpriced? Or is the Tudor build quality really up there with Rolex build quality, and apart from the movement I should expect to find the watch 'feels' as well made as my old Daytona? Will the 2892-DD combo movement mean that the watch will simply NOT last decades?
Opinions welcome!!
I reckon this deserves its own thread.For those who don't get the above comment, the aforementioned gentleman piquetuk cruised into the Real or Fake thread when the OP had raised the worry that he'd get a fake foisted on him when buying a 'decent watch' with five grand he'd fortunately acquired, and being a Rolexophile, piquetuk suggested a vintage Submariner. Good, solid, reliable watch, won't lose any money, no bling, sensible suggestion.
Then I pointed out that 70's Subs are full-on investment pieces these days and some may be worried to use it as a daily beater. I didn't get into the usual BS about how Rolexes are the most widely faked watch, and you need to be a Rolex expert to spot the difference on some, high quality, replicas - we've had that thread many, many times. I got rightly slapped for suggesting that 'investment' watches may not be worn regularly, and of course a Rolex Sub has its reputation only *because* so many have been worn as daily beaters for 40 years and *still* work perfectly (the lack of bearings on the automatic winding rotor could be an issue for some, esp. if servicing and lubrication isn't regularly performed, but I know the current 3135 uses bearings on the rotor and can't remember when Rolex brought them in - it'd only be an issue for those considering a Sub made *before* Rolex fitted the auto rotor with ball bearings, and even then, unlubricated ball bearings can wear the carriages and result in similar 'grinding' noises when rotating... anyway I digress).
I bemoaned that Rolex's Daytona (which I'd owned a few years back as my 'grail watch', due to the motorsport connection and the classic, superb, design - mine had a white face and looked fantastic) didn't have a date function. And that put me off suggesting one as a perfect high-quality daily-wear. The lack of date eventually wound me up
- I'll be honest - the reason I sold mine was because I ran into financial trouble and needed money quickly (and Rolexes are *great* for that, there's always a ready and sensible market for steel sports Rolex), and not because the lack of date was annoying me. But it was getting less wrist time as a result - from being my daily watch, to being a special 'Saturday night' watch only.Piquetuk then posted up pictures of the new Tudor 'Heritage' Chronograph, which was shown at the recent 2010 Baselworld trade show. And that's why he's an 'absolute nightmare' as per my first sentence
Basically, I want one. Badly. So fking badly that I'm now desperately trying NOT to do something stupid and pay over the odds for one.Here is the watch in question:
Basically it's a Rolex-made case (I can't find anywhere which grade of stainless steel they use - one of the only ways to spot a fake from a genuine Rolex (in steel) is the grade of stainless, since Rolex use a special high-grade steel whereas everyone else (and all the replica guys) uses 316L steel), with a Rolex-made Oyster bracelet, screw-down crown and screw-down chrono pushers (as per the Daytona, and as per the original 1970s Tudor Chrono), so 150m water resistance (i.e. good enough for me, which includes watersports, falling off waterskis, etc. - I don't dive but it's dynamic pressure that's the worry). The bezel rotates, bi-directionally, so useful for dual time zone calculations.
Most crucially - it's a chronograph, but it *has a date complication* which the bloody Daytona, otherwise the 'perfect daily watch', doesn't. And whilst there's a lot of shared DNA between Tudor and Rolex (Tudor being the 'entry-level' brand for Rolex, of course, and in general tend to be third-party movements in Rolex-designed and Rolex-made cases, built to Rolex standards), this particular watch allegedly has its own motorsport heritage, the link being with Porsche....
Yummy yummy - this watch is pressing ALL the right buttons (I'm currently a Lotus driver and I'd say that my eligibility for self-description as a 'Lotus Enthusiast' is only limited by the fact that I've always *also* been a 'Porsche Enthusiast'... there's a lot of partisanship between the two marques, but historically, I've owned 3 Porsches and 4 Lotuses - if you count the VX220 as a Lotus, which I do
). So I've done a bit more digging - it appears that even in Tudor's press release, Tudor only claim to a relationship with Porsche from 2009, when Tudor entered into the 'powerful TUDOR-Porsche partnership' by becoming 'Timing Partner' for the 'one-make cups' (presumably the Carrera Cup racing, national and international - both popular GT racing series). I can't see anything about Tudor being involved with Porsche back in 1970 when the original watch was made.Indeed, the cliché is of the chap driving his 911 whilst wearing a steel Rolex Daytona, a cliché I happily perpetuated at the time, blithely indifferent to the embarrassment I'd suffer now
Also, it is Rolex who sponsor the big international GT races, with the Rolex 24 Hours of Daytona (they'd have to, really), and from what I can tell, they also are 'official timing' for the 24 Heures du Mans too. For the 'overall' FIA 'official timing' sponsor for GT racing internationally, it appears Blancpain have jumped in for 2010. So whilst Tudor may very well be represented at national Porsche Cup one-make series and the Supercup international series since 2009, their 'motorsport heritage' smells *incredibly* of marketing BS to me. And I desperately want this watch, so I'm not as cynical as I'm sure some could be.Hell, I like the idea of a link between this Tudor watch and Porsche. Whilst currently Lotus fit my driving excitement needs much better than Porsche (I still hanker after air-cooled cars, and the *fast* air-cooled cars are now silly-money collector's-item money, but I'd happily take a GT3 of any age... but they're so damn fast these days that you can't have much fun on the road before losing your licence), I still love Porsche - their GT racing heritage is virtually without parallel, and I love the unique 911 driving style. The trouble is that the 'link' is a year old, and Tudor are marketing the watch as if the 'motorsport heritage' of Tudor goes back to the 70s when the 'old' version of this Chronograph was sold. It's a bit fishy, and whilst I'm a sucker for the motorsport connection - it was the reason I bought a Daytona, after all, and sadly I didn't get 'trade price' or survived a waiting list, but paid London dealer money for mine - this time round I'm not going to pay above RRP for something with *dubious* motorsport heritage in the first place...
Next up is the movement. Now I'm not going to be a moron and complain that the Tudor isn't using an in-house movement - Tudor *are* the entry-level 'brand' for Rolex, after all, and it is Rolex you buy if you want the full in-house manufacture. The Tudor costs significantly less than any comparable Rolex, too. More importantly, and IMO absolutely essentially, it's utterly irrelevant regardless - since Rolex themselves don't have any movement they could use anyway. The original issue for me was that Rolex's Daytona - in all other respects, my 'perfect daily-wear watch' - didn't have a date complication. This is because Rolex didn't design one into their in-house movement when the manufacture decided to switch away from using the underclocked Zenith El Primero. As you all know, the Daytona originally used a Zenith El Primero movement - seen by many as the finest automatic chronograph, running at 36,000 bpm - slowed down for 'reliability'. It was the only Rolex that used outsourced parts, and Rolex, as a company, like to be completely independent and make *everything* themselves, like Seiko. The oft-quoted example of Seiko developing its own lubricants is a philosophy pioneered by Rolex - Rolex even have a bunch of metallurgists developing their own alloys (the odd 'Everose' gold is an example, whilst Rolex claim that most rose gold alloys fade to yellow gold over the years and through wear (I've never seen or heard of this before Rolex said so), they developed a new alloy that apparently doesn't - it does look nice though and is different to most other rose golds).
Why Rolex didn't future-proof their new Daytona movement with a date complication, I don't know. Perhaps they are, and as soon as I buy this new Tudor, Rolex will announce a new Daytona with a date, just to wind me up
But currently, even if Tudor wanted one, they can't have a Rolex movement that satisfies the requirements. The El Primero, however, *is* available with a date complication.... I'd absolutely *love* that movement in a Tudor. It'd be more expensive than a Rolex though! Anyway, my initial thoughts on seeing the watch were that it'd be using a version of the tried-and-tested Valjoux 7750. Yes, this movement guarantees that the 'replica' guys, the counterfeiters, will be able to have a micron-perfect replica of the new Tudor available immediately if there's demand (hopefully the Tudor brand would prevent counterfeit demand, which would be cool), but the benefit of the 7750 is that it's very widely used in lots of high-end watches, is reliable, well known and available IIRC in chronometer-grade versions.
However the Tudor *doesn't* use the 7750. The press release, weirdly, only talks about the movement used in the *old* 1970s version - the Valjoux 7734, and doesn't mention what's used in the *new* watch. A bit of googling resulted in finding out that the *new* watch uses a standard ETA 2892, with a Dubois-Dépraz 2054 chronograph module bolted on. The lack of Tudor claims for the watch meeting 'officially certified chronometer' status implies that the 'chronometer' grade ETA 2892 hasn't been used (the 2892 is available in many grades and prices, with a 'proper' chronometer-certified grade at the top). One forum I stumbled across in researching this watch slammed the movement entirely - one moderator with a watch on order cancelled his order and took his deposit back, on the basis that the Dubois-Dépraz module is 'riveted' together and cannot be serviced, only replaced entirely, at a cost of around $25 (in other words, it's cheap unserviceable rubbish).
The thing is that the combination of the ETA 2892 and the Dubois-Dépraz chrono module isn't some weird never-seen-before lash-up. Ulysse Nardin use exactly this combination in their Marine Chronograph, which is well regarded. My Omega Speedy Reduced (the Schumacher 2000 edition) uses the same movement IIRC. Many Breitling chronos use this combo as well. No, it's not up there with the El Primero and the Rolex chrono movement, but the watch *is* a lot cheaper.
Most of the bad attitude on the forums regarding the 2892-DD combination is down to the DD module being hard to service, with most watchmakers preferring to just throw away the module and buy a new one. This calls the longevity of the watch into question. Whilst Rolex watches usually last a lifetime, part of the appeal of the Tudor is the Rolex DNA and the chances that it will, also, be dependable.
I'm looking at this watch as an everyday wear with a bit of specialness to it - I can't see it being massively popular amongst the City crew, who'd generally *require* the Rolex label - and the fact that it's as close to a Daytona with a Date as I'm going to get. I particularly love the case and bracelet design (well, it's a Rolex Oyster isn't it...) and would definitely go for the grey dial version and keep it on a bracelet.
So - having discovered which movement this watch actually uses, and the dubiousness of the Porsche 'heritage' - I still want one, and will be looking out for one. I won't be paying a premium though. What does this esteemed forum think though? The list price, according to piquetuk, will be £2500, but LukeBird reckons I can find one in Paris at a decent discount. Given the *very* ordinary movement, does anyone else think that this watch is massively overpriced? Or is the Tudor build quality really up there with Rolex build quality, and apart from the movement I should expect to find the watch 'feels' as well made as my old Daytona? Will the 2892-DD combo movement mean that the watch will simply NOT last decades?
Opinions welcome!!
Dear me. Too mcuh writing could you do a qucik sumary please.
PS I have already decided that will be my next wacth I was going to get a Grantour but Its going to be one of those. Problem is no UK dealers and there appears to be two different colour faces Grey/black
I would like to see them in the flesh before I buy but thats going to be unlikely
the pictures are all over the place sometimes the grey faced one looks Black/Brown/grey
If you do find one at a discount please let me know where
PS I have already decided that will be my next wacth I was going to get a Grantour but Its going to be one of those. Problem is no UK dealers and there appears to be two different colour faces Grey/black
I would like to see them in the flesh before I buy but thats going to be unlikely
the pictures are all over the place sometimes the grey faced one looks Black/Brown/grey If you do find one at a discount please let me know where
Edited by Pesty on Sunday 18th April 22:52
Note grey faced watch has Black sub dials
Looks brown here and in others
Black sub dials so grey face but this time looks black unless they do four versions of it
ARe you sure of the price at 2.5? might have to go back to a grantour at 1.5 in that case
I thought I had read it was going to be 1.7-2k ish
Looks brown here and in others
Black sub dials so grey face but this time looks black unless they do four versions of it
ARe you sure of the price at 2.5? might have to go back to a grantour at 1.5 in that case
I thought I had read it was going to be 1.7-2k ish
Edited by Pesty on Sunday 18th April 23:43
Well I think I'm going to 'need' one as well!
There is nothing to stop you going into a Rolex AD over here and asking for one, the only problem being supply & demand as it will be a special order only. i.e. You pay up and they deliver, they will not order in for you to view, a shame but something that will hopefully be solved in the near future (rumour of Tudor's return to the UK are also all over the place).
Anyway, you could be left hanging for a while in the UK.
As I posted elsewhere there are details of a Tudor AD in Paris having them in stock at the moment. Based on the price that followed that info (€3100), it certainly makes an appealing proposition!
Oh and CF email to follow, not long been back home!
There is nothing to stop you going into a Rolex AD over here and asking for one, the only problem being supply & demand as it will be a special order only. i.e. You pay up and they deliver, they will not order in for you to view, a shame but something that will hopefully be solved in the near future (rumour of Tudor's return to the UK are also all over the place).
Anyway, you could be left hanging for a while in the UK.
As I posted elsewhere there are details of a Tudor AD in Paris having them in stock at the moment. Based on the price that followed that info (€3100), it certainly makes an appealing proposition!
Oh and CF email to follow, not long been back home!
How about this?
http://www.watchfinder.co.uk/Tudor/Heritage-Watche...
They suposedly source from an Italian AD
£2690
just clicked get uote and they £2421 actual price
Tudor Heritage 70330
Retail Price £ 2,690.00You Pay : £2,421.00
You Save: £269.00 (10%)
http://www.watchfinder.co.uk/Tudor/Heritage-Watche...
They suposedly source from an Italian AD
£2690
just clicked get uote and they £2421 actual price
Tudor Heritage 70330
Retail Price £ 2,690.00You Pay : £2,421.00
You Save: £269.00 (10%)
Edited by Pesty on Monday 19th April 17:44
Thank you Cyberface for starting this post. I would have started it myself only I assumed you would all laugh, as it was old news and I'm a newbie! But I have been wrong before
A friend of a friend was at Baselworld and was very excited by the Heritage. I have now been told europe may get them as early as June and it may be as late as next summer in the UK unfortunately.
Will post pics as soon as...
A friend of a friend was at Baselworld and was very excited by the Heritage. I have now been told europe may get them as early as June and it may be as late as next summer in the UK unfortunately.
Will post pics as soon as...
Pesty said:
How about this?
http://www.watchfinder.co.uk/Tudor/Heritage-Watche...
They suposedly source from an Italian AD
£2690
just clicked get uote and they £2421 actual price
Tudor Heritage 70330
Retail Price £ 2,690.00You Pay : £2,421.00
You Save: £269.00 (10%)
Yup, sounds perfect.... but it's 'Currently not in stock' which normally with web shops means 'give us your money and then be prepared for a long wait, several frustrating delays, and eventual cancellation of order'.http://www.watchfinder.co.uk/Tudor/Heritage-Watche...
They suposedly source from an Italian AD
£2690
just clicked get uote and they £2421 actual price
Tudor Heritage 70330
Retail Price £ 2,690.00You Pay : £2,421.00
You Save: £269.00 (10%)
Edited by Pesty on Monday 19th April 17:44
Perhaps I'm just really cynical but unless I can get cast-iron guarantee of availability in writing, I'm really wary of these 'finder' web services that source things on the grey market for a premium.
Would such a grey-market watch retain its warranty? Not sure how Tudor play it - some marques are *really* sniffy about where the watch was purchases, some don't care as long as it's legit.
Did your Watchfinder quote (presumably you entered details to find out how they sourced them) include a guaranteed availability / potential delivery date? If so, then I'm going to think about it... hell, I've dropped them a line - they are going to call me back re: availability, but their offer of taking a 25% deposit isn't flying until I know *damn* well when the watch is going to be delivered...
The thread Luke linked to regarding immediate availability in Paris is interesting too - I speak enough French but I may get a fund manager with french clients (who is MUCH better at dealing with Parisiens) to call Wempe up and ask them what the crack is regarding (a) buying one, and (b) getting it sent to the UK - or whether I'd have to have a weekend in Paris (what a bummer.
My girlfriend was suddenly a lot keener on the watch (though she thought it looked damn good) when I said we'd have to go to Paris to buy one! I don't want to pay a premium, that's the only criterion really. There's a chance with the big Tudor re-marketing plan next year that Rolex will push Tudor upmarket into the price point left as Rolex themselves hiked their prices, in which case waiting till next year would be a large mistake. Quite how many of these watches Tudor will make is another open question - if they play a Daytona then the silly premium game could start off again, as it is a fantastic looking watch...
Cheeers Pesty!
cyberface said:
(what a bummer. My girlfriend was suddenly a lot keener on the watch (though she thought it looked damn good) when I said we'd have to go to Paris to buy one!
Cheeers Pesty!
Thats really odd. Mine had exactly the same reaction My girlfriend was suddenly a lot keener on the watch (though she thought it looked damn good) when I said we'd have to go to Paris to buy one! Cheeers Pesty!
As for availability they are not out anywhere yet so I think the web site is jumping the gun somewhat
Just wish there were some UK ADs' mind youy I will be going to Italy next year pehaps that may be a good place to buy.
This is still my main target with a grantour in second place on the list interesting what you say about the prices may be going up next year. I also would rather not pay a premium. It looks like I may get a bonus this year in august we are on target. Ok its not a lot but it would cover teh watch and a trip to Paris for the weekend ( as long as I like it as much when seeing it in the flesh )
Edited by Pesty on Monday 19th April 22:57
andy tims said:
It IS very nice, but to me that big blank space above the 6 o'clock position gives the dial design a lack of balance. If they'd moved the date window up as tad & made it slightly bigger that might have helped.
Hmm yes but if they had moved it up they would still need a six marker and I think it may have then looked odd floating there above that may have added a bit of clutter.Then again would have ballenced out teh tudor sheild hmm you may be onto something.Not enough to put me off though
But its nice to have that blank pace too often watch makers fill that with un needed writing and symbols
[
Edited by Pesty on Monday 19th April 23:11
That web site has sent me some emails saying it will have full tudor international warrenty and asking to give them a ring for availability.
Will phone them this week and let you know what they say.
Retail Price : £ 2,690.00
Our Price : £ 2,421.00
Condition : Brand New
Brand : Tudor
Series : Heritage
Model Number : 70330
Movement : Automatic Chronograph
Case : Steel
Bracelet : Steel
Dial : Grey Baton
Size : 42mm
Sex : Gents
Comes With : the Full Tudor International Warranty box and papers
Delivery : Please call for latest availability
Will phone them this week and let you know what they say.
Retail Price : £ 2,690.00
Our Price : £ 2,421.00
Condition : Brand New
Brand : Tudor
Series : Heritage
Model Number : 70330
Movement : Automatic Chronograph
Case : Steel
Bracelet : Steel
Dial : Grey Baton
Size : 42mm
Sex : Gents
Comes With : the Full Tudor International Warranty box and papers
Delivery : Please call for latest availability
Cyber have you ever considered making your own?
I'd imagine your perfect watch would be machined from a solid lump of depleted uranium or something equally preposterous and impractical, along with a Sea-gul Tourbillon movement (decorated with the world's rarest gems), with the glass made from some stolen panes from the space shuttle, and quadruple glazed.
I'd imagine your perfect watch would be machined from a solid lump of depleted uranium or something equally preposterous and impractical, along with a Sea-gul Tourbillon movement (decorated with the world's rarest gems), with the glass made from some stolen panes from the space shuttle, and quadruple glazed.
Mattt said:
Cyber have you ever considered making your own?
I'd imagine your perfect watch would be machined from a solid lump of depleted uranium or something equally preposterous and impractical, along with a Sea-gul Tourbillon movement (decorated with the world's rarest gems), with the glass made from some stolen panes from the space shuttle, and quadruple glazed.
I'd imagine your perfect watch would be machined from a solid lump of depleted uranium or something equally preposterous and impractical, along with a Sea-gul Tourbillon movement (decorated with the world's rarest gems), with the glass made from some stolen panes from the space shuttle, and quadruple glazed.
???
I did make this once though as a laugh:
though that didn't have a Sea-Gull movement in it andy tims said:
It IS very nice, but to me that big blank space in the lower half of the dial lacks balance. If they'd moved the date window up a tad & made it slightly bigger that might have helped.
The rest of the design is spot on to my eye.
I'm also not keen on the aesthetics of the face.The rest of the design is spot on to my eye.
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff