Omega Speedmaster Racing vs. Tudor Black Bay Chrono

Omega Speedmaster Racing
329.30.44.51.04.001
44.3mm case
15.4mm thick
50mm lug to lug
21mm lug width
50m water resistance
Cal. 9900 w/ 60 hours power reserve
187 grams
$9,100
Tudor Black Bay Chrono
M79360N-0002
41.5mm case
14.4mm thick
50mm lug to lug
22mm lug width
200m water resistance
Cal. MT5813 w/ 70 hours power reserve
$5,450

[@willelliott5052]

The 44mm Speedmaster Racing has been on my radar, only it may take a couple years before it will no longer conflict with my financial goals. Though I am disappointed with the 50m water resistance for a sports type watch, I will gladly pay twice the price of the Tudor. It has three times the character with the sub-dial bezels, the ceramic bezel insert, the combined hour / minute sub-dial, the finishing of the movement appearing thru the large caseback crystal. And I prefer the combined hour hand / date adjustment because it is conducive to crossing time zones.

[@brianclebowicz2920]

These are two completely different watches, with the Omega at twice the price of the Tudor and with the Omega having a much more useful AND "blingy" set of features. The Omega's 12 hour timing capability makes it practical for use in parking, cooking, exercise, etc. and its precision works for sporting events and the tachymeter. The independent "jump" hours hand is really a "hidden" Traveler's GMT function and allows resetting the time zone in seconds without upsetting the minutes/seconds hand, and that's just how I use it. It requires more turns when resetting the date - but that's an EXCELLENT trade in my experience. The clasp is excellent and the rear exhibition case back is beautiful - pure "bling", with its unique 60 hour power reserve Coaxial movement, as is the ceramic/"liquid metal" bezel. This watch is a major hunk of metal, though - big, heavy and is more fragile than the Tudor IMO. Regardless, it's water resistance is just fine - I wouldn't be diving with a chronograph anyway. The Tudor is a bargain, relative to the Breitling chronos with the same movement AND the Omega, and has been "tuned" a bit by Tudor. It's slightly smaller than the Omega - which is GOOD, because even with my 7.5 inch wrist, the Omega is pretty big. The screw down crown and pushers help make it more robust, but are a bit curious on a watch that probably should never see more than 10 feet of water. Regardless, its a hallmark of Tudor tool watches and I appreciate it. What IS a pain is that the timing totalizer stops at 45 minutes. And since the fixed tachymeter bezel does not rotate for gross timing events, as do the other Black Bay models, there is no capability to time longer everyday events. So the chronograph function is a lot less useful than on the Omega. Aside from that, the Tudor is pretty much all business - LARGE, easy to use crown, solid case back, painted aluminum bezel (I've cracked ceramic bezels, BTW, and scratched metal ones - both have their pros and cons), etc. I suspect the Breitling sourced movement, with its 70-hour power reserve, is also tougher than the Omega Coaxial movement, which I had some issues with on a new watch. They are VERY different pieces - both VERY good in their own way. If you want one watch that does it all ("Travel GMT jump hours hand, 1/5th to 12 hours timing, a piece of jewelry to wear to an event if you can fit it under or close to your cuff) and price is unimportant, get the Omega. If a solid, well built luxury chrono, at a good price, is your goal - go for the Tudor. But also consider one of the Tudor GMT's - they do just about everything well (Timekeeping, travel GMT, long interval timing, strongly built/VERY waterproof) at a very good price. They're very practical, useful and tough "daily drivers". Just like the Rolex GMT Master II (a great watch) - just a lot less cost, a bit larger and less "blingy" and less of a theft magnet.

[@boop8621]

The tudor chrono is the smart man’s speedmaster racing

[@scottwexlin6456]

The Speedy is gorgeous. As soon as my bank account recovers, will probably be my next purchase. And will certainly buy from you.

[@brentmillertime8778]

It's a really good one Scott!

[@stevens1041]

Best comparisons right now on youtube, for watches. Great versus.

[@brentmillertime8778]

Thanks for viewing!

[@Fuzzy-zk8ix]

Great video Brad. Love them both. The dial and bracelet on the Omega are better. The price on the Tudor is better. Can't go wrong either way. Keep these types of videos coming.

[@paulbonaventura4969]

That's the first speedy that I actually like! Wish the dial was panda like the Tudor.

[@pacomacaw2456]

Checked them both out carefully. Bought the Speedy...and love it!

[@brentmillertime8778]

Congrats, enjoy wearing it!

[@toshitominaga3911]

The Tudor Chrono is the way to go. The 70 hour PR rocks!

[@anthonyoquendo5197]

Great comparison! Love the Omega.. it would be cool if you can compare the New Omega Speedmaster Super Racing with the new Spirate tech to the Ceramic Apollo 8, seeing that they're both 44mm and have a black and yellow color scheme.. can't wait to see that!! 🤘😃👍

[@brentmillertime8778]

Would love to get my hands on those. Hopefully at some point they come in!

[@DialectsCoach]

I've tried both on and they both look great. The Omega wears very similarly size-wise because it's extra diameter is due to the asymmetrical case with the crown and pusher guards. The bracelet on the Omega is really nice and has a heftier, more solid feel to it, and I prefer the two rows of small polished links to the rivets on the Tudor. I like the uncluttered nature of the Tudor and the dial proportions, but I like the Omega for it's interesting "racing" designs. I agree with somebody who said the Tudor is "two watches in one," a dive watch and a chrono. I happen to have a dive watch, (a Planet Ocean) so that isn't a concern for me. And the need to unscrew two pushers to use the chronograph which means that timings must build in that time so less spontaneity. For example, when my son was young, I'd spontaneously tell him "run to the telephone pole and back, and I'll time you!" It would be cumbersome to have to unscrew things first. I like the date setting on the Omega because the trade off is the ability to move the hour hand around forward or backward by one hour jumps without stopping the watch so if you change time zones it is very easy. It's the same on the Planet Ocean and it has not bothered me. The Tudor is a great value for it's price, but with the Omega you get the METAS certification, the exhibition caseback, ceramic bezel, co-axial escapement, and I like the finishing better on the case itself. Omega manages to hide the thickness by use of bevels and so forth, whereas the Tudor is a bit more "chunky" looking in my opinion. It's a tough choice and it's really a matter of what's important to you. You get more but you pay more for the Omega. You get a lot for a lot less on the Tudor. I'm leaning Omega myself, but nobody could go wrong with the Tudor either.

[@brentmillertime8778]

All good points and I did the same timing my son at random places!

[@robertlock6041]

You have two stunning watches there Brad, and having read the specs I'm more confused than ever. I like the panda dial on the Tudor but the Omega offers the sapphire case back and independent hour hand. I would hesitate to take a chronograph in the water unless it was a Sinn with the D3 system, so the water resistance is a bit of a red herring. The Omega isn't a Moonwatch though... At this price it's in Zenith El Primero territory, and a Chronomaster Original would sit so well on my wrist, yours too Brad. So: of these I'd go for the Tudor, but if the aforementioned Zenith was in the frame that would be the one for me. Thanks Brad, this is a great comparison. Cheers, Bob 🍻

[@brentmillertime8778]

Would love to have had access to the Zenith too! It's a good one as well.

[@georgetown8986]

Both excellent chronos. The Tudor is an outstanding watch and the size and looks are spot on.

[@jimsteinway695]

I just bought this speed master. It doesn’t wear like a 44. It’s wears much smaller and more comfortable than it looks. I cannot wear a IWC 44yet this speed master is fine. I also checked it against the Tudor. The Tudor felt very much rougher less polished. You could tell there was a price difference

[@yoyo50658]

Omega next to a Tudor, you will always be able to see why the Omega is double the price. Omega = Class

[@JohnBowman-ut4dz]

Before trying them on I wanted the omega but after I didn't like it enough to buy it.i then tried on the Tudor it fits much better on the wrist and I liked it so much I bought the Wight face and the bi metal version (the price didn't come into it I would have bought the Tudor even if it cost more money)

[@1000lightyrs]

The Omega's case looks so elegant, the Tudor's is more blocky but still looks cool. To my eyes, the Omega still looks twice the price overall though.

[@waisoserious3017]

The sticker on the Omega is double the Tudor, but actual market price is almost the same in the used market.

[@mendipfox1650]

Can you direct me to where I can buy a Speedy 9900 racing for $4,000 please 🙏

[@noccolovedomeno2232]

Tudor nice!

[@neman018]

Tudor all the way. Not even close with how wide and thicc the speedy is!

[@offroadfreak8582]

The omega is nicer. But love the waterresistance of the tudor.

[@jeffreybateman7314]

Both great. The Tudor was an amazing deal before the price increases. Think most would be cross shopping the Tudor with the hesalite Speedy, not this 9k offering. The Speedy at 6600 versus the Panda at 5450. Tougher call.

[@vijaymehra1101]

$7k new on Chrono24

[@steveclay2785]

These are both fantastic watches, with VERY different wearing experiences IMHO. Not to take anything away from the Tudor, but my Speedmaster Racing gets more wrist time. I generally find 44mm watches to be too large, but this Omega wears more like a 42-43mm watch because of the short lugs. And the dial is just gorgeous. The Tudor has a more "tool watch" feel, and seems to wear larger than the Omega on my wrist.

[@brentmillertime8778]

Great feedback from someone who owns both! The dial on the Speedy is so good too.

[@jimsteinway695]

I just bought one also. I tried both these watches on and they wear very similarly. I can’t wear a 44 IWC but the speed master is fine. They are very similar in size on the wrist (Tudor and omega)

[@hanumarn7882]

I would go for the Tudor for it’s quick set date and smaller size. I have the IWC IW370603 from a longtime ago and it’s amazing in that it’s so small (39mm) and yet it has a chronograph AND a day-date function.

[@lawrencelacagnino11]

Hi - I own this speedy. Size is a huge deceiver! It definitely wears like a 42mm and has measurements that are less than rolex submariners! The non-quick set date is actually a benefit for those who don’t want to worry about damaging the movement when changing the date at all different times. This watch is MINT. The Tudor is beautiful, no fight there, but the movement in the Omega is king. Timeless and iconic.

[@haromaster6086]

I’ll take the San Martin option. The Omega is my favorite but way too expensive.

[@manueljnegrete5048]

I have two seamasters and two Tudors. This particular seamaster is huge. No m way I would strap it on my 7.25" wrist. Large watches over 42mm seem to big to me.

[@eahmhelmoa]

For tudor to build a watch that is so close in comparison to a double price watch is a great achievement in itself and shows how great value is this tudor.

[@69fastfurious]

Love the Tudor, but why that 3 o’clock subdial is 45 minutes?! Bit awkward, the brown Omega bracelet looks way better than the Tudor with those kind of rivets

[@CrazyHigh]

Tudor 🔥😍🔥

[@wristroll_vlad]

Both are too thick for a modern chronograph and should take notes from a bunch of other brands at (or near) this price point. I’m thinking JLC, IWC… even Breitling Navitimer’s B01 comes at 13.6 mm (Tudor uses the same movement AND doesn’t have an exhibition case back)

[@Anonymouslyme1]

The Omega is more beautiful but I’d buy the Tudor, better specs and half the money how can you beat that?

[@gregsmith7145]

Well Brad it's not in stock anymore.... 😀

[@brentmillertime8778]

No, it certainly is not! Enjoy wearing it and great having you in again.

[@mendipfox1650]

Incomparable really. Two completely different price points.

[@marek8902]

Tudor

[@thomasneuenschwander8953]

Tudor all day

[@andrewallen2038]

For me the Tudor all day long. Nicer looking,sits better on the average wrist, screw down crown,half the price…need I go on. My choice would however be the amazing Tudor nato strap as it is so much lighter and more comfortable but each to their own. If we all liked the same things it would make for a very boring world!

[@ThelittledirtyMcNasty1683]

Tudor wins no contest in my opinion. The Tudor is a chronograph, and a dive watch it really is 2 watches in one. It’s even 100m deeper rated than a Daytona. You also get a quick set date on the black bay, the omega lacks this. The speedmaster is overpriced, too big, and all around out gunned. I do like the exposition caseback on the omega, but if the Tudor had one it’s MT5813 movement is finished better, and more aesthetically pleasing than this speedy’s movement as well.

[@benvazquez2159]

The Tudor movement is not finished better or as nicely decorated as the Omega movement. Google the images they put no finish on any of their movements. Also the Tudor hour hand can end up blocking and entire register making it impossible to read. Agree on the WR though. The speedy needs to be at least 100m in this day and age.

[@faustogianelli4246]

Omega tutta la vita

[@Mega-zi7ys]

Not in the same League. Tudor is longines level

[@williamgoggin3633]

Tudor better specs and movement and doesn't cost as much lume is better aswell

[@vijaymehra1101]

What no it doesn't

[@gullseye1549]

I own the speedmaster 3861 sapphire sandwich Tudor chronograph panda love them both and I’m lucky enough to own grand seiko slg005 white birch hi beat the movement is out of this world.

[@Angry_Gnome]

Omega all day…the snowflake hour hand has no business being on a chronograph.