Review: Tudor Black Bay GMT MT5652

[@WatchesOnYou]

In this video, I say that the watch has a 60 click bezel. It actually has a 48 click bezel such that each click represents a 30 minute increment with respect to the GMT hand.

[@koolpep]

I have this watch since last a December and love it to bits. BUT it doesn’t have a 60 click bezel. It has a 48 click bezel as GMT watches should. They’re way you can track full hour and half hour time zones (like India, Iran, some Australian and Canadian provinces). 60 clicks would not line up properly. Also the bezel is bidirectional so that makes it not suitable for dive measuring. EDIT: just saw your comment haha, nevermind, thanks for the video.

[@WatchSociety]

Nice video, I currently own it, great watch and good value for the buck, can be improved however, trimming down the case thickness would make it a fantastic pick on a slimmer profile!

[@porschephile2k3]

Imagine if Tudor made a watch with a case size similar to the Monta Atlas and put that real GMT movement in there. Now that's something I would definitely buy!

[@rcm4u2]

This is the 3rd gmt watch I own, made in a Rolex factory. It is great, and the only one I can dive with. I think I love it most.

[@markwolfson2023]

Have it on the bracelet, ordered the fabric Faure for it. Sits rather flat because the bottom of the case almost sits flush with the slab sides. I am left handed, regarding accuracy, getting minus 2 per day on left wrist, and minus 2.5 on right wrist, then overnight rest in fastest position found (face down), gets quicker at plus 1.5 to plus 2 seconds. I am curious to what other owners are getting. I know my times are within COSC, but curious....

[@rodriguezahr]

Great video. Have it on the classy Siena leather option. A unique vintage style that is a head turner. Love it. As per how it wears, well, it wears much slimmer than it looks since the bulge on the back of the case sinks in the wrist which makes the watch hugs the wrist perfectly well. One problem with reviews that I see more often is that the watch never get worn properly for the wrist shots. The watch must sit snag and behind the wrist bone.

[@Nachovalenti899]

Totally agree with your comment. I own this watch since 2 years and 2 months ago and I'm delighted with it in every single way. Some people are like parrots and repeat what others say without even having put the watch on their wrist.

[@jason_chan]

This is a bidirectional bezel which is not recommended for diving. You could accidentally knock it the wrong way which indicates more time than actual. Dive watches with external bezels only rotate one direction.

[@ImtianaJones]

It's thinner than a Sea Dweller but noone says that's too thick🤷🏽‍♂️

[@Rotten3ullet]

Sea Dweller is a different beast. It has 1220 meters of water resistant.

[@Eric_Nielsen]

It's thick, but if was Omega there would be a stacked escape wheel & display caseback adding 3 *more* millimeters.

[@domenicpellegrino4907]

Just got one a couple days ago. You get a lot at the price point.

[@willyk8296]

Great review! I love mine except for the date issue I will have to get fixed.

[@timeintheuk]

the gmt is superb

[@borjastick]

'Tooda'. Definitely a good watch to wear while muff diving.

[@yaaxarr8977]

Great review. Ty!

[@carzakone333]

Can you do a LHD Pelagos review?

[@leesh771]

I was surprised for the height of this watch

[@hambone988ubet]

Good vid, but would be more helpful to put numbers to the thickness.

[@ImtianaJones]

My calipers have it at between 14.3-14.6mm

[@evh4611]

For my taste, too thick and three snowflake hands is a bit overdone. I find my Black Bay Eta also a bit too thick by the way

[@derekshearer9049]

You must love quartz watches...

[@evh4611]

@@derekshearer9049 Nope

[@derekshearer9049]

@@evh4611. What watch is thin enough for you?

[@evh4611]

@@derekshearer9049 2254.50 and 2531.80

[@derekshearer9049]

@@evh4611. I much prefer the latest model Seamaster and l am planning to get the blue dial or the white dial in the new year. I want to see them in person before deciding or maybe a Speedy Pro. Cheers

[@clarkgavinst]

Its a very nice watch.

[@tonyamouri2891]

Very nice watch. The price is grow in the future !!

[@InGratitudeIam]

No. You cannot use a bi-directional bezel for diving. Ever. Have you ever gone diving? If the bezel gets bumped in the wrong direction, you could unknowingly extend your dive time and end up dead. Just because it has a 200 m WR rating doesn't mean you should use the watch for something it was not intended. Diving bezels rotate in only one direction for a reason. You have no clue, so don't go making recommendations about things you think might be a good idea but could end up in disaster.

[@florenciocanaveras1167]

La luz en los vídeos es demasiado cálida y no se aprecian los colores reales Un saludo

[@edwardkollar448]

The review is excellent, but for the video if you can keep the watch steady or place it on something that would help viewers. As you were describing the snow flake style hands the watch was moving too much to get a good look.

[@kostasp1137]

I think this watch could be improved, specifically the case

[@Degarth]

So you are saying a mid price point watch could be improved? The movement really lacks nothing so you must mean the finish can be improved. But, NOT for where it is currently priced.

[@kostasp1137]

Joseph J M Redner improving the aesthetic of the case does not mean higher price. There are cheaper watches out there without the Tudor heritage and offer a better case. I wish I could see this improvement being made in next iteration

[@Degarth]

@@kostasp1137 I respectfully disagree. I own the watch. I also own watches from AP, PP, Rolex, Glashutte Original. Seiko and others. I dont feel that it gives up much to any of those (when you factor in the massive price difference). It is in fact nicer than my vintage Universal Geneve watches. And if they are going to step it up to the next level they sort of have a brand called Rolex for it. What GMT would you say has a "more improved" case in the 3K range while sporting an in house movement?

[@SirMopy]

Joseph J M Redner completely agree with you!

[@imranbecks]

This is so overrated and it's not without its problems. Its definitely a nice piece that's for sure. Wanted to get this but i didn't in the end. Ended up getting the Steinhart Ocean 39 Vintage GMT. Better sized at 39mm and not as thick as well. Plus the ceramic bezel which this one doesn't have. So much win with the Steinhart imo. While this Tudor is overrated, the Steinhart is underrated. You should check that one out.

[@markwolfson2023]

But the Steinhart GMT is not a jumping hour hand, worthless if you travel a lot. I do like the look of the Steinhart though, looks great. Steinhart needs to make their own movements.

[@justinh1258]

That bezel is misaligned quite a bit to the right

[@redsox7897]

I no longer want this watch. If I decided to buy it when it was released I would have sold it by now. I don't know why but I have a BB41 that I really like and I don't plan to sell anytime soon. BB41 is such a low key watch. I don't know but maybe this GMT lacks a genuine character. Anyway, I bought a 36 datejust instead and I'm really happy with my decision.

[@derekshearer9049]

Almost as thick as a grand seiko. Lol

[@derekshearer9049]

@@MT-kx2uc. Sorry you're correct the grand seiko is thicker.