How Did Tudor Get Away With This?

Last month, Tudor released a smaller version of the popular Black Bay Chrono, the Black Bay Chrono 39 "Bumblebee." The case diameter shrinks from 41mm to 39mm, and the thickness from 14.4mm to 13.1mm (a huge difference on wrist), bringing it closer to the dimensions of a modern Rolex Daytona. My first reaction when I saw this watch: how did Tudor get away with this?

The slim Chrono 39 maintains the original BB Chrono's 200 meters of water resistance and excellent Swiss chronograph movement — the caliber MT5813: a vertical clutch, column wheel chrono based on Breitling's B01 architecture. It remains one of the best chronograph movements you can buy in a watch under $10,000. It's a big part of why any Black Bay Chrono offers great value even at full MSRP. The Chrono 39's screw-down pushers and crown have also adopted a sharper, more Daytona-like knurling, which seems like a small detail until you see both in person. Just imagine a Daytona without crown guards. And once the inevitable black and white dials arrive, that Daytona comparison is going to be even harder to miss.

There's an obvious answer to my question: Tudor is owned by Rolex. Hans Wilsdorf, the founder of Rolex, established Tudor in 1926 as a more affordable sister brand held to Rolex's standards, and the two have sat under the same corporate roof ever since. So Tudor isn't really "getting away" with anything. It has permission. But that has never quite explained the reaction I have when one of its watches lands so close to a particular Rolex. And the Chrono 39 wasn't the first Tudor to give me that feeling.

I've thought this before

Tudor Black Bay 54 vs. Rolex Submariner 6205. Image Sources: Hodinkee (left) and IsringTime (right).

The Black Bay 54 elicited the same reaction from me. It's a dead ringer for a vintage 37mm Tudor Submariner, right down to the reference it's named for, the 1954 ref. 7922. That's effectively a modern version of a 6204/5 Rolex Submariner, which is by all accounts "something Rolex would NEVER release." Well, they kind of did… it's just a Tudor. I remember asking myself "how did Tudor get away with this?" and I've met a lot of people who own and love the Black Bay 54.

Tudor Black Bay 'Monochrome' vs Rolex Submariner Date. Image Source: Reddit u/ ConsiderationNo398

The Black Bay 41 Monochrome did it too: black dial, black bezel, no gilt, no date, about as close as Tudor has come to a modern no-date Submariner. I remember hearing plenty of others ask some version of "how did Tudor get away with this?"

The comparisons that don't get that reaction

Tudor Black Bay GMT vs Rolex GMT-Master. Image Source: Millenary Watches

What the Chrono 39, the BB 54, and the Monochrome have in common is that they're all recent releases with slimmed-down, redesigned cases, and that tighter modern packaging is exactly what pushes them so close to their Rolex counterparts. Tudor builds direct Rolex parallels all the time, but the ones that don't make us ask the question tend to be older designs that haven't gotten that treatment. The Black Bay GMT, for example, shares the no-gilt Pepsi look with the (now discontinued) GMT-Master II "Pepsi," but it's 14.6mm thick compared to the Rolex's 12mm. The visual comparisons are always obvious, but when the Tudor's dimensions come within striking distance of a Rolex, you start feeling like they got away with something.

It's always justified

Even with Rolex's blessing, none of these watches are straight copies. That's the part I find fun, and what makes Tudor such an interesting brand to follow. Where the silhouettes get close, the details go another direction: aluminum bezels instead of ceramic (which I personally prefer), gilt vintage styling, colors like bright yellow or sunburst red, pulling from vintage examples, Snowflake hands, and model names that belong to Tudor alone.

So how do they get away with it?

The honest answer is that they don't. Every time a Tudor lands this close to a Rolex, there's a set of choices that not only keep it from being a copy, but give it its own appeal. That's exactly what makes the brand fun to follow. Going forward, I have to remind myself not to be suprised when the next release lands shockingly close to a particular Rolex reference, modern or vintage. Tudor is making real moves to hold its claim as the best value in a new watch under $10,000. The Chrono 39 Bumblebee is just the latest watch to prove it.

Left Header Image Source: Monochrome Watches