Already half a page new posts after yesterday contribution i made in the Tudor story so i start over again on top of the page.

So let's talk on something interesting allthough i have told this before I think it's worthwhile meantioning again the small difference between the Rolex Big Crowns 6538 and the early Tudor Big Crowns 7922. Together with Jerome, another enthousiatic Tudor collector, we were comparing our serial numbers and i came within my collection to the following remarkable conclusion....

First on my 2 oldest Rolex & Tudor Big Crowns we see on the left the Rolex 6538 from I-'56 with 140.3xx serial & on the right the Tudor 7922 with Rolex caseback I-'56 and also 140.3xx and only 40 numbers away from each!!



And next example is my Rolex from III-'57 with 304.xxx serial & Tudor 7922 with Rolex 6538 & 7922 caseback also from III-'57 and serial 307. xxx also very close batch!!


The later 7924 Tudor Big Crowns had 275.xxx serial and always IV '58 date stamps inside the caseback so it's impossible that these serial numbers where from Rolex because they would date them before 1957.

So my conclusion: Imho Rolex was using Rolex Big Crown cases with Rolex serial numbers for the early Tudor 7922 Big Crowns and the only difference between the 2 brands at that time was the use of the cal 1030 - 390 movement making the line very thin in the evolution of the early submariner by Rolex & Tudor ...

Please feel free to show your early example if you are lucky to share it with us..

Regards Philipp


To finish, here a scan of the different used Tudor BC casebacks...on top of the 4 the 'Oyster by Rolex' casebacks of the later 275.xxx series...

...serials were engraved before the interior of the case was routed?

I would think that the 390 and the Rolex 1030 require different configurations on the inside of the case...

...or are they truly interchangeable...

-B

On top the Tudor early '56 7922 & later '58 7924 compared with 2 x 6538..besides the outside caseback shape there is NO difference & i believe the early ones where all made as Rolex but for prototype use some engraved with Tudor reference numbers. I have not yet tried to change it yet but nothing is telling me that it wouldn't fit, look closely to the inside of the case, interchangable ;- )

Rgrds.Philipp

meet the two register Monte Carlo 234 Valjoux and the Daytona powered 727 Valjoux. The MC was sans Micro Stella balance and a thrid register. But the 234 and 727 used the same parts for the two movements. Such as column wheels, many set springs, main train wheels, heart cam clutches, and etc.

One theory of why the MC become so popular to many chronograph collectors (especially the plastic Daytona Boys) was the caliber being from the same Valjoux family. Both the plastic crystal Daytona and two register MC calibers were reworked extensively by Rolex master watchmakers to bring them up to Rolex standard and accuracy.

Oddly enough both the plastic SS Daytona and MC were never submitted for chronometer certification. Also the watch cases of the Daytona and MC were produced by Rolex. Notice the same pushers, crown and crown tube.

I know of one watchmaker who fitted a 234 MC caliber with a Daytona 727 Micro Stella balance and bridge with very small modifications, mainly to the jewels and staff size. This modification to the MC was also reversible.

Cheers Arthur



n

...if TV has no objections. We can make it a little more formal once the forum changes begin.

7922 Tudor Big crown must be very rare, according to a 1960 "R 5000" technichal catalog it does not exist, at least it is not mentioned.

Here are some tech specifications:

6538 fitted with a 1030 has a 8mm crown, 8mm tube and a washer refence 282 shared with the 7924 but not with the 7922. The Tropic 17 is also shared with the 7924 but not the 7922.

7922 fitted with the 12,5 lines 390 caliber is 'officially' fitted with a 6mm crown, the washer is reference 138 (so not shared with 6538 nor 7924), the tropic is also different being reference 16 and not 17.

7924 fitted with the same caliber as the 7922 12,5 lines cal 390 has the 8mm crown and tube, the 17 tropic and washer 282 idem as 6538.

Recommended back key openers are the same for all three references being key-tool 29.5mm (whih does not mean anything in fact).

We could then imagine that the 7922 small crown would be the perfect equivalent of either the 6536 or the 6536/1 small crowns but it is only true for the 6mm crown, the washer is the same 282 as the 7924 but the 6536/1 is fitted with another washer reference 77. Tropic is 18 for 6526 BUT 16 for 6536/1 (remember that topic 17 fits the 7924 and Tropic 16 for the 7922.

Upper and lower tasseaux (sorry do not know the english word) are 41 and 60 for 6536, 6536/1 and 7922 BUT 41 and 69 for the Tudor 7924 and 42/61 for the big crown6538.

So, similar yes but not exactly the same watches.
Now, erasing a ref number and re-engraving onother one next to it was always to signify an up grade it never has been used because one part was missing so we used a similar one, at least afaik.

Thanks for your input **philip**!

not everything is clear for me what you are writing [ translation french - english ] but as far as i read your post, correct usual a 7922 has a smaller midcase section were only a 6 mm crown will fit, on the 2x Big Crown 7922 i showed this midcase section is much thicker and only a 8 mm Brevet crown will fitt properly and not viseversa!

So yes, the small crown 7922 is rare but as big crown even more and probably used for early research purpose & all my Tudors have direct MN - french army & collectors provenance...

Rgrds.Philipp












& Here a sidescans of the brown 7922 BC with Rolex case...

already were in place and are produced earlier the the Tudor Subs. The Big and small crown Tudor Sub and all the Tudor Chronos were just a cheaper way to own a Rolex. Not much more. Love Tudor of course but the Rolex Sub was the first one on the scene, and set the design model for all the Tudor Subs to follow.

Research purpose was the 6200 for the big crown and 6204 for the samll crown. These early Subs were a left over from the bubble back era parts such as movements and similar case backs.

So as always a Tudor mimicked the Rolex line for economies of scale in cases and part production, but fell short with the movement. Saving the best for the Rolex line. You can still see the price difference of a Tudor big crown and a Rolex 6538 or a Tudor MC and a Daytona 6265. That is way the Tudor line is the little brother in many ways and part of the Rolex family.

Cheers Arthur

Forgive me but i don't yet see the reason why you post this historical Rolex evolution here in this Tudor post?

Only thing i am saying here is that when Rolex started to deliver their early Tudors subs, after the evolution of Rolex Subs have been made, the line at the beginning between those 2 brands was very thin.......
&
Exact this is the point i wanted to make clear with this post: After i have studied them carefully & compared them with similair Rolex's, I don't see the "little brother" in these early Tudor Subs like you do. These examples should almost be handled as equal and what i notice from serieus collectors [ look around ] is that having a rare Tudor in your Rolex collections has been changed to a absolute must this year...you should know this, count of MC ; - )

Rgrds.Philipp

...we have a bit of a difference in status between, say, two Big Crown Subs with the exact same cases: the Tudor has the Valjoux-based 390 while the 6538 has the in house Rolex 1030. So while I appreciate your passion & enthusiasm for the Tudor marque, it does not change the reality that it is and always has been Rolex's secondary brand. Therefore, I cannot agree with your statement that "these examples should almost be handled as equal" because it is almost certainly a fact that Rolex themselves did not consider watches with the Tudor badge the equal of the watches with the coronet on the dial. The choice of movements and the original price points are proof of this, IMO.
Best,
T.

P.S. Look forward to reading your Tudor article!

Hi Tom

"But the movement, Philipps, was NEVER a Rolex-made " this is why Tudor is not a "second brand" even the cases,dial,adds .... are not the same ,of course history of Tudor is linked to Rolex, it's why Tudor is a brand for his own part , but us "Wine and cheese " guys seems to not see the thing like you , you must own a Tudor BC or MC to understand .The fact is that you come to Tudor for the price and then you understand ......


Best regards
Jerome

Hans Wilsdorf himself mentioned in various
documents that Tudor was the "affordable" brand
created by Rolex to "help customers to have access to Rolex
quality at lower price". No need to be Nobel price to
understand what he meant.
Same quality production with lower quality calibers
bought from an external company.

Apparently some collectors are now re-writting the Rolex
history.... so be it.

.

2nd - how many shared parts between a Swatch watch
and a Breguet watch? ZERO. Are the same watchmakers producing
Swatch watches and Breguet? NO
Is it a different factory? YES
Were the same watchmakers producing Tudor and Rolex? YES.
Were they produced in the same (Biel) factory? YES

Please, if Tudor was not an under Rolex brand,
what exactly is your definition of an under brand?

Tudor became a brand of its own when less than 10% parts were shared with Rolex products wich correspond of todays production.

We Are talking about Big Crown and Mc Right ?

Tudor BC

Look a like but not the same !!!! i see that you never hold in your hands a Tudor BC

Case : look like a 6538 but not the same at all in his construction ,movement look like the 1030 but not the same , Crown look like the 8 MM from the 6538 but not the same (different ref) , So 6538 and 7924 share only a glass and the bezel ,

Tudor Mc

Different case, different pushers,different bezel,glass,different movement,......every parts are different

If i remember correctly not so long ago on the 'other' forum you wrote about Tudor: "Wrong approach K, Tudor watches created desirability of their own. Dinos are no Ferraris and already by far outperform Ferrari prices in auctions. Sooner or later some Tudor will outperform Rolex in auction (not all Rolex of course but some). I bet with you. Watches like MN are so undervalued and so much interesting with the decom papers. Early chronos are interesting too. Wait and see. Some gilt Tudor Submariner dials are simply gorgeous with no Rolex equivalent. There will be, sooner or later, Tudor collectors in parallel of Rolex collectors and the way modern Tudor are catching up will help even more. Ten years ago Tudor was a pain in the n... for Rolex since few years they are making profit. Once again wait and see. Tudor being and "under brand" is not anymore a right way of seing things." I couldn't have said it better, thanks again! regards Philipp

Dis I ever mentioned that Tudor was not an under Rolex brand here???
I really dont see your point.

"But the movement, Philipps, was NEVER a Rolex-made " this is why Tudor is not a "second brand" even the cases,dial,adds

Sorry but I never ever read someting so stupid and I'm surprise Philipps you can subscribe to that.

edited for personal comments

.

...good points are being made by both sides and it is an interesting debate. Let's please keep it civil so we can all learn, not just about "facts" but also about different ways of thinking about a given subject.
Thank you and merçi,
Tom

.edited for personal comments

.edited for personal comments

You probably know me by now that i am not that type of guy that want to rewrite anything. It is my believe that nothing has been written yet about these early parralel's. So i am sharing my conclusions in this post after i studied the details on the early 7922 BC's compared to the 6538's, the thin line at the beginning of Tudor's start. I am not talking about the 7924 or the later 7928. I just was more then surpised that the serial numbers on these 2 early Tudor big crowns are from Rolex and not Tudor.....

Imho there is no need here to analyse the Rolex sub evolution, the rest of Tudors history or the current price explosions happening around us on vintage Rolex and Tudor...

& It's your: "Apparently some collectors are now re-writting the Rolex history" remark that irritates me **philip** ! I have to say now that some of your answers itch me so now and then and i start to understand the collectors that have warned me about you...Nobody is stupid here, we are talking about our mutual passion, no need to get upsaid or offended. Take you time to re-read my initial post and the ones i already contributed on VRF about this subject.......

but most of all, relax & be happy ; - )

Regards Philipp

...which is not to say that Tudors do not have their own unique and worthwhile appeal. They have ever been Rolex's second brand and still remain that way even in the Vintage market (Tissot & Omega have the most comparable relationship historically, setting aside the question of current values). When a Big Crown Sub is 150k, a Big Crown Tudor is still a less expensive (not cheap, of course! ) alternative for the Rolex enthusiast while still retaining a Rolex link. When a pointed CG minute track 5512 is 30k, a 7928 with the same external features seems like a good deal in comparison. Just the same with an Exotic MC compared to a manual wind Daytona. No one would argue that they are not a great marque in their own right and that perhaps they have finally come into their own in the marketplace. But the King still wears the coronet and it is the powerful gravitational pull of Vintage Rolex which is having such a consequent major effect on the interest and demand for Vintage Tudor.
Cordialement,
Tom

But we are not talking the same money , you talk $$$ and i talk €€ . So when a dealer ask 40K €uros for a Tudor Chrono let me know where is the good deal , and you even don't what is the price of a Tudor BC here , there is no more good deal with Tudor !!

Best regards

Jerome

...the Home Plate MC is still a mere $20-25k USD over here.
Best,
T.

I will bring you some good french wine and cheese Lol

It's just watches and passion

All the best

Jerome

...Grand Cru Burgundy & Saint-Andre, si'l vous plait.

Best,
T.

...thank you, Mr. Stahl and Jerome!
Best,
T.

This is just the beginning !!!!!!!!!!!


You Don't Know The Power Of The Dark Side

&moduleId=image_details.jsp.M&clickedItemDescription=Image Details

it will complete the link of the 7922, 7924

here is my 2 7923.

Hahaha!