Tudor Hydronaut, a Review

By Marc Levesque

 

       

 

       


       
* Unfortunately, this is all that could be salvaged from IMAGESTATION

This review was intended to be a joint project between Damon (Omega Forum member) and myself. Unfortunately, due to my personal time restrictions and problems with image hosting sites, I was unable to pull it off. I sure hope Damon is not offended and that he completes and posts his portion of the Tudor Hydronaut review for everyone to enjoy. Sorry my friend!

 

INTRODUCTION:

My affair with Tudor begun in 1995 when I had an opportunity to trade up for a vintage 1970's blue faced Tudor Submariner. It was my first mechanical watch, graduating from modern quartz TAG Heuer watches; this was a big leap for me. It was running slow at about 2 minutes every week or so. The person who sold it to me assured me that this was normal for a vintage watch. Little did I know back then, so I took him at his word. This from the guy who tried to convince me that the regular Breitling SuperOcean was actually the Professional, boy did he look stupid when I pulled out the Breitling Chronologue!

Anyhow, on with the story. I wore that watch for about 6 months and managed to scuff the crystal at least once a week. Nothing irritated me more then having to go to a jeweler to have my crystal polished. One place even managed to warp it a little. Again, these were pre-WIS days and I didn't know about Polywatch. Needless to say it didn't last much longer. I managed to trade it for a quartz pre-Bond Seamaster Pro 200m.

A year or two later, I stumbled onto another vintage Tudor, this one was the ranger model with a silver dial and acrylic crystal. I wasn't too worried about the scuffs since I was introduced to Polywatch by then and could take care of it myself. The price was irresistible, $200 Canadian, so I jumped on it.

I wore that watch for 2 years! Even wore it on my wedding day, but on my honeymoon I found a Festina in a window and bought it on the spot. I then traded the Tudor and have missed it ever since. This is now my 3rd Tudor and it is taking part in an attempt at contentment. I've always loved silver dials and dive watches, this appears to be the perfect combination, let's see if it passes the test!

 

CASE:

The case is made entirely of stainless steel, with a combination of polished and brushed surfaces, the latter being on the sides. It is apparent that the Hydronaut shares the same Oyster characteristics as its big cousin the Rolex Submariner. With its knurled case back and trip-lock crown, it sure gives the impression of imperviousness. Measuring 39mm in diameter and a scant 11mm thick, it is not the largest dive watch on the market, nor is it the smallest. In my opinion, the size is perfect, large enough to be readable at a glance and small enough to fit under any shirt cuff.

The curvaceous lugs aren’t as sharp as the Submariner’s, a courageous statement from a company that used to rely on the tried and tested. They are also drilled through, which in theory should help ease strap/bracelet changes. The crown guards, or should I say guard since it is one piece that wraps all the way around the crown, is very nicely executed. Making the crown look as if it is being sucked into the case for safety. The crown itself is large, easy to grip and doesn’t dig into the back of your wrist like some other watches I know… *cough* Seamaster… As stated previously, it utilizes the same patented triple seal, trip-lock mechanism as the Submariner. It is incredibly reassuring and helps keep the watch water-resistant to 200m.

The unassuming case back is more impressive then it looks. It is barely engraved, Tudor – Prince – Geneva, but that is not what is poignant. After close examination, you can easily see how tightly it is screwed on. Kudos to the Oyster case, as impressive today, as it was a generation ago.

 

CRYSTAL, DIAL & BEZEL:

 
The latter is something I usually despise, but for some reason it doesn’t bother me on this watch. Somehow it just fits. Speaking of pet peeves, color coding the date display is usually a big deal for me, but since the dial on my watch is silver; it is a non-issue.

The dial was my favorite part of the watch. It is absolutely stunning! It is difficult to capture the right reflections with pictures. The markers are all applied and have partial stainless steel borders. Not quite as perfectly executed as the Rolex, as you can see upon closer inspection, the luminescent paint spills over its edges where there are no borders. Sort of like a child drawing with crayons and going over the lines, sloppy if you ask me. Even worse then that, I found a tiny piece of lint underneath the crystal at 7:30, probably unnoticeable to most, but to me it sticks out like a sore thumb! Say what you will about this occurrence, it doesn't change the fact that I hate it and I will have a hard time living with it.

The material used for the luminescence is Super Luminova. It glows very brightly once it has been charged and lasts about 4-5 hours. I found out recently that pound for pound this substance is even more expensive then caviar, food for thought. When not glowing or if in direct light it is white in color, but when activated, it is a bluish-green. The writing is tastefully done and adequately proportioned.

In the pictures I’ve seen on the internet, the bezel always looked kind of cheesy. The graduated scale between 12 and 3 o’clock just looked odd. Now that I’ve seen it live, it’s much nicer then I expected. Of course, it is a matter of taste, but if I could make a suggestion, reserve your judgment until you see one in person. Some type of sandblasting creates the matte finish and the numerals, along with the graduated scale are lightly engraved. Then painted in. I had initially thought it was some kind of insert, but that is not the case. It only rotates counter-clockwise, as it should, and ratchets at ½ minute increments. For some reason my bezel doesn't seem to line up perfectly at 12 o'clock, always a bit too far or a bit shy, I'm always adjusting it. However, It is very easy to turn and thanks to its rising lugs and crown guards, the gripping surface is confined. Therefore limiting the chance of getting knocked out of place.

 

MOVEMENT:

The movement housed in the Hydronaut is the tried and tested ETA 2824, specially modified by the people at Tudor/Rolex. Here are the specifics for generic movement:

Caliber 2824-2

Movement with automatic winding, with an autonomy of 38 hours, rotor mounted on a ball bearings, base caliber 2801-2.

Functions: hours, minutes, central seconds; date [with quick change capability].
Shape: round.
Diameter: 25.60mm [11'''1/2].
Thickness: 4.60mm.
Jewels: 25.
Balance: gilt nickel or Glucydur.
Frequency: 28,800 pulsations/hour.
Balance-spring: flat, in Nivarox 2 or Nivarox 1.
Anti-shock system: Incabloc.
Options: feature to stop seconds; fine adjustment.

At the time of this review, my watch was only 3 weeks old and was consistently loosing 4-5 seconds/day. Not bad, though I figured it would have settled down by now and performed a little better.

N.B. Being a watchmaker's apprentice, Damon has taken the opportunity to disassemble a raw ETA 2824 and compare it to the finished version in his Tudor. I am certain his "movement" portion of his review will be MUCH MORE detailed.

 

BRACELET:

The bracelet is disappointing. It measures 20mm at lug-width and tapers down to 18mm. I usually prefer bracelets that do not taper, but one cannot overlook the comfort aspect of the tapering effect. When the wrist is bent the less steel there is to be pinched the better. The end links, which attach to the case are solid and tightly wedged in. So tight in fact that I needed to go to my dealer to have it removed. I then played with a bunch of strap possibilities and decided to put the bracelet back on. I was too shy to return to my dealer to ask for another favor, so I attempted doing it myself. What a horror! I needed WD40 just to slip in the pushpins into the end-links and sliding the whole thing back into place was equally difficult. Why would they make it so darn difficult? Do they expect us to return to the dealer every time we want to change configurations? Needless to say, I was quite dissatisfied with the whole experience.

The links themselves are mostly solid, though the center portion has been hollowed out. This gives the bracelet a little side to side play and makes it lighter. Is this a benefit or a draw back, I am unsure, but I think I would have preferred them to be solid. This would have helped counter balancing the weight of the head. As you can see in a couple of my pictures the edges underneath the links are beveled inwards, this is nicely done.

The clasp is my least favorite part of the watch. Similar to the Rolex Submariner, it is made of simple folded/stamped stainless steel. It is signed on the cover, folding innards and extension. The only positive comment I can make is that once closed, the folding portion, along with the extension, fit tightly underneath and the combination hugs the wrist gently. Many less expensive watches, which use similar construction, leave indentations on the wearer’s wrist, this one does not.

 

PACKAGING:

The presentation box is surprisingly very impressive. I was expecting a small thinly wooden box with a velvet pillow and overlaps like its cousin. You can imagine my expression when my dealer pulled out the large mahogany colored box from the back-store and handed it to me. Inside was a plush leather box with a nicely positioned pillow with my watch sitting in the middle. The instructions were bear and generic. Disappointing, especially after just having owned an IWC. As customary with these diving Oyster watches, an anchor accompanied my watch and it is now proudly displayed from my rearview mirror. Tacky I know, but in Montreal, only a fragment of a percentage will know what it is really from.

 

CONCLUSION:

As far as dive watches go, it doesn’t go the deepest, it isn’t the most technically impressive, it doesn’t have a helium escape valve, but what it does have is style and the Rolex reputation. Though, in this day and age a batter bracelet/clasp is warranted. If you’ve ever had the pleasure of fondling one of the new Rolex Daytonas, in my opinion that is the clasp that should become universal for all the Tudor and Rolex lines. It is thick, solid and great looking, without loosing its Rolex distinctiveness. I just find it hard to swallow that many sub $1000 watches can have a more impressive clasp/bracelet then a Rolex Submariner. Anyhow, I could probably overlook this shortfall if bracelet/strap swapping was easier. With options like Bros, one does not have to rely solely on what is supplied with the watch.

So will this one make me content? Well, unfortunately not. As a matter of fact it is already gone from my collection. I just could not get passed the bracelet and not only was it not up to par; it never really fit right no matter how I adjusted it. I also couldn't live with the sloppiness on the dial, I'm sorry if I am being too hard, but I expect better for this kind of money.

I guess you can consider me off the wagon again!

Thanks for reading,

 

Written by Marc Levesque