We get back to Wrist Game or Crying Shame where you advise us if a watch is advantageous or essentially a wild misuse of time. This week we investigate the remainder of the line for a more seasoned style of watch, the Tudor Submariner 79090. But first…
I complained two or three weeks prior that you perusers were a lot of softies who were able to toss your well deserved virtual money at pretty much anything I presented. After all, all you were doing was committing to a mouse snap and everybody is so pleasant when they’re unknown on the web, right? Well, I tossed a meatball directly down the focal point of the plate with the Hublot MDM 1810.1 Chronograph and you hit it directly out of the recreation center into the closest landfill. The Hublot, at under $4,500, got destroyed in a 90% Crying Shame loss! Perhaps the precious stone bezel didn’t help things, yet I thought it kept things energetic and interesting. Ah who am I kidding? I needed a bloodbath and I got it! So let’s take things back to reality. Today, with the Tudor Submariner 79090, we go with something contrary to wild and I am truly inquisitive if that will strike your fancy.
In 1954, the main Tudor Submariner – reference 7922 – was delivered as a cheaper choice to the all in-house Rolex alternative. This watch commenced a line of Tudor Subs with acrylic gems that finished with today’s Tudor Submariner 79090. We’ll at last ask you your opinion about such a watch.
I’ve spoken about the uncomfortable equilibrium of assessment that encompasses vintage Tudor and watches like today’s Tudor Submariner 79090. The advocates of these watches talk about their heavy form quality and the way that, in spite of utilizing bought developments, these watches are 99% as great as their undeniably more exorbitant Rolex counterparts. Plus, there’s the way that Tudor has consistently took into account a touch more life in their plans – yet just a touch. With discretionary tones like blue and hands looking like candies and snowflakes, these watches are a genuine drunkfest in the generally grave universe of Rolex! Naysayers, then again, talk about overrated Rolex duplicates with passerby developments and the fashionable person premium joined to what in particular some call a more “real” jump watch. Do trendy people dive? And that form quality? Well, a decent glance at things like dial paint life span may persuade that the B-group went to chip away at these at the Singer plant or the work was done after a neighborhood bierfest. But like most things old and toolish, time has loaned favor to the defenders and these old Subs have ascended in cost mightily. Depending on the variation, they even duke it out with a conventional Rolex for estimating superiority. Craziness, I tell you!
As referenced, the Tudor Submariner 79090 is the remainder of the line with regards to acrylic precious stone Subs. It went out toward the decade’s end alongside what is unequivocally the best music ever: the 1980’s. But what’s better than a plastic lens? How about a matte dial with painted tritium indices? Check! What about a consistent eddie ETA 2824-2? That’s a check and possibly one that you can set aside while considering the great looks of one of these 79090’s. obviously, the 79090 is embellished with some somewhat natural Mercedes turns in lieu of the previously mentioned desserts or winter-propelled ones. But, in the event that this were a Rolex with a matte dial, take on the situation for a 5-figure pat-down…so, those Merc hands are looking very acceptable now, aren’t they?
What we have for you today is a Tudor Submariner 79090 that was maybe sold in 1990. It’s available to be purchased in the land of lederhosen, otherwise known as Munich, Germany for 5,850 Euros and can be seen on . It evidently comes with the entirety of its unit – gotta love that Tudor burgundy box – and is by all accounts in pleasant shape. I notice some lume breaking, however your watchmaker could apply some sealant on the undersides of the hands to help keep further decay at
black bay. But in general, doesn’t this look nice? obviously it does on the grounds that it would seem that a Sub. By the way, this late version apparently changed away from a collapsed wristband (Tudor exchanged far later than Rolex – they exchanged the Sub in 1975) and I consider that somewhat of a fault, yet I focused on a piece with a tolerably solid case over finding a piece with a collapsed bracelet. Such is life!
The Tudor Submariner 79090 was at one time a “sub” $4,000 (or Euro) watch. Those days are unfortunately a distant memory and I told myself many times to simply get one some 2-3-4 years ago. And…I didn’t. The inquiry is whether you actually think this Tudor Sub is one helles of an arrangement or not…(that’s some self-composed Munich humor for the uninitiated) Let’s have your vote!