The latest release from Tudor saw the light almost a week ago and now the dust is settled, there’s a topic I wanted to address.
The ‘new’ Pelagos FXD seemed to launch like a lead balloon in the Instagram comments sections, although I happen to like it myself. A resounding theme came back again and again, comment after comment; many thought Tudor were going to release a new Submariner and were heavily disappointed that they did not.
So why the Submariner frenzy? Of course, the Rolex Submariner is steeped in history, but side by side with its Rolex relative, the Tudor Submariner wrote its own dynasty too. The Tudor Sub (like many and most Tudors of that era) was designed to bring the essentials of its Rolex counterpart at a lower price point, achieved largely by swapping in off the shelf movements. From the 50’s through to just before the turn of the millennium, Tudor Submariners brought an affordable, high spec and high-tech dive watch to a wider audience.
Now, it’s important to stop there and consider that point: dive watch. For the Rolex Oyster and then the Submariner lines that followed were conceived to perform. Highly accurate tool watches that could handle diving, yes diving with a dive watch?! They were not luxury items in the traditional sense, more feats of engineering, but that is not to say a Rolex was ‘cheap’. You paid for the performance and craftsmanship, albeit nowhere near the relative price point you need to cough up for a Sub today.
Tudor found their own feet so to speak and with the Snowflake references that landed in 1969, a distinct identity set the Tudor Submariner apart from the Rolex. You could still also purchase a Tudor Sub with a more traditional dial and hands arrangement if the snowflake was not your bag. By the 80s and 90s however, the tides were turning for Tudor and until the Black Bay appeared in 2012 the brand had certainly fallen far from being top of the list for the majority of buyers.
The Black Bay needs no introduction, it’s no surprise that a line of watches harking back to some of the most iconic Tudor and Rolex pieces has been a hit. Another watch adorned the Tudor press material in 2012 too, the Pelagos. A distinctively modern approach to the Tudor dive watch, in Titanium. Between this and the Black Bay it seemed as if Tudor was seeking to bookend its historical design language.
There has been several variants and evolutions of the Pelagos over the last decade and it’s fair to say the line has always had features clearly aimed at diving over dining. The FXD first landed in 2021 after much speculation grew thanks to some leaked photos from testing with the Marine Nationale. The latest 2023 FXD was designed with the US Navy in mind and appears to be a great choice for those who dive or maybe just want a dependable watch that can wear many frocks (as long as they are one-piece straps).
Back to the matter in hand, the outrage that blessed the comments sections of this new release. I have my suspicions on what is going on, with which you may agree or disagree, but hear me out…
The original Tudor Submariners were more accessible tool watches with Rolex DNA. But let’s be honest with ourselves, in 2023 the Rolex Submariner is seldom seen as a tool. The pricing and availability have placed this iconic line of watches (that can still very much be used as a tool) onto a pedestal. Whether that pedestal is a symbol of wealth, luxury, dependability, success, exclusivity or just the ultimate one watch collection, is a topic for another day. But whichever way you look at it, the Rolex Submariner has become highly desirable.
It’s for this reason I think that folks are yearning for a relaunch of the Tudor Submariner. It would serve as the ultimate, officially licensed, rubber stamped, free-pass homage to the Rolex that so many crave. Surely if these disappointed people truly wanted a Tudor Submariner reboot, they’d jump on the Pelagos, a watch that takes clear design cues from the Snowflake Subs. Outside of true watch enthusiasts (yes those that find themselves reading watch blogs), many won’t have heard of an El Primero or an Alpinist but thanks to marketing, mainstream media, history and pop culture, the Rolex Submariner is known and craved widely (and not just for its reliability anymore). So, what am I getting at? Where have we seen these attitudes before? The Moonswatch.
Swatch Group’s officially licensed tribute act sparked an incessant worldwide feeding frenzy for plastic watches by many folks who wouldn’t look twice at a ‘regular’ Swatch sporting the same ETA quartz movement. In many ways, this was genius from Swatch, they have sold more watches than ever, at a price point way above Swatch’s plastic pieces and anecdotally, Omega Speedmaster sales are up.
I’m sorry to disappoint the masses when I say that Rolex do not need to boost Submariner sales and again anecdotally, they don’t need a cash grab either.
Why isn’t there the same desire for a Squale 20 Atmos? Which, by the way, is an excellent submariner homage at a reasonable price. Simple, people want that officially licensed, cut price, spin-off merchandise (I am aware Tudor sells watches at a much higher price point than swatch). There is more appetite for a plastic quartz ‘Speedmaster’ than something like a Seagull, a column wheel chronograph available for less money! All because of the name on the dial.
Of course, I don’t want to offend, I’m sure there are some of you reading this that genuinely want a slice of Tudor history, I tip my hat to you! If you are one of the comments section haters that was hoping for a new Tudor Sub, ask yourself: Do you want one because you would love to see the line reintroduced? Or perhaps you dream of a sub (nothing wrong with that) and you hoped this would be an 'approved' budget option?
In my humble opinion, the FXD holds its own, give it a second look.
