Black Bay Pro Tudor vs Pelagos!!! my own insight

[MCGregor]

Hello everyone,
I just wanted to share my experience with the Black Bay Pro, which I have had for 2 and a half months. I know that many Tudor lovers can't decide between Pelagos and Pro, and if you're thinking about a Pro, you should know what the pros and cons of this watch are.

To be honest, I like how the Pro option arranges on the wrist more than the Pelagos. It has an ideal diameter of 39 mm and does not stand out at all in relation to my wrist, which is neither too big nor too small. Visually, it may seem that it is a bit tall. and it's actually pretty tall, about 14mm high, but when you put it on the wrist, its height becomes pretty balanced and dissolves into the whole construction. The truth is that it is not exactly a watch to wear under your sleeve. So either wear it with anything with short sleeves or accept that it will stand out from under the long sleeve.

When I bought it, I tried both options, the one with a bracelet and the one with a fabric strap. To be honest, it seems to me that the strap version is better. The watch seems to become more attractive and different, even if it is cheaper. In the end, I bought my model with a bracelet. It looks quite traditional, but in terms of comfort - it has more credibility.
When I tried the model with a strap, it seemed to me that the weight of the case is much too noticeable, in relation to the weight of the strap. But with the model with a bracelet, the weight is dispersed over the entire surface of the construction, and I feel it is somehow homogeneous.
I thought that with the wardrobe I have, it would be difficult for me to match it with my clothes if I take the model with strap fabric. But if you're the more sporty guy, I'm sure you'll get satisfaction from the strap watch.

Snowflake hands do not interfere with each other in any way. I was worried that the place where the snowflake is placed on the 24-hour hand and the second hand will "conflict" with each other. but I was wrong. Tudor did a good job with the space between them.

The domed sapphire adds a lot of aesthetics to the Pro watch, which lacks in the Pelagos models, as their xtals are flat. From another point of view, the Pelagos gains substantial ground in the water resistance profile, the ratio being 500m vs 200m for the BB Pro. But, I'm not a big diver and I'm pretty ok with those 200 meters.

I am a little dissatisfied with the Pro's luminescence in the dark. I expected something stronger, like the Pelagos chromalight. But the luminescence is the traditional Superluminova, which, in principle, is not bad, but is slightly inferior to the Pelagos Chromalight.

It seems to me that aesthetically, BB Pro gains ground due to applied circles instead of hour markers. Personally, the applied squares of Pelagos make it seem more rigid. The Pro is somehow nobler, thanks to the circular contours.
Clearly, the Pelagos is a bit lighter than the Pro, being made of Titanium. But personally, the aesthetics of the design mattered more to me than the weight. And in the end, I decided on the Pro option due to its vintage style. I find the modern style of the Pelagos a bit boring, no offence.

overall, I'm very happy with how it performs. it is quiet, calm, and does its job perfectly. I don't feel it bothering me throughout the day. it is one of the most comfortable and problem-free models to wear every day
These are the impressions. feel free to ask anything I missed, if you intend to get yourself one

 

[Skorsese]

I appreciate that Tudor has switched from 41mm to 39mm cases lately. good for it. but, I still don't understand what's in hell wrong with the thickness. why are they still so thick??
thanks for the info,@MCGregor it's good to know such general ideas!

 

[Greg_B]

yes indeed.... the phase with the height I don't really understand. and what's more, I don't understand why, having such a "generous" height, add a domed sapphire... it might look more elegant with such a sapphire, ok, let's admit... but I think it would have gained a few mm less if be opted for a flat one, ain't it?

 

[MinervuS]

yes indeed.... the phase with the height I don't really understand. and what's more, I don't understand why, having such a "generous" height, add a domed sapphire... it might look more elegant with such a sapphire, ok, let's admit... but I think it would have gained a few mm less if be opted for a flat one, ain't it?

you read my mind)) I was only thinking about the domed xtal which would be more reasonable to replace it with a flat one)...

The appearance is wonderful, I have no complaints. And this steel bezel exudes a specific accuracy, which is missing in ceramic ones, for example... but the NATO version is also superb. I don't know if I would have resisted opting for the nato strap in your case... either way, I'm thinking about how this bracelet would look on a BB58 model... I had intentions of purchasing it...

 

[WatchOut]

pleasantly surprised by this model. it looks really good. and the vintage aura is clearly felt. agree that it is a bit thick for my preferences. but I can forgive these shortcomings precisely because of the very well-balanced dial. I like that the dots on the hour markers are well proportioned with the hands. Those who know the 58 model will understand what I'm talking about. in that model there was no question of balancing proportions on the dial, at least on the hands.

and the date aperture here fits perfectly in the proportions of the details on the dial. It's not like Explorer II, which is very similar. Only that in the Explorer II, the date aperture is horrible

 

[Eddie]

I like everything, but not the thickness. I mean, I would accept it on my wrist, but I don't understand its logic. about how thick is the mechanism, making the watch itself so tall?
good point with the flat crystal, which would be more logical. and if 100 m of WR were removed, it would also make it thinner. after all, how relevant is 200 wr when the bezel is fixed?! even 50 meters would have been ideal. you just won't sink this watch to the bottom of the ocean, do u? a maximum shallow depth of 10-30 meters.

 

[EuGeniuS]

eeeeemmmmmm...... you guys are like talking about a thickness of about 50mm.... am I the only one seeing it on the border between a bit thick and normal?
it is not excessively thick after all... and the author specified that when you put it on your hand, the height is not exactly exaggerated visually...... facepalm me next time I consider such a thickness for my future watches...

 

[CosmoS]

I see no problems with this model, really. lovely piece to me!
that is, it is unique enough not to be confused with a rolex, and obvious enough on the hand, to feel present and attract attention. but not in an exaggerated way.
after all, maybe that's the trend to make taller watches... everything works in this watch thanks to the clean dial, the water resistance and the comfortable hard bracelet, from what I understand. good outcome from Tudor

 

[FleurDeLis]

@EuGeniuS, all gut!! same here

I don't think it's right to analyze the height separately from all other aspects. everything must be taken as a whole. I have a Seamaster rep 2538.20 identical in proportions to the original version. It has a thickness of 13.6mm. I also have a BB rep 41 that I bought half a year ago. this last one is an M79540-0006 rep is 11mm high. and guess what! this 11mm seems thicker than seamaster rep. And the reason is that slab side.

so I think this Pro should be tested individually on the wrist to see how thick or not it looks visually. you have to feel it

 

[CuriousGeorge]

@EuGeniuS, all gut!! same here

I don't think it's right to analyze the height separately from all other aspects. everything must be taken as a whole. I have a Seamaster rep 2538.20 identical in proportions to the original version. It has a thickness of 13.6mm. I also have a BB rep 41 that I bought half a year ago. this last one is an M79540-0006 rep is 11mm high. and guess what! this 11mm seems thicker than seamaster rep. And the reason is that slab side.

so I think this Pro should be tested individually on the wrist to see how thick or not it looks visually. you have to feel it

yep, on the same page here.... things should be considered per ensemble. in most cases, the difference actually lies in the mid case, no matter the proportion itself. a BB of 14mm might be looking absolutelly different from a Speedmaster, for example, of the same thickness..

 

[DoctorWHO]

Guys, everything has an explanation that not everyone actually knows. the height is no accident here, and Tudor could certainly have made it thinner.
The idea is the thick body of BB watches is actually a concept desired by Tudor. This is a specific characteristic of Big Blocks and Monte Carlos which are highly sought after by collectors. I personally think that with this case, Tudor tried to target those who worship such a concept, even if they are few in number

 

[BenjaMIN867]

you may be right @DoctorWHO . but I think it is not very fair to catch ten rabbits with one shot. Here we are talking about a luxury brand, more or less. And personally, when I refer to a luxury watch, I would like to see its technical capabilities maximally restricted in a fine and supple body. Otherwise, it leads me to think that the brand gave in and did not want to go the extra mile to deliver what luxury means. Respectively, a feeling of lazyness is created on the part of the brand. I mean, the idea is not that "the watch is very technically equipped and that's why it's thick". that would not appeal to me at all. Instead, I would want a feeling like"oh, how the hell did they integrate so many functions in such a subtle body"? - such emotions would attract me much more in a luxury brand. If it's about collectors, then a series should be created exclusively for them, taking into account what collectors are looking for. We, as the general audience, should get what we need. That's just a strictly subjective thought

 

[Karim]

eeeeemmmmmm...... you guys are like talking about a thickness of about 50mm.... am I the only one seeing it on the border between a bit thick and normal?
it is not excessively thick after all... and the author specified that when you put it on your hand, the height is not exactly exaggerated visually...... facepalm me next time I consider such a thickness for my future watches...

with all due respect, I'll take the chance to disagree here...
the proportions are just as important as the general aesthetics of the watch. I had experiences where I had to sell spectacular watches, which I really cared about, just because the proportions made them look horrible on my wrist. But, at the same time, I have to accept that a lot depends on the wrist of the owner, which is wider, which is narrower. And respectively, the tall watch is viewed differently. So I prefer not to give my opinion until I test the Pro on my personal wrist

 

[YuliusMeinl]

I can't believe how much fuss there is around a fairly acceptable thickness. more than that, it looks big only because the domed sapphire adds a few extra mm. if you exclude it, the watch falls within the limits of decent thicknesses

I admit that proportions matter. but in this watch particularly, the aesthetics is very successful. and the thickness is not exaggerated at all. respectively, everything is calibrated and it is not so bad, after all

 

[SunStrokeGOLD]

I love this watch. By me, it is the most versatile and successful model in the BB series. and I am happy for this iteration of the collection. Very practical, and you @MCGregor nailed it very well saying that it is calm and a good companion. it's actually a loyal tool watch. And I don't mind the thickness at all. I don't see a problem with that. Than spending tens of thousands for a Rolex, standing in line like forever, I'd better "swallow" thickness deficiency and enjoy it in any type of adventures and activities. I wouldn't hesitate to have it in an authentic version

 

[MirrorHope]

I would prefer it slightly thinner and featuring drilled lugs... it would have been the perfect combination... but overall, it doesn't look bad! I admire everything tudor has been doing lately and I like that it is detaching itself from Rolex more and more

 

[carRacer638854]

I would prefer it slightly thinner and featuring drilled lugs... it would have been the perfect combination... but overall, it doesn't look bad! I admire everything tudor has been doing lately and I like that it is detaching itself from Rolex more and more

oh really???
I see the exact opposite in this Pro. I love GMTs like a crazy, but this Pro really lacks something. It's as if the brand gathered all its shortcomings and integrated them into a single watch: the Pro. I think the vintage styling is too exaggerated, it's too much. And on the contrary, I see too much similarity with Explorer II. Either way, I remain loyal to the significantly lighter titanium Pelagos watch. even if it is more expensive and has a lower historical value than BB, the modern aesthetic definitely prevails

 

[Thereld]

i cant say that i always loved Tudor but this model was something interesting for me, I'm talking about the black bay. even so, i like it on the photo, there was another turnaround when i received it, and started to feel like a total robot... i don't know if there is smth about the style of this model that makes it look inaccurate to me.. at least this is what it gets all the time.
pelagos turned out to be more comfortable ..
i thought about it so many times and i think that i could be related to the size and the style of the black bay... it was too big and that clumsy style was not for me.. there are watches that have bigger sizes but felt different. this one with 41 looked like 50 to me. uncomfortable on the wrist for sure.
pelagos's style is a little bit different and the size for the style suits me better in my view.

 

[MCGregor]

I feel all of you guys, who don't understand why tudor didn't take an additional effort to reduce a bit of its height. when I first saw the watch, I thought it wouldn't really fit, because visually, it seemed too tall. but this is still a watch that needs to be worn on the wrist to understand it. once you put it on, it becomes homogeneous on the wrist, so to speak. and yes, it's tall, but it doesn't seem too high for my wrist. that is, it doesn't stand out too much so that the people around say "what's wrong with this guy, why does he wear such an inappropriate watch". is at the limit of reasonableness. in the end, it's a matter of personal preference. and it depends a lot on what you wore before. if until now, thin watches were a priority, it is unlikely that you will quickly get used to this PRO. If, on the contrary, you used to be more with G-shoks, this pro will seem like a feather

 

[Cacktoos]

idk.... i'm like more with the Pelagos 39. everything sounds good in the pro, except for the dimensions, sadly. akward decision to make such height, considering that there were possibilities to cut it down..