The battle of the divers
Comparing Tudor and Christopher Ward - with extremely surprising results
Happy new year! And hello 👋 to the new people who’ve joined recently - I know a few have signed up off the back of some recent Instagram posts (@tiny_machines). Thank you for coming along for the ride… It’s genuinely lovely to have you here.
I don’t know about you, but so far 2023 has been an absolute Watch Fest. To the point where it’s prompted me start with four New Year’s Recommendations:
Buy this
I had lunch this week with Nicholas from Fears, an absolute gentleman and MD of my favourite brand right now. Buy a Fears watch. Now. You’ll be getting one of the best-looking and most carefully made watches on the market today. (Incidentally, Nicholas also let me get hands-on with a *very special* limited edition collaboration that’s coming out at the end of the month - I can’t say any more as I promised silence…but I will say it’s incredibly elegant and I think it might break the internet.)Watch this
I had a virtual breakfast with Andrew “The Hands” Morgan from Watchfinder. Seeing his face on a screen is an unusual experience for those of us who watch his Watchfinder videos. Which you’d better watch too. Or else.Join this
Pasta was on the menu on Friday when I caught up with Hamish from The Watch Collectors’ Club. You should *absolutely* join. It’s one of the best things that happened to me in 2022. Hamish and Ed run events full of lovely, welcoming, equally nerdy people. And they’re brilliantly planned and researched evenings.Visit these
I ate doughnuts with my good chum Robert, from the Patek Philippe team at Watches of Switzerland on Regent Street. And I did a bit of browsing around the new Mr Jones Watches shop in Covent Garden, as well as paying visits to the A. Lange and Söhne and Vacheron Constantin boutiques on Bond Street. Go visit all four. It’ll be fun!
I’m exhausted. And it’s only January 8th.
But what the heck am I writing about today?
Well…this week saw a new and unexpected arrival, from Christopher Ward - which prompted a comparison with another reasonably new piece from Tudor. And the conclusions I reached blew my tiny mind. Let’s go!
First up, Christopher Ward…how are you doing this?
On Tuesday afternoon, I got an email. The subject line said, “Limited to 250 pieces - the NEW C60 Graphite Special Edition”. I opened it up and saw this picture.
I was interested. I love a stealthy watch.
Then I read the specs. Black and grey case. Ceramic bezel. Automatic Swiss workhorse Sellita SW200 movement. 600m water resistance. Top-quality lume to light things up at night. It all seemed pretty serious stuff.
Then I saw the price. £495.
If you’re not into watches, trust me when I say that’s good value. And, if you are into watches, you’ve probably just fallen off your chair.
I think it’s time we started asking questions about Christopher Ward. Well, one question - how the heckington heck are they doing this?
They’re known for producing great quality watches for reasonable prices. But recently they’ve been, frankly, taking the piss out of the rest of the industry. The C1 Bel Canto was more expensive than normal at £2,995 - but you got the kind of watch that you’d expect to have at least one more digit in its price. And this new C60 would easily be double or triple the price from other brands. Whatever the commercial realities and decisions behind these watches, it’s all very much at odds with what we’re seeing elsewhere, where prices across the board have been leaping like Louie Spence.
After getting the email from Christopher Ward, I was genuinely curious. I’ve been admiring them for a while. I recently met Mike France, their CEO, who is not only an incredibly savvy business-person but a genuinely lovely chap who cares very much about offering his customers something incredible - and really wants the UK watch industry to achieve its potential. It’s a brand that’s consistent from the very top.
I’d not yet pushed the button and bought a Christopher Ward…but I was edging closer. This C60 release tipped the balance. I clicked the link and handed over my credit card details. Then watched as the 250 watches they’d made sold out in about 17 seconds.
But what would it be like…?
Tudor: you’re making this unfair…
I wrote recently about how much I love the Tudor Pelagos 39. I managed to get my hands on one at the tail end of last year. Since I got it, I’ve worn it more than anything else.
Why do I mention this? Because it felt like Very Bad News for Christopher Ward. If the Pelagos 39 is what I think of when I think of a dive watch, how on earth is a watch that costs 1/7 of the price (yes, one seventh) going to get a fair hearing?
So when the postman delivered my C60 on Friday, I was ready to be underwhelmed - or, at the very best, whelmed.
I unpacked it. The first thing I noticed was just how good the packaging was. It felt really nice - wood and some sort of very tactile synthetic material. This actually worried me - if they were spending this kind of time and money on packaging, I didn’t hold out much hope for the watch they’d made with the balance of my £495.
Then I got to the watch itself. And the mystery deepened…
It looked *stunning*. If you spend time with Hamish from The Watch Collectors’ Club, he encourages you to look very carefully at watches and pay attention to what you see. So I did just that. I noticed sparkly applied indices on the dial. A well-sculpted case that made the 42mm size feel surprisingly svelte. High quality alternating brushing and polishing, with sharp transitions between the two, a hallmark of the Light-catcher™ case. An extremely precise click when you turned the bezel. Which is ceramic, by the way.
I got out my loupe (magnifying glass) to have a closer look. At first glance, I thought the dial looked a bit flat - but it actually had a slight sparkle to it under a certain light. The hands were sharply crafted, with very evenly applied lume and precise brushing down the centre. The printed text and minute markers were crisp and even.
I then put it on my wrist. It wore very, very well given the dimensions. As I get older and wider, I’m increasingly a fan of monochrome knitwear - it’s very forgiving. I think the black/charcoal PVD coating on this watch has the same effect…it makes it feel slimmer than it might otherwise feel. And the sculpted case makes it sit very close to the wrist, as well as playing tricks with the appearance. It felt much thinner than I’d expected.
For the money I’d spent, I was struggling to find flaws.
Nine head-to-head battles…
Given all that, I thought, “sod it, let’s do a head-to-head with the Pelagos!” Now, I know they’re different watches of different sizes made of different materials at very different prices. But they’re both designed to do the same job - diving. And now I’ve worn the C60 for a couple of days, I’m confident it can more than stand up for itself.
So here are nine characteristics that matter to me personally - and might also matter to you. Here’s how the two watches stack up…
1. Case material
Tudor: Titanium (grade 2)
Christopher Ward: Steel (PVD-coated)
Titanium is a more premium material than PVD-coated steel. But then you’re paying SEVEN TIMES as much. So you’d expect it.
I do like the darker colour of the grade 2 titanium Tudor have used on the Pelagos 39 (compared to the grade 5 of the standard Pelagos). It feels warmer and more refined, to my eye.
But see below (‘finishing’) for thoughts on the C60 appearance. I think it’s punching well above its weight for the price.
2. Movement
Tudor: Tudor MT5400, COSC-certified
Christopher Ward: Sellita SW200-1
The Tudor has a COSC-certified manufacturer movement, while the Christopher Ward has a standard SW200-1 movement inside.
On paper, you’d think the Tudor would walk it. But hold fire! Both seem to be keeping exactly the same time - about -1 second a day - which is remarkable. They’re both 4hz movements as well, for solid timekeeping and a nice smooth sweep. Quite the result for Christopher Ward…
The Tudor does edge the win with a 70-hour power reserve (as opposed to 38 hours in the C60). But that’s the only major difference I could find.
3. Dial
Tudor: Sunburst black
Christopher Ward: Sandblasted matte grey
This might be quite a subjective point, depending on personal preferences. Both dials do what they do very well.
The Tudor has a beautiful - and very subtle - sunburst effect, which looks terrific in certain light. Combined with hour markers that are solid blocks of lume, it’s a very legible dial (big tick for a diver). It also has minimal dial text - and a nice pop of red for the “Pelagos” marking, which feels inspired by classic Rolex models. Love it.
Having said that, the C60 is a stunner in a different way. The blasted finish on the dial makes it a bit more interesting than it first appears. It has a slight shimmery shine under certain lighting. And the applied indices are crisp - with some really nice polishing on the edges that give it an extra sparkle that feels a lot more premium than the price suggests. And it has almost no dial text, which (as a fan of minimalism) I like a LOT.
God, this is a hard one. It’s so subjective. I can’t quite call it. Maybe the Pelagos. I really don’t know…
4. Strap / bracelet
The Pelagos comes with two options as standard - a titanium bracelet and a rubber strap. I won’t go into the details here as they’ve been covered extensively elsewhere, but the Tudor bracelet is possibly the best I’ve worn - solid, with great adjustment through the T-Fit clasp.
I chose the C60 on the #tide strap, but there were also (more expensive) options of a bracelet and hybrid strap. I can’t vouch for the others. What I can say is that the quick-release/change function is leaps better than the (time-consuming) standard fiddly-pin style that Tudor went for.
I think Tudor will probably pick up the win for overall quality - but you pay a lot more.
5. Bezel
Tudor: Ceramic (sunray brushed)
Christopher Ward: Ceramic (DLC coated)
Nothing to separate the two here, really. Both have excellent ceramic bezels with lumed minute markers. The Pelagos has a slight sunray finish, while the C60 is blasted and slightly more matte. All down to personal preference - but both excellent options.
6. Wearability
The Tudor will be the better option for more people. At 39mm, it’ll just fit more wrists. And it’s super-light - but still feels as solid as a rock.
Having said that, the C60 wears much smaller than expected. The colour and case sculpting make this sit really close to the wrist - and appear very, very thin. I think this will surprise people - and really has to be worn to be believed.
7. Water resistance
Tudor: 200m
Christopher Ward: 600m
Well. This is an open-and-shut case. The C60 wins hands-down. I’ll never go anywhere near either depth rating. But if I dropped either in the sea and had to call on James Cameron to rescue them for me, the Christopher Ward might stand a better chance of survival.
8. Finishing
The Tudor does feel slightly more premium, given the brushed and polished titanium case. As you’d expect, really - they don’t mess about.
But the C60 is exceptionally good for the money. Time will tell how well the PVD coating stands up to the trials of daily desk diving, but (as I said in my first impressions) the mix of brushing and polishing feels well done - and the edges between the two are sharp under a loupe. The Light-catcher™ case is a beauty with its sculpted and bevelled edges, making the package overall feel a lot thinner than the dimensions suggest.
9. Lume
Tudor: Not disclosed (the usual Rolex/Tudor stuff you’d expect)
Christopher Ward: Super-LumiNova® Grade X1 BL C1
Both are terrific. Like an absolute geek, I charged both up under a halogen lamp and kept them in a dark room overnight. I could still read both in the morning - yes, a lot less bright, but still very visible.
I think this could be a draw.
Well, this is surprising…
On paper, the Tudor Pelagos 39 takes the win. And it’s what we might expect. But I don’t think it’s quite as open-and-shut a case as it might appear.
The Tudor wins where you’d expect it to, given the higher price tag. The movement is just that bit better. The case material is just that bit more premium. And the size is a lot more versatile for more people. The weight of the titanium only adds to that.
But I’d say that Christopher Ward have produced something quite remarkable - and arguably better, given the price. Some of the most important characteristics match the Tudor. Timekeeping is on a par, which is extraordinary. It has a ceramic bezel that will handle knocks and bashes just as well as the Pelagos. The depth rating absolutely blows Tudor away.
I also think the dial and case finishing is nothing short of stunning for the price. Trust me when I say the applied indices really shine - and the matte dial is much more interesting when you live with it day-to-day.
So what’s the conclusion?
I started off thinking it was a silly comparison. A £3,500 watch versus a £495 watch. An unfair fight, surely? But the more I get to know the Christopher Ward, the less I think that’s the case. It’s an absolute Bobby Dazzler. A watch you can buy with - as far as I can see it - no real down sides. It doesn’t feel like there’s much in the way of sacrifice. All the flaws I’d normally be expecting from a lower-price watch just don’t seem to be on display.
To the Christopher Ward team: I see you. You’re clearly witches.