Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra 150M Black Lacquer
220.10.41.21.01.002
- Case
- 41mm
- MSRP
- $7,400
- Movement
- Automatic
- Reserve
- 60h
VS
Building 1v1 comparison
Building 1v1 comparison
1v1 Watch Comparison
A focused side-by-side page for specs, fit, movement details, review notes, and enthusiast context.
220.10.41.21.01.002
M79680-0001
Pair Review
Built from the saved specs and wearability notes for these two watches, then weighed against enthusiast priorities like fit, movement quality, practicality, finishing, value, and collector appeal.
Where it wins
Buyers who prioritize higher water resistance and a date display
Where it wins
Buyers who want the stronger value proposition and lower MSRP
The Tudor uses the in-house MT5601 automatic caliber with 70 hours of power reserve and COSC certification, which gives it a strong enthusiast credential set and good practical autonomy. The Omega uses the automatic Calibre 8900 with 60 hours of power reserve; the provided data does not list COSC or METAS certification here, though the wearability notes describe it as one of the strongest technical movements in the segment with exceptional anti-magnetism and a jumping local hour hand. On the listed specs alone, Tudor wins on power reserve and documented certification, while Omega appears more technically sophisticated by the supplied narrative context. Serviceability and long-term reliability are not directly listed, so they cannot be judged definitively. Winner: Tie
Both watches are 41mm, so the main difference is in thickness and overall wearing profile. The Tudor is 12.2mm thick with no lug-to-lug or weight listed, and the pre-existing wearability note says it has a substantial but balanced feel and wears larger than the Black Bay 39, with especially strong bracelet comfort. The Omega is 13.4mm thick, has a 48mm lug-to-lug, weighs 148g, and uses a 20mm-to-18mm taper with a butterfly clasp and 2mm micro-adjustment; its wearability note says it has a more refined wrist presence but still wears large for the class. In practical terms, the Tudor should feel cleaner and a bit easier to live with for a wider range of wrists, while the Omega will have more presence and a more substantial footprint. Winner: Tudor Black Bay 41
The Tudor offers a flat sapphire crystal, anthracite dial, 100m water resistance, no date, and a screw-down crown, which makes for a simple, legible, low-fuss daily watch with a more streamlined, versatile look. Its polished-and-satin steel case and bracelet, plus the T-fit clasp, support easy everyday wear and a strong balance of sport and smart-casual use. The Omega adds 150m water resistance, a date display, and a more modern luxury-sports presentation with a glossy black lacquer aesthetic; its tapered bracelet and micro-adjustment system are meaningful comfort advantages, but the thicker case means it will feel a little less discreet on the wrist. Based on the listed practicality points, Omega wins for versatility features and water resistance, while Tudor wins for cleaner simplicity and easier everyday understatement. Winner: Omega Aqua Terra 150M Black Lacquer
The Tudor has a lower MSRP at $4,825 versus the Omega at $7,400, and it also brings COSC certification and a 70-hour reserve at the lower price point. The Omega asks more money but offers 150m water resistance, a date display, a more advanced-seeming movement package in the provided notes, and a more overtly refined luxury presentation. Brand-wise, both Tudor and Omega carry strong heritage signals, but the data here gives Tudor the stronger value proposition because it delivers a premium in-house movement, excellent bracelet hardware, and everyday versatility at a materially lower entry price. Ownership practicality is also favorable for Tudor given the simpler no-date layout and slightly thinner case. Winner: Tudor Black Bay 41
Compared
220.10.41.21.01.002
M79680-0001