Tudor Black Bay 39
M79660-0002
- Case
- 39mm
- MSRP
- $4,500
- Movement
- Automatic
- Reserve
- Not listed
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.
M79660-0002
220.12.41.21.03.009
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
Collectors who want the best compact everyday fit and bracelet comfort
Where it wins
Wins for buyers who prefer its overall mix of specs, fit, ownership appeal, and value.
The Omega uses the automatic Omega 8900, and the provided notes describe it as METAS-certified, highly anti-magnetic, beautifully finished, and fitted with a convenient jumping-hour function for travelers. The Tudor uses the manufacture calibre MT5602, which is COSC-certified and has a strong reliability reputation, with a listed 70-hour power reserve in the wearability notes. On the data provided, Omega is the more technically ambitious movement package, while Tudor brings certification and proven robustness with simpler ownership logic. Performance detail is more completely documented for Omega in the supplied notes, but Tudor’s COSC status and 70-hour reserve are clear practical strengths. Winner: Omega Aqua Terra 41 Blue
The Omega is 41mm wide, 13.2mm thick, and 47.9mm lug-to-lug, with no listed weight and no bracelet taper data because it comes on a rubber strap. The Tudor is smaller at 39mm, thinner at 12mm, slightly shorter at 47.5mm lug-to-lug, and listed at 145g with a 21mm to 16mm taper on the bracelet. In the wearability notes, the Omega is described as wearing noticeably larger than the 38mm Aqua Terra models, with the rubber strap making it feel lighter and more casual but still substantial; the Tudor is described as exceptionally well proportioned, with a compact case and aggressively tapered bracelet that make it feel especially balanced on wrist. For a wider range of wrist sizes and all-day comfort, the Tudor is the easier fit, while the Omega will suit buyers who want a bolder presence and do not mind a larger, sportier footprint. Winner: Tudor Black Bay 39
The Omega offers a blue teak-pattern dial, yellow accents, Super-LumiNova, 150m water resistance, sapphire crystal, a date display, and a rubber strap that the notes call extremely comfortable and more athletic-looking than the bracelet Aqua Terra versions. The Tudor has a blue dial, flat sapphire crystal, 100m water resistance, no date, a polished and satin stainless steel bracelet, and a T-Fit clasp with 8mm of tool-less micro-adjustment. In practical terms, Omega wins for lume, water resistance, and travel-friendly functionality thanks to the jumping-hour movement, while Tudor wins for bracelet execution, on-wrist polish, and a cleaner, more restrained daily aesthetic. The Omega is better for mixed sport/business wear if you like the added personality; the Tudor is better if you want the most universally easy-to-wear package. Winner: Tie
The Tudor has the lower MSRP at $4,500 versus Omega’s $7,100, and the provided notes frame it as one of Tudor’s most complete modern watches with strong comfort, versatility, and build quality. The Omega brings a more premium-sounding movement story, more specialized design cues, 150m water resistance, and an exhibition caseback, but it asks substantially more money and leans into a more niche aesthetic tied to the Mondo Duplantis tribute. From a collector and ownership standpoint, the Tudor is the more accessible, broadly practical buy, while the Omega has the stronger brand-level technical halo and a more distinctive enthusiast narrative. Without bringing in outside market behavior, the Tudor offers the clearer value proposition on the supplied data. Winner: Tudor Black Bay 39
Compared
M79660-0002
220.12.41.21.03.009