Tudor Black Bay 68
M7943A1A0NU-0002
- Case
- 43mm
- MSRP
- $5,075
- Movement
- Automatic
- Reserve
- 70h
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.
M7943A1A0NU-0002
217.30.42.21.01.001
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
Enthusiasts who want a larger wrist presence with a modernized Black Bay design.
Where it wins
Enthusiasts who want the strongest technical dive-watch package and 600m capability.
Omega uses the automatic Co-Axial Master Chronometer caliber 8912, with 39 jewels, a 3.5 Hz / 25,200 vph beat rate, 60 hours of power reserve, METAS certification, and 15,000 gauss magnetic resistance. Tudor uses the automatic MT5601-U, with 70 hours of power reserve, COSC certification, METAS certification, and 15,000 gauss magnetic resistance; jewel count and beat rate are not yet listed. On paper, the Tudor wins on power reserve, while the Omega offers more fully specified movement architecture and a proven high-end Co-Axial platform. Both are technically strong, anti-magnetic, and highly credible daily-wear movements, but the Omega feels more elaborate and the Tudor more straightforwardly robust. Winner: Omega
Omega is 42mm wide, 13.79mm thick, and 47.5mm lug-to-lug, with a listed weight of 177g and a 21mm bracelet taper. Tudor is larger at 43mm, slightly thinner at 13.6mm, but its lug-to-lug and weight are not yet listed. In wear, the Omega should feel more balanced and less oversized than the Tudor despite the heavy diver character, especially given the pre-existing note that Omega finally improved the Planet Ocean’s thickness, bracelet taper, and comfort setting. The Tudor has the stronger wrist presence and, per the wearability note, feels surprisingly balanced for its size, but it is still an unapologetically large watch and may be too much for smaller wrists. The Omega is the better all-around fit for more wrist sizes; the Tudor is best if you specifically want a bigger, bolder watch. Winner: Omega
The Omega offers a black dial, Super-LumiNova, a domed scratch-resistant sapphire crystal with internal anti-reflective treatment, ceramic unidirectional bezel, screw-in crown, helium escape valve, transparent caseback, and 600m water resistance. The Tudor has a sun-brushed silver dial with applied hour markers, domed sapphire crystal, screw-down crown, folding clasp with T-fit, and 200m water resistance; bezel material and lume are not yet listed. The Omega is clearly the more capable tool diver for water use, with much higher resistance and more explicit dive-oriented hardware, while also benefiting from the cleaner no-date layout described in the wearability notes. The Tudor has a crisp, legible, more modern dress-sport look and is likely easier to live with as a general sports watch, but it is materially less specialized for serious diving. Winner: Omega
Omega’s MSRP is $9,200, while Tudor’s is $5,075, making the Tudor materially more accessible on price. The Omega brings stronger brand-level dive credibility, a more elaborate movement platform, METAS certification, 600m water resistance, and a more developed technical identity; the Tudor counters with its own COSC and METAS-certified movement, 70-hour reserve, and a simpler ownership proposition at a lower entry price. From a collector perspective, the Omega feels more flagship-like and technically ambitious, while the Tudor offers a compelling blend of modern specs and brand prestige for less money. For pure value, the Tudor has the edge. Winner: Tudor
Compared
M7943A1A0NU-0002
217.30.42.21.01.001