Tudor Black Bay Chrono
M79360N-0012
- Case
- 41mm
- MSRP
- $6,875
- 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.
M79360N-0012
310.30.42.50.01.002
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 want the more practical everyday sports chronograph with 200m water resistance and automatic winding.
Where it wins
Collectors who value icon status, Moonwatch heritage, and chronograph history.
Omega’s manual-wind Caliber 3861 is the more technically distinctive movement on paper here: it has 26 jewels, a 3 Hz / 21,600 vph beat rate, a 50-hour power reserve, METAS certification, and 15,000 gauss magnetic resistance. Those listed specs give it a strong modern-precision and anti-magnetism case, while the transparent caseback adds enthusiast appeal by showcasing the movement. Tudor’s automatic MT5813 is the more convenience-oriented caliber, with COSC certification and a longer 70-hour power reserve, which is a real practical advantage for an everyday chronograph. Serviceability and long-term reliability are not listed directly, so they can’t be judged beyond the fact that both are established, widely known chronograph architectures. Winner: Omega
The Omega is 42mm wide, 13.18mm thick, 47.5mm lug-to-lug, and 138g, so it should wear more compact and less top-heavy than its dimensions suggest. The pre-existing wearability note supports that: despite the 42mm specification, the short lug-to-lug and twisted-lug case help it wear like a relatively compact sports chronograph, and the redesigned bracelet is described as slimmer and more comfortable than the prior generation. The Tudor is slightly smaller in diameter at 41mm, but it is significantly thicker at 14.4mm, with lug-to-lug and weight not yet listed; the wearability note says it wears more compact than the numbers suggest, but it can still feel substantial and somewhat top-heavy on smaller wrists. The Tudor’s T-Fit clasp with 8mm of tool-less adjustment is a meaningful comfort advantage, while the Omega’s 2.3mm micro-adjust is smaller but still useful. Overall, the Omega is the cleaner fit for wrists that prefer lower visual bulk, while the Tudor suits those comfortable with a chunkier chronograph presence. Winner: Omega
For daily wear, the Tudor is the more versatile tool watch. It has a 200m water resistance rating, a screw-down crown, a long 70-hour reserve, and an automatic movement, all of which make it easier to live with in mixed-use settings. Its opaline dial with black counters should also offer strong contrast and a clear vintage-racing look, though lume is not yet listed. The Omega offers a black dial, Super-LumiNova, sapphire crystal, a transparent caseback, and the iconic Moonwatch tachymeter layout, which is excellent for chronograph legibility and collector appeal. However, its 50m water resistance and manual-wind nature make it feel more like a heritage chronograph than a go-anywhere daily sports watch, and the wearability note also points out that polished center surfaces can scratch relatively easily. Materially and aesthetically, the Omega is the more iconic and arguably more legible chronograph; functionally, the Tudor is the more practical daily companion. Winner: Tudor
The Tudor has the lower MSRP at USD 6,875 versus USD 9,000 for the Omega, so it delivers a stronger price-to-features case on the listed numbers alone. The Omega’s value is anchored more in heritage: the Speedmaster Moonwatch is one of the most important watches in modern horology, and the METAS-certified Caliber 3861 plus display caseback strengthen the enthusiast proposition. The Tudor carries its own credibility through COSC certification, a 70-hour reserve, and rugged 200m water resistance, which make ownership feel highly practical and durable. If collector appeal is weighted toward iconic lineage, the Omega wins; if value is defined by usable modern specs per dollar, the Tudor has the edge. Winner: Tie
Compared
M79360N-0012
310.30.42.50.01.002