After having my eye on it for awhile, I was finally able to get a Tudor Ranger about a month ago. I’m absolutely loving it, and wanted to share some thoughts.
I’ve of course read all the back and forth on this watch on this site and others. To use a Bushism, I think it’s misunderestimated. I’ll even go so far as to say something that I’m sure will outrage many: this watch is the new 1016. Hear me out.
First, why I got the Ranger. I recently switched to working from home full time, and I was finding that I wanted a more rugged watch to wear when dealing with household chores and kids. For the last 6 years, my daily driver has been a Hamilton Intramatic Auto Chrono 68. I cannot express how much I love that watch. And despite not being COSC, it was running +0.8 sec/day. But a bulky chronograph is not ideal for horsing around with kids and knocking around the house.
So I set my mind to getting a new steel sports watch. I was willing to spend some cash, but nothing crazy. I wanted COSC-level time keeping, as I’d gotten spoiled by the Hamilton. My wife is sensitive to anything that looks flashy or expensive, so anything that says “Rolex” on it is out; and honestly I too wanted something understated. When I first saw the Ranger, I knew it fit the bill.
This thing is built like a tank, but also incredibly comfortable. Everything you’ve read about the bracelet is true. The links are not so thick as to make it bulky, and the T-fit clasp guarantees a perfect fit in every season. The brushed stainless steel means it’s not a blingy watch, despite all the metal. The polished hands under the domed sapphire give it just the slightest bit of sparkle to show that it was thoughtfully designed.
To me, this is the quintessential go anywhere, do anything watch. I’ve worn it with shorts and a t-shirt, and with a suit and tie. In some ways, it’s filling the role of a beater watch; from my description of what I was looking for, it kinda sounds like that’s what I was looking for. And I did consider finding something in the $1k range with an ETA or Sellita inside, but I just couldn’t bring myself to sacrifice the accuracy.
Which brings me to the other thing I love about this watch: it’s a total If You Know You Know watch. No one will recognize this except fellow watch nerds. It’s a total no frills, basic three-hander. But inside is a modern, highly engineered movement. Mine is running consistently at +2.4 sec/day. I’ll admit to being a little disappointed that it’s less accurate than my non-COSC Hamilton, but that one was a fluke and this is well within specs.
Some folks have complained about the painted-on indices and numerals, but again I didn’t want something flashy. This is a tool watch and it makes no apologies for it. And I have to say: look at it right next to the 1016, and try to tell me this isn’t the modern day version of that classic.
The case shape is the same, very similar crowns w/o a guard, both have a domed crystal, the slight yellow matches the patina on the 1016, the same minute markers, the same hour markers, the same minimal text in the same locations, the same font for the numerals, the same minute hand, the bulbous rattlesnake mirroring the Mercedes hour hand, the rectangular bulb on the Tudor seconds hand mimicking the dot on the 1016’s. The red tip on the Tudor seconds and the 12 instead of a an arrow are the only meaningful differences! I’m telling you, the Tudor Ranger is the Rolex Explorer 1016 of the 21st century. Change my mind.
I thought about being an Explorer for years, but could never quite get myself there. The modern Explorer just doesn’t know what it is. Is it a sports watch? Sure, it’s stainless steel, but it’s way too highly polished and has tons of polished applied indices and numerals. Is it a dress watch? Could be! But the chunky numerals make that a weird fit. The 1016 was the best version of the Explorer, back when it was honest about what it was meant to me. The Ranger is the same thing, but with a modern movement (and at a fraction of the price of the vintage explorers).