Omega Constellation Globemaster Annual Calendar vs Tudor 1926
Ref. 130.33.41.22.02.001 vs Ref. M91550-0003
Comparing the Tudor 1926 to the Omega Constellation Globemaster Annual Calendar means weighing a significant price difference — is the premium justified? At $9,600 versus $2,325, these two watches serve different segments of the market. Here's how they stack up on specifications, value retention, and investment potential.
Price Comparison
Omega
Constellation Globemaster Annual Calendar
Tudor
1926
At retail, the Omega Constellation Globemaster Annual Calendar is listed at $9,600 while the Tudor 1926 comes in at $2,325. The Tudor 1926 comes in at $7,275 less — more than half the price difference — making it a significantly more accessible option. On the secondary market, the gap narrows: the Omega Constellation Globemaster Annual Calendar trades around $7,680 and the Tudor 1926 around $1,860, a difference of $5,820 favoring the Tudor 1926. Available at 20% below retail and trending downward, this represents a buying opportunity for those comfortable with the current market position. The Tudor 1926 shows a more modest market premium of -20.0%, though currently trending downward. Both watches score equally on flip potential at 2/10, making neither a clear investment winner over the other.
Specifications
| Specification | Omega Constellation Globemaster Annual Calendar | Tudor 1926 |
|---|---|---|
| Case Diameter | 41mm | 39mm |
| Case Thickness | 14.35mm | 10mm |
| Case Material | Stainless steel | Stainless steel |
| Bezel | Stainless steel fluted bezel | Stainless steel, polished with ridge detail |
| Crystal | Domed sapphire crystal with anti-reflective treatment | Sapphire crystal |
| Water Resistance | 100m / 330ft | 100m / 330ft |
| Movement | Omega Co-Axial Master Chronometer calibre 8922 | Tudor Calibre T601 |
| Movement Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Power Reserve | 55 hours | 38 hours |
| Bracelet/Strap | Stainless steel bracelet | Stainless steel bracelet |
| Clasp | Folding clasp | Folding clasp with safety catch |
| Lug Width | 20mm | 20mm |
Key specification differences stand out between these two: the Omega Constellation Globemaster Annual Calendar offers longer power reserve at 55 hours. With 5 notable spec differences in total, the choice depends on which features matter most to your use case.
Value Per Feature
Per millimeter of case diameter, the Omega Constellation Globemaster Annual Calendar costs $187 versus $48 for the Tudor 1926. For water resistance, the Tudor 1926 delivers better value per meter of depth rating. The Tudor 1926 offers more power reserve per dollar spent.
Which Should You Buy?
Choose the Omega Constellation Globemaster Annual Calendar if you value the Omega heritage. Go with the Tudor 1926 if you prioritize a lower entry price.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is more affordable, the Omega Constellation Globemaster Annual Calendar or the Tudor 1926?
The Tudor 1926 is more accessible, priced at $2,325 compared to $9,600.
Which holds its value better on the secondary market?
The Tudor 1926 currently trades at 20.0% below retail, indicating moderate value retention on the pre-owned market.
How do the Omega Constellation Globemaster Annual Calendar and Tudor 1926 compare in size?
The Omega Constellation Globemaster Annual Calendar measures 41mm in diameter and 14.35mm thick, while the Tudor 1926 is 39mm by 10mm.
What movements do these watches use?
The Omega Constellation Globemaster Annual Calendar uses the Omega Co-Axial Master Chronometer calibre 8922 with 55 hours power reserve, while the Tudor 1926 runs on the Tudor Calibre T601 offering 38 hours of power reserve.
Related Comparisons
Omega Constellation Globemaster Annual Calendar
vs Rolex Datejust 41
Omega Constellation Globemaster Annual Calendar
vs Rolex Day-Date 36
Omega Constellation Globemaster Annual Calendar
vs Rolex Day-Date 40
Rolex Datejust 41
vs Tudor 1926
Rolex Day-Date 36
vs Tudor 1926
Rolex Day-Date 40
vs Tudor 1926