Sunday Morning Showdown: Tudor Ranger Dune White Vs. Christopher Ward C65 Dune Aeolian Sand

Welcome to a new installment of Sunday Morning Showdown! This week, we pit two very similar watches from two very dissimilar segments against each other. The Tudor Ranger Dune White takes on the much cheaper Christopher Ward C65 Dune Aeolian Sand. We’ll see if the €2,425 price gap makes sense.

Daan will take the Tudor’s side, and Thomas will defend the Christopher Ward. Let’s see how they fare!

But first, last week’s results

But, of course, we’ll first take a look at last week’s Sunday Morning Showdown. This was a controversial one, as we put the new Omega Planet Ocean up against the Rolex Submariner. The Rolex won with a significant 61% of the votes against 39% for the Omega.

The matchup was clearly contentious, as it triggered a whopping 156 comments. Of course, many readers questioned our pairing, which we explained in the intro. But that wasn’t the main theme of the discussion in the comments section. It seems the majority of voters prefer the Rolex for being simpler, cleaner, and less shiny. A small but vocal opposition pointed out that the Planet Ocean is the more interesting, less predictable, and less boring choice.

With that out of the way, let’s proceed with today’s matchup. We suspect it could spark just as much debate as last week’s showdown, so top up your coffee, take one last bite of your croissant, and let’s dive in!

Thomas: Christopher Ward C65 Dune Aeolian Sand

Good morning, Fratelli! And good morning, Daan! This week’s Sunday Morning Showdown is challenging, to put it mildly. Here we have two divisive brands, operating in very different segments. After all, the Tudor costs more than three times as much as the Christopher Ward.

Still, we saw enough similarities to put them up against each other. After all, both serve up the classical “explorer’s watch” recipe with sand-colored dials. Both have fans who love them for what they are. However, both also speak to those looking for a more affordable, dependable, and modern alternative to a Rolex Explorer ref. 1016. I mean, I can say that out loud, right? I am sure this will offend people, but everything does, so I will just come out and state it plainly: both contestants perform the role of the value-driven alternative to something else. I will go into hiding now until things cool down…

Jokes aside, there’s no shame in this. If you love the genre but want something you can rock daily without worry, these watches gloriously serve that purpose. I will argue, however, that the Christopher Ward C65 Dune Aeolian Sand is the one that does it better.

The Christopher Ward C65 Dune offers unbeatable value

Okay, you saw this argument coming from a mile away: at €1,165, the C65 Dune Aeolian Sand offers much greater value for money. This begins with specifications. You get basically the entire standard wishlist of features. Whether you want proper water resistance (150 meters), a screw-down crown, sapphire crystals on the front and back, a quick-release mechanism, and toolless micro-adjustment on the bracelet, the C65 has it. The only shortcoming you can point to is its poor accuracy rating, allowing up to 20 seconds per day of deviation.

However, the value doesn’t stop at the spec list. It continues in terms of design features and execution. The case features much more intricate surfaces and curves than the Tudor. The dial comes with quite fancy details. Even the Bader bracelet feels fairly solid with properly screwed links and milled parts.

The C65 Dune Aeolian Sand is the smarter package

Now, it shouldn’t come as much of a surprise that the watch costing one-third the money is the better-value option. However, things get clearer when you look at what the Ranger offers over the C65 Dune.

I see three main selling points for the Tudor: 1) slightly better construction and finishing, 2) brand power and status, and 3) a more accurate in-house caliber. Now, the construction and finishing of these two watches are much closer than you might imagine. Both are good but not special. The brand power is subjective, but I feel neither comes with an overly inspiring aura, to be honest. Lastly, the fancier movement could actually be considered a weakness rather than a strength.

Why? Because it limits your options when servicing your watch, likely condemning you to go through Tudor’s official channels. That means you will pay more and be less flexible in your options. Now, if you got something absolutely beautiful or horologically special in return, that would be a fair trade-off. Unfortunately, you don’t. You simply get a basic workhorse caliber without any of the Sellita upsides. All in all, I would always go for the truly high-value option or for the original. This means I would get either an Explorer 1016 or a C65 Dune Aeolian Sand. Now, Daan, tell us why people should vote for the Tudor instead!

Daan: Tudor Ranger Dune White

Thanks, Thomas. I didn’t know you were such a spec-minded person! Sure, there’s a big price difference between these watches, but in the end, I’d always choose the one I’d look forward to wearing. That, to me, is undoubtedly the Tudor. I completely agree that the Christopher Ward offers a lot of value for money, the finishing is on par with Tudor, and so is the bracelet construction. But it also looks like a watch that’s trying a little too hard.

You’re right, Thomas, when you say that the C65’s case has more interesting surfaces and curves, but is it also nicer to look at? The same goes for the dial. Sure, those sand waves are perfectly on theme, and they’re interesting to look at, but they’re also a bit much, don’t you think? Especially in combination with the applied hour markers and the lower-level minute track, it’s all a little over the top. I’m also still annoyed by the abstract Christopher Ward logo. It almost looks like the watch is made in collaboration with your local hospital.

Tudor’s more refined approach

I agree that the €3,590 Tudor looks simpler, but in that sense, it also looks more effortless and more confident. It doesn’t have to throw around features and design quirks to impress. The case is less complex than the C65’s case, and that’s exactly why I like it better. Again, when it comes to the bracelets, I think there’s very little difference between the two. However, I do prefer the female end link on the Tudor as it generally adjusts to the wrist a bit better than the male end link on the Christopher Ward.

As with the case, the Ranger’s dial also looks simpler than the one in the C65. It’s a no-nonsense flat dial with contrasting printing. It’s exactly the kind of configuration you’d expect on a practical tool watch. It’s clean and doesn’t distract you from reading the time. In addition, the red tip on the seconds hand reminds you of the COSC-certified caliber inside and adds a sporty touch.

Both are attainable

As I already said, I truly think you should go for the watch you want to wear, not the one that offers the most value on paper. Yes, there is indeed a substantial price difference between these two. Still, I think that everyone who’s shopping for the C65 could also save up some more money to go for the Ranger. That also gets you a watch with more brand power, and I, unlike Thomas, do think that Tudor has a substantially better aura than Christopher Ward, especially in the eyes of people who don’t know a lot about watches.

In conclusion, the Christopher Ward C65 Dune is a quirky and value-oriented alternative to the Rolex 1016, to stay within Thomas’s comparison. It might make you smile at first, but you’ll also get tired of it much sooner. On the other end, the Tudor Ranger is a more refined, more grown-up alternative that offers more long-term satisfaction on the wrist.

Cast your vote!

All right, there you have it. Thomas and Daan gave it their all. Now it’s time for you to make a decision. Which of these two watches would you get if you had the choice? Make sure to cast your vote, and please share your reasons in the comments below!