If you’d like to skip the details to review a summary list of what makes this option a potential candidate for my grail watch, scroll to the bottom of this part.

Prior to reading this submission, make sure you’ve checked out Part 1 (which provides the series ground rules).

Number Four

Tudor Heritage Black Bay 36 Remastered

The current version of the Tudor Heritage Black Bay 36 (Reference 79500) is quite a tempting piece for those of us on the hunt for something in the 1016 ballpark. It has a 36mm diameter case – check. Lug to lug, it’s 44mm – check. The BB36 is 10.5mm thick – check. Just like an Explorer, it has a smooth bezel with no markings – check. Featuring a screw-down crown, it has 150m of water resistance – check. It is, of course, a three-hander without a date complication – check. Its oyster style bracelet tapers from 19mm to 16mm – check.

As it is, the BB36 already hits the mark on quite a few of the features needed to form my grail. It doesn’t tick all the boxes. However, it’s close enough that Tudor has a unique opportunity to capitalize on – should they so choose.

I propose the Tudor Heritage Black Bay 36 Remastered. Of the options described in this series, this imagined timepiece is my / Tudor’s minimum viable product. The 36 Remastered would retain its 36mm case and 44mm lug to lug measurement, but the watch’s thickness would expand to 12mm with the inclusion of a domed crystal.

As mentioned in the ground rules established in Part 1, my preference is acrylic. In my mind, the way it refracts the elements of a dial and the visual access it provides far outweigh its penchant for picking up faint scratches easier than sapphire. However, my goal in this series is to walk a fine line between what I want and what could resemble a blueprint for success for the referred to brand. After all, I really would like to see one of these suggested options released imminently (preferably during Baselworld 2020).

So, in keeping with that “fine line”, if the crystal had to be sapphire to appease the market, Tudor (and everyone else) should take lessons from Oris when it comes to implementing a domed sapphire crystal. I previously owned an Oris Divers Sixty-Five and let me tell you, in my mind, no one does domed sapphire better than Oris. I don’t know how they achieve it but the sapphire on the Sixty-Five has a very pronounced bulb effect without even the slightest appearance of the typical milky ring you tend to find on domed sapphires. I don’t think there’s anything I despise more in the watch world than that milky ring effect. Without fail, every single watch I have seen with this affliction immediately falls out of favour for me – regardless of whatever other appealing features it may have. That ring completely breaks up the design of a watch and traps the eye within the dial. The design of a watch’s dial and crystal should allow the wearer’s eye to spill out onto the bezel, and flow down the lugs and along the bracelet. But, that damn milky ring acts as a barrier and separates the dial from the rest of the watch. If you can’t tell, it drives me up the wall – but that’s enough ranting.

Bottomline, the 36 Remastered would have a domed sapphire crystal (with anti-reflective coating), and Tudor would make sure to figure out what Oris has been doing to curtail the scourge of the milky ring.

As for the Remastered’s case features, the unmarked bezel is perfect as is but the sides of the case should be slightly reimagined to make them less slab-like. Take a page out of Timesfactors’ Smiths Everest’s book. There’s a smooth and gradual curve to the Everest’s case sides that gives it a vintage flair, allows the watch to sit flush with the wrist and adds a higher level of comfort for the wearer. From my perspective, it just looks better.

When it comes to the crown, I’m not terribly picky about the size. Although, I’m aware that some find the “big crown” too big on the BB36. So, maybe a reduction in size would be in order. The change that I would insist on seeing, with regard to the crown, is the colour of the crown tube. In its current iteration, it’s black. For the 36 Remastered, it should be given the steel treatment – much like the Black Bay Fifty-Eight (Reference 79030N).

The BB36’s existing bracelet will do the trick, but the clasp should be replaced with one that is Rolex GlideLock-esque. What makes the Explorer design concept so perfect is that it is both an elegant and adventurous watch at once. In order for a piece to successfully transition between the two, it needs to be able to compensate (on the fly) in the event of wrist swelling. There’s no better clasp for this purpose than the GlideLock design. A watch of the calibre I am suggesting needs to be comfortable. Slapping a micro-adjustable clasp (that doesn’t need tools) on the Remastered will ensure the watch is a treat to wear – whether trekking through a humid, lush forest or tucked beneath a French cuff at a gala event.

Now – the movement. I’m not a cogs and wheels aficionado. I am interested in the inner workings of a watch in so far as I respect the engineering and craftsmanship. And, being a watch enthusiast, I accept that movements are an important part of the conversation. However, my interest in timepieces is skin-deep. When I look at my wrist to admire the watch I am wearing, I don’t see the innards (and no, I don’t own any skeletonized watches). So, decoration and finishing of a movement don’t rank high on my wish list. That said, what does matter to me, regarding movements, is that I can trust them to keep my watch ticking – even in harsh conditions. So, what should the Remastered’s movement be? I recommend that Tudor swap out the BB36’s ETA Calibre 2824-2 for their in-house Manufacture Calibre MT5402. These two movements are a similar size (the 2824-2 is 25.6mm in diameter while the MT5402 is 26mm), so there should be no issue regarding compatibility. What makes the MT5402 a great candidate is that it checks all my boxes and then some. It’s a self-winding, COSC-certified workhorse with a beastly 70-hour power reserve. I have experience with this movement in my BB58. Plain and simple – it’s awesome.

That fantastic movement will be pushing three hands. Speaking of which, what should the handset be? Definitely not the snowflake variety. I’m not in the camp of snowflake haters. Actually, I like them quite a bit on the Fifty-Eight. However, they would be out of place on the 36 Remastered. My recommendation – the handset from the 1967 Tudor Oyster Prince Ranger 7995/0. I’m in love with the pairing of the arrowhead hour hand, sharp baton minute hand and block syringe second hand. All should be steel, filled with white or faux patina lume. When I look at photos of the vintage Ranger, I’m always a little perplexed by the block syringe second hand. I’m usually partial to a lollipop instead of something so cornered, angular and jagged. However, there is something about it that works. It’s intriguingly foreign and adds just the right amount of quirkiness to the watch. And that arrowhead hour hand – I can’t adequately express how perfect I think it is. The vintage Ranger’s handset is a masterpiece and would go a long way in making the 36 Remastered a viable option in my grail-laden dreams.

Those gorgeous hands will need to sweep across a matte black dial. There shouldn’t be any reflective properties in the dial. It should be ash-like. The BB36’s current dial, while nice, won’t cut it. The Remastered’s dial needs to be a flatter black. Something like the colour found on the gritty, lustreless black dial of the Tudor Pelagos (Reference 25600TN) would work well, I believe. As for the printing on the dial, the BB36’s current logo and script can remain as is.

Last, but not least, the indices and hour markers. To begin, the existing indices running along the edge of the dial and the inverted triangle marker at 12 o’clock can stay. However, they should match whatever colour the other hour markers are (whether white or custard). The circular hour markers should be replaced with rectangular markers, much like the existing markers at the 3, 6 and 9 o’clock positions (only with their size diminished slightly). As for the rectangular markers at 3, 6 and 9 – they should be replaced with explorer-style rounded Arabic numerals. Fortunately, this type of numerals already exists in Tudor’s inventory. The Black Bay Bronze (Reference 79250BA) features numerals that will fit the bill well. All that will need to be done is to size them accordingly to ensure balance on the smaller dial, and match them up to the white or faux patina colour scheme of the other markers and hands.

And, voila – there you have my minimum viable grail, coming in at number four. The Tudor Heritage Black Bay 36 Remastered.

Price? $3800 CAD (approximately $2900 USD).

**Recapping the Roadmap for the Tudor Heritage Black Bay 36 Remastered:**

Take a Tudor Heritage Black Bay 36.
Replace its flat crystal with a domed sapphire (free of the milky white ring).
Introduce slightly rounded case sides.
Reduce the crown size and change the tube colour from black to steel.
Add a GlideLock-like clasp to the bracelet.
Swap out the movement for Tudor’s in-house Manufacture Calibre MT5402.
Substitute the snowflake hands for the vintage Ranger all-steel arrowhead set.
Subdue the reflective dial, making it completely matte flat black.
Place rectangular hour markers where the circular plots currently are.
Steal the Arabic numerals from the Tudor Black Bay Bronze and size them accordingly.

While this watch represents the bare minimum imagining of what my grail watch could be, I wholeheartedly believe, with the mentioned tweaks and additions, this would be a stone-cold killer of a watch. I have no doubt this would be well-received by the watch community and an immediate success for Tudor.

To continue on to Part 3 in this series, click here.