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, please review Parts 1, 2 and 3 of this series - if you have yet to do so;

Number Two

Tudor Oyster Prince Ranger 7995/0 Mark II

This is where things get incredibly exciting for me. We’re getting into no-compromise territory. Should either of my top two featured in this series see a release, I would not have to feel any sense of settling.

More than any of the other options discussed here, I believe option number two has the best chance of being brought to life. What’s more, it represents the greatest opportunity for the brand in question. That brand being Tudor. Before I explain why such a great opportunity exists for Rolex’s younger sibling, let’s hash out the details of the watch that takes the number two spot on my grail wish list.

There are a lot of beautiful watches to lust after. However, I’ve only ever seen two watches that made me feel that if I owned one of them, I wouldn’t want for any other watch in my collection. Those two watches are the Rolex Explorer 1016 and the Tudor Oyster Prince Ranger 7995/0. Today, both the Explorer and Ranger models exist in their respective brand’s collection. However, the current in-production generation of these models are not faithful to their ancestors. They are close enough in design to their predecessors to be recognized as such, but are far enough off that those who adore the originals (and nearly everyone does) won’t be fulfilled by their existence.

Both Rolex and Tudor (and many other watch brands for that matter) need to come to the realization that every once and awhile, the stars align and a watch design is conceived that can never again be improved upon, and any deviation from that design or futile attempt at besting it can only diminish and disturb its unique and inexplicable harmony. Such is the case with both the Explorer (1016) and Ranger (7995/0).

I submit for your approval, the Tudor Oyster Prince Ranger 7995/0 Mark II – a near total reissue of 1967’s 7995/0. Just the thought of this gives me chills. So, what makes the Mark II the Mark II? Well, almost everything that made the 7995/0 what it was.

Frankly, if the Mark II I dream of existed and you were holding it in your hand, one of few hints you’d have to conclude that it was indeed the Mark II, as opposed to the 1967 version, would be the absence of wear and tear on the piece. That’s how similar it would be. One of the only significant deviations from the original would not even be visible to the eye – unless you opened the case up.

Instead of using the same movement as the vintage 7995/0 (ETA Calibre 2483), the Mark II would (should) use Tudor’s in-house Manufacture Calibre MT5402. The 2483 and MT5402 are nearly the same diameter, so the newer in-house movement would be compatible with the Mark II’s case size.

Speaking of case size, the original 7995/0 had a 34mm case, instead of the typical 36mm size of an Explorer-esque watch. I think that’s an intriguing size for the Mark II, and would be to my liking. However, I want this watch to be released and I want it to be a success. So, in the spirit of appealing to the vintage Explorer enthusiast market, Tudor should up the case size to 36mm. It’s beyond me what they were thinking when they expanded the case size to 41mm in the current Heritage Ranger (Reference 79910). That’s way too big. No Ranger variant should be larger than 36mm.

Regarding the dial – the lumed areas (hour markers, Arabic numerals and inlays on the steel handset) should be colourized in a custard faux patina style. The vintage 7995/0’s lume paint was originally white, but turned a mustardy hue over time because of its tritium composition. To be wholly faithful to the original (as it was retailed), the Mark II’s lume paint would have to be white. However, that colour of patinated tritium is just too rich and beguiling to resist. Which reminds me, this is definitely a foregone conclusion but I’ll put it on the record anyway – the Mark II will not have tritium lume (nudge, nudge – it should be Chromalight). Since the lume will be comprised of a more modern substance, the “T’s” enclosing the word “Swiss” just below the 6 o’clock numeral should be removed. As for all other text and branding on the dial, it should remain exactly the same. And, when I say exactly, I mean to a T (wink, wink – except for the tritium “T’s”). Tudor should make sure the exact gothic font is used for the brand printing and the “rose in relief” logo should be a carbon copy of the one found on the vintage 7995/0. I’m not sure what they were going for with the rose logo found on the modern Heritage Ranger, but it’s definitely not a faithful reproduction.

While we’re talking logos, Tudor should refrain from placing the shield logo anywhere on the Mark II’s dial. However, it should be placed on the crown, replacing Rolex’s coronet. The original 7995/0 was released during a time when Tudor, as a brand, was almost an afterthought – fitted with hand-me-downs from Rolex’s bits and bobs bins. This isn’t the case anymore. Tudor will always be inextricably linked to Rolex, but the brand has forged its own successful path and can now stand on its own two feet.

Omega Speedmaster Professional Moonwatch

Tudor should strongly consider offering the Mark II with a domed acrylic crystal – just as the original 7995/0 was. Would they catch some criticism for producing a watch that doesn’t have a sapphire crystal? Sure, they would. However, just because some wouldn’t appreciate acrylic versus sapphire, doesn’t mean there can’t be a success case for the former. Just look at the hesalite version of the Omega Speedmaster Professional. A large portion of Speedy consumers consciously choose the hesalite over the sapphire version, specifically because it’s more faithful to the original Moonwatch. Could the same logic apply to the Mark II? I don’t see why not.

The final touch is the clasp. As with the other options described thus far, the Mark II should be fitted with a GlideLock-esque micro-extender. These Explorer style watches have the look of being able to do it all (whether thrust into rigorous or refined environments). The Mark II should be equipped with the hardware that ensures it can conquer both, not only in form but also in function.

Whatever elements I didn’t mention, it’s because they shouldn’t deviate in any way from the original. That means the Mark II’s case shape, handset and bracelet should be identical to the vintage 7995/0. Tudor’s current Heritage Ranger misses the mark on every one of these counts. The case gives way to the dial far too much, that red second hand is jarring and the bracelet seems like some sort of aftermarket oyster knock-off (sans endlinks). When a brand reissues one of their beloved models, I applaud them because their heart is in the right place and they are moving in an appealing direction. However, it takes a lot of gumption to do a reissue right. Reason being, people need to park their ego and that’s easier said than done. Sometimes, leaving your mark doesn’t mean making changes – but instead facilitating a resurrection.

Now that I’ve detailed the specifications of the Oyster Prince Ranger 7995/0 Mark II, it’s time to offer up the reasons why, as I suggested earlier, such a great opportunity to deliver on this piece exists for Tudor.

Reason #1: “Born to Dare”

Tudor’s slogan doesn’t just represent their brand identity – it hints at the purpose of the brand’s very existence. Translated, “Born to Dare” means “created to do what Rolex cannot (or will not) do”. Such as, faithfully reissuing a beloved design. It may not seem daring to identically replicate what once was. However, in the current watch industry climate, next to no one is making the case that such a move would be commonplace. What’s sad about this reality is that watch brands are actively ignoring market demand. The vintage watch market has never been so healthy. I’d say that’s pretty good evidence for gauging the watch community’s appetite for bygone models and designs. So, while watch enthusiasts happily hand their cash over to reputable vintage dealers, brand houses that bear the same name as those found on the various tropical dials purchased on the pre-owned market don’t profit a cent and continue to attempt creating demand instead of responding to it. Tudor, your slogan says it all. Live up to it and be courageous enough to produce what your customers want.

Reason #2: The Black Bay P01 (Reference 70150)

I have to come clean. When Tudor reps were barricading themselves inside their ramparts after releasing the Black Bay P01 at the last Baselworld, I was among the pitchfork wielding mob calling for blood outside their gates. I wasn’t leading the charge, but I was certainly following the crowd’s seemingly unanimous mania. In retrospect, I think we all would have benefited from a deep breath and a self-imposed time out. Having the advantage of time to reflect on the P01 release, strange though it may remain, it emboldens my belief that Tudor is showing signs that it will indeed live up to its slogan. Even if you have nothing good to say about Tudor’s Baselworld 2019 premiere release, you at least have to admit that it’s a daring concept. So absurd a design does the P01 offer, I am forced to conclude that Tudor must have known the risk they were taking. There was no chance for in between. The market was either going to love it or loathe it. Seeing that kind of gamble through takes guts. The kind of constitution that may be necessary for parking your ego and placating your target audience’s demand. That kind of backbone could be just the right recipe for seeing a watch like the 7995/0 Mark II lit up in AD showcases.

A final lesson regarding the P01, from which I hope Tudor learned. During the lead up to the Baselworld that would see this model’s release, Tudor (who does a great job of staying active on social media platforms) was teasing that something big was coming. In one of these “teasing” posts (via their Instagram), Tudor gave a hint by sharing a macro photo of a triangle marker. Unfortunately, there’s no way Tudor fans could have known (even slightly) what was coming. Even more unfortunate for Tudor, those fans interpreted that sneak-peak to be the triangle marker design that would soon be found at the 6, 9 and 12 o’clock positions of an imminent Submariner 76100 reissue – a revival that has been called upon for quite some time. It goes without saying, Tudor enthusiasts were primed for severe insult to injury. And, as the saying goes, the rest is history. The reason I’m recounting this story? I suspect Tudor learned a very important marketing lesson the hard way. Hinting at something is all fun and games, until it’s not. If you’re going to try to influence your target market a certain way, you better make sure they conclude what you want them to. Otherwise, you’re motivating them to want something you can’t deliver on – which sours people.

*Screen capture of Tudor’s January 20th Instagram post ahead of Baselworld 2019.*

Reason #3: Hinting at It

Speaking of hinting at something – Tudor has, over the last two years, been sharing photos of a well-preserved Oyster Prince Ranger 7995/0. You might say, “this could be nothing more than heritage appreciation posts”, but that’s not an explanation I can accept. Since the modern Heritage Ranger is not a convincing representation of its ancestor and has not been well-received, most won’t be able to look at these posts of the vintage version and appreciate the evolution that brought us the current iteration. I know I can’t. My hope is that these aren’t heritage appreciation posts, since that wouldn’t really make sense. My hope is that they are indeed hints of a faithful reissue. Intermittently trickling out these portraits of this beautiful relic have allowed Tudor, and its decision-makers, to test the market in a vacuum. If you go to Tudor’s Instagram feed and scroll through their gallery to find the few images they have posted of the vintage 7995/0, in reviewing the many comments attached to each of these photos, you’ll get a pretty clear sense of what watch enthusiasts think of this model. Let’s just say it’s an unanimously different reaction than what the P01 was subject to.

*Screen capture of Tudor’s October 21st Instagram post showcasing the vintage 7995/0.*

Reason #4: Case Studies

There are a few brands that have brought to market the exact watch their target audience demanded. The two examples I’d like to highlight here are Hamilton’s Khaki Field Murph Auto and Breitling’s Navitimer Ref. 806 1959 Re-Edition. There are many models from different brands that I could have used as case studies for successful response to demand. However, these two interest me because each was demanded in a different way. The Murph was Hamilton’s response to the specific demand for that exact watch, while Breitling’s 1959 Re-Edition was a response to a general trending of the market demand toward vintage. Both scenarios deserve praise. But I believe the release of the Murph should earn Hamilton a standing ovation from the watch community for the precedent it sets. I’m not a fan of the Murph particularly (for what it is, it’s too large for my taste), but that’s beside the point. Hamilton deserves applause because their target market begged and pleaded for this model to be produced for years following the release of the movie Interstellar (which it was featured in), and they finally did. What’s more, they didn’t release an interpretation of the watch or an “inspired-by” version – they produced the exact same Murph that was seen in the film. Precisely what consumers were asking for. By releasing this watch, Hamilton proved they value their customers’ wants over their brand’s ego. We need more of this in the watch industry. As for the Navitimer 1959 Re-Edition, good on Breitling for taking action to intercept monies that would otherwise be earmarked for the pre-owned market. This is vintage reissue done right. Breitling seems to understand that when you’re reproducing a legend, you don’t tinker. It’s just too bad this model is limited, because it’s a beauty. For my grail 7995/0 Mark II to be released, Tudor will have to channel both Hamilton and Breitling, as they will need to understand the importance of responding to specific asks and respecting the vintage designs that influence demand. If they are able to embody these ideals, as Hamilton and Breitling have proven, there is success in it.

Reason #5: The Market is Primed

Tudor Black Bay Fifty-Eight (Reference 79030N)

“Ding-dong, the witch is dead.” The spell has been broken – the days when bigger meant better are over. Gradually, market demand is turning in favour of watches that offer a more classic and tasteful wrist presence. Nearly every watch brand is offering models that are sub-40mm – and, lo and behold, these smaller models are seeing success. These days, it’s not uncommon to hear a watch influencer or enthusiast say, “if only it were a little smaller”. After design, diameter and lug to lug measurements are becoming make or break features. In keeping with modest sizing, the vintage aesthetic has become the people’s choice. As mentioned earlier in this article, the pre-owned vintage market boom gives undeniable credence to the notion that buyers want timeless timepieces. I’d like to put it on the record at this point that I don’t believe for a second that Tudor isn’t already totally cognizant of the revelations regarding diminutive sizing and old-fashioned design. If they weren’t aware of these shifts in market demand, the Black Bay Fifty-Eight wouldn’t exist. A 39mm diver with very vintage styling – the BB58 was not a slow burn success. It essentially out-and-out won Baselworld 2018 for Tudor (and, don’t kid yourself – there are winners of the show). To this day, it can still be difficult to get your hands on one with a steel bracelet. Tudor had to have known something of what I have been discussing to prompt releasing such a piece and I’ll hasten a guess that whatever their convictions were in producing the Fifty-Eight, they were more than validated and encouraged by the watch’s overwhelming (and all but unanimous) approval from the masses. This experience paired with their consumer base’s consistent urging to reissue a faithful version of their vintage Submariner (Reference 76100) should embolden the brand to confidently bring back to life some of the most beautiful watches ever made – including my Mark II. Oh, and without question, after you’ve released my grail (preferably at Baselworld 2020), win the show back-to-back by appeasing the Tudor Sub fans in 2021. Tudor’s most recent big splash was a diver (in the 58). It’s time to mix it up before releasing another dive-focused model. What I have suggested in the 7995/0 Mark II is a perfect next addition to their offering.

Reason #6: One Trick Pony

The Black Bay line is nothing short of amazing. The prevailing design language across the models found within the Black Bay family has certainly struck a chord in the watch community. Plus, the line single-handedly resurrected the Tudor brand. Unfortunately, Tudor’s other lines aren’t really pulling their weight. The Pelagos line is well-loved but certainly not even close to as commercially successful as the BBs. So, when you boil it down, Tudor is really just the Black Bay line. I mean - even their GMT (Reference 79830RB) is part of the Black Bay family… Why is an aviation style watch included in a dive watch line? Quite confusing. If you’re a decision-maker at Tudor, the fact the brand is leaning so heavily on one line should keep you up at night. While some believe there are enough Black Bays currently available, I have no issue with Tudor continuing to release new models. Why should we discourage them when the line has only improved and become more interesting over time? Keep pushing the Black Bay line, but breathe new life into your other lines so you aren’t eventually seen as a one trick pony. Don’t rest on your laurels. Give watch enthusiasts something to talk about, outside of the Black Bay line. My suggestion would, of course, be to look toward the Ranger line prior to any other. The 7995/0 Mark II is an absolutely perfect model to refresh the Ranger line. A compelling Ranger model would complement the Black Bay line in all the right ways, without being something so niche that it would not find comparable market success. The Black Bay and Pelagos lines offer pure tool watches – purpose built. While the Mark II is still a capable sports watch, its smaller size and under-the-radar features allow it to assume dressier roles the other lines cannot. That versatility would make a faithful Ranger reissue a steadfast companion to the variety of Black Bays.

I’ve gone into great detail, providing a blueprint for what the Oyster Prince Ranger 7995/0 Mark II should be and key reasons why Tudor has an opportunity (unique to them and them alone) to produce a watch (my grail watch) that will both further advance their influential position in the industry and be a tremendous commercial success. For my part, all that’s left to do is suggest the price and provide a roadmap recap (as I have for each grail option in this series), and continue to hope and dream that Tudor will see this for the no-brainer that it is.

What will this watch cost? $4250 CAD (approximately $3200 USD).

**Recapping the Roadmap for the Tudor Oyster Prince Ranger 7995/0 Mark II:**

Replicate nearly every detail of the original Tudor Oyster Prince Ranger 7995/0, except;
Strip the innards of its ETA Calibre 2483 and institute Tudor’s Calibre MT5402,
Take the original case size from 34mm to a more palatable and familiar 36mm,
Mimic the custard colour of fully patinated lume on the handset, numerals and markers,
Remove the tritium “T” markers from the dial, as the lume material will be Chromalight,
Replace the Rolex coronet on the crown with a Tudor shield, and
Swap out the vintage style clasp for a GlideLock-esque system.

Tudor – please – do not deviate from this blueprint. The changes that have been suggested above allow a legend to step out from behind the sands of time and, while becoming sufficiently modern, remain true to itself.

To read the final part in this series, please click here.