Comments on: Longines HydroConquest Review: 41mm Automatic Model

By: William McCutcheon

William McCutcheon — Sat, 05 Aug 2023 17:46:29 +0000

I have had Rolex’s and now prefer to have a collection of watches that do not break the bank. I have a Tudor Pelagos, a couple of TAG formula one and a Baum & Mercier. By far my two favorites are the Pelagos and the HydroConquest. But I have to say the Hydro definitely the best looking of them all, and very comfortable.

By: John Raba

John Raba — Fri, 04 Aug 2023 15:14:36 +0000

One final comment. The Longines fit and finish is the equal of the Tudor. The style is different. The quality is not. Also, the Tudor movement is in house so to speak. It is not, however, more accurate or more durable. The L888.2 movement used by Longines is actually in house as well. It is made exclusively for Longines by the company that owns Longines, the swatch group. It also has a free spring balance like the Tudor. The Longines retails for about $1,700 now. The Tudor retails for about $3,950. The power reserve of both is very close. The Longines beats the Tudor in water resistance by 100 feet. (300 vs. 200 meters) With the Tudor you get a watch that wants to be a Rolex, but is not. The Longines name has been around for much longer than Tudor. Tudor was always positioned as a poor man’s Rolex. In closing, the Longines price point is artificially suppressed so as to not compete with Omega. The price point of the Tudor is artificially enhanced because it is made by Rolex. The real question is what do you really get for the extra $2,250? The answer is nothing that significantly affects the quality or durability of your purchase.

By: John Raba

John Raba — Fri, 07 Jul 2023 14:45:34 +0000

In reply to Kevin. The lug width should not in any way turn anyone off. You can get 21 mm lug width straps all over the place. Longines sells them as well. You can find 23 mm lug width straps all over the place as well. This is clearly not any kind of rational issue.

By: Nick

Nick — Mon, 03 Jul 2023 21:11:39 +0000

In reply to Mike. It most certainly is chunky. I tried one on in the dealers. It looked fantastic but my goodness the thickness looks odd.

By: SVBeta

SVBeta — Sun, 29 Jan 2023 03:15:27 +0000

Great review, and i have the 39mm Hydro and got in on a rubber strap, just bought in November and it is my rugged outdoorwatch that already feels light and goes well under all my hiking clothes and goves. I just purchased a Horus strap for my biking summers so will see how it works and feels (lighter strap) with the Hydro.

By: Dazed

Dazed — Mon, 19 Dec 2022 14:06:40 +0000

Great watch, and brand. Maybe more popular in Europe than in the US? I have the older one with the aluminum bezel insert. In 41. I’ve been wanting to check out the upgraded “ceramic” one in 43mm though. Compensating? What a d!ck comment! 😉 Not everyone has a schoolgirl wrist. 😉 But of course, og you ever need to do the Pulp Fiction thing or something, a smaller watch might be preferable. 😉

By: Mike

Mike — Sun, 25 Sep 2022 14:10:31 +0000

Great watch, noticeable buy not chunky. I don’t feel like I’m wearing pressure gauges from the Titanic around my wrist.

By: Adrian Thomas

Adrian Thomas — Wed, 15 Jun 2022 09:38:45 +0000

“In a world where Instagram tells us we need to change the strap every week for a new photo”

Maybe not listen to Instagram for a change?

By: Kevin

Kevin — Sun, 12 Jun 2022 14:11:55 +0000

I was seriously thinking of the ceramic hydroconquest at 41mm. Really like the look, something different. But as you point out, lug width by committee of 21 mm completely turned me off. If you stick with the bracelet it isn’t an issue, but to me these sorts of decisions are just plain stupid (and possibly arrogant). Already have a watch with 23mm lug width and it’s a PITA finding straps (24mm usually squeezes in, but not leather and some rubbers). So I bought a Steinhart ocean one GMT Coke Ceramic 42mm (with a 22mm lug width) at about third the price, happy with the decision and teally like the watch.

By: John

John — Fri, 18 Feb 2022 01:23:36 +0000

A great review of this new model. I had the previous one and I have to say I was underwhelmed in all of the areas that the revised model improves on. The old model had aluminium bezel, terrible lume and a junk clasp, but the movement “feel” and case finishing were superb. Sounds like Longines listened to their customers. I actually did the opposite to you and sold mine for the mk2 Christopher Ward C60, which I have now sold for the mk3 version. I would say the finishing on the CW has caught up or even overtaken the HC, but the HC gives the option to those who want a heritage brand in this price range that they can view in store. I guess Oris may do this too.