New Rolex Explorer 36mm 124270

[Eugenio]

There are several reasons why the new 36mm is the perfect Explorer.

1. Gloss/ lacquered dial.
2. Anti-reflective coating
3. 36mm - Classic size.

Such a well designed watch. So comfortable on wrist.

[Andrews148]

I had my name down for a 39, but I'm so glad that I didn't get the call until after the shift to 36.
I have a 7in wrist and the watch feels great.

[carlmartin]

Another vote for the 36mm. I have bought and sold the 39mm mkII on three occasions since I love the design and how it looks on other peoples wrist. But when looking down on my own wrist the proportions never really worked, too much dial relative to everything else. The 36mm however, while small, is perfection proportion-wise. And it is the original size after all.

[Belugahype]

I have a 6.5 inch wrist and am attached to my 114270. It's the first version of the explorer I saw and fell in love with so I'm quite used to its proportions.

That being said, the 124270 wears much better on a bigger wrist than the 114270. I think they did a fantastic job with the proportions!

[brandrea]

I honestly don’t see a huge difference in the aesthetics between the 39 and 36, to each their own

[Farsh14]

Ehhh, 36 is way too small. Time to keep up with the times and these are the right times (bigger watches but not huge watches either)

[telesquire]

Originally Posted by Farsh14

Ehhh, 36 is way too small. Time to keep up with the times and these are the right times (bigger watches but not huge watches either)

Nonsense.

[duvals101]

Literally the perfect watch. Proportions are unreal, versatile in all situations, great readability, AR is actually useful, timeless yet modern.

Here’s mine on a CB worn in coffee leather band.

[BDII]

Originally Posted by duvals101

Literally the perfect watch. Proportions are unreal, versatile in all situations, great readability, AR is actually useful, timeless yet modern.

Here’s mine on a CB worn in coffee leather band.

I’d love to see a few angles of this thing on a strap… Does the notch end of the case bother you? Does it chew into the strap?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CPZorro]

Originally Posted by brandrea

I honestly don’t see a huge difference in the aesthetics between the 39 and 36, to each their own

Agree. The reality is that Rolex should have offered both options this time around.

[~JJ]

Love the 39mm. Tried on the new 36mm and was pretty surprised by how small and cramped everything appeared. I’ll stick with my old T-Rex ; )

[soho]

Love my 39mm MKII, absolutely nails the sport - dress balance. While I completely disagree that the 36mm is too small, I think it moves things just a tad towards the dress side. That may be what some want.

Also, while I never thought about it before reading someone’s post here, I prefer the Explorer text at the bottom over the top.

But overall to OP I say both are great watches and they aren’t that different, so I can’t imagine that’s it’s worth switching from one to another.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[afmars]

Originally Posted by Mick006

My preference is the 36. The proportions of the 39 seemed off to me.

Agree with this

[Juggernaut]

Originally Posted by Belugahype

I have a 6.5 inch wrist and am attached to my 114270. It's the first version of the explorer I saw and fell in love with so I'm quite used to its proportions.

That being said, the 124270 wears much better on a bigger wrist than the 114270. I think they did a fantastic job with the proportions!

I have mixed feelings for sure.
It's a really tough call for me. I have a similar sized wrist (6-3/4") and did not like the look and "boldness" of the 39mm 214270 Mk2 I had. However, I did like the matte-ish (not fully matte unfortunately, let's say it was "satin") dial and I did like the lower placement of the "EXPLORER" text to bring it in line with their other models in the professional line. I felt neutral about the Easy Link...even with the 3 detent positions, I never found it to be "spot-on" for me; 5 mm was either way too much of a change to make sense.
So with the 124270 they reverted 2 of the things I liked in the 214270, the case is slightly thicker, the bracelet is narrower, with a more aggressive taper and I'm sure the watch has an overall heavier weight. The improvements in the movement won't be that noticeable for me on a day-to-day basis.

For me, the big fault of the 14270 and 114270's was always those un-lumed 3 6 and 9...that always bugged me. Even the 1016 had lumed numbers. So the fully lumed dial is really the main pull for me towards the 124270, is it enough?....meh, I'm still on the fence.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Juggernaut

For me, the big fault of the 14270 and 114270's was always those un-lumed 3 6 and 9...that always bugged me. Even the 1016 had lumed numbers. So the fully lumed dial is really the main pull for me towards the 124270, is it enough?....meh, I'm still on the fence.

When I was trying to decide between the 124270 and 114270, I knew I still preferred the classic 36mm Rolex proportions and lighter weight of the 114270, but I narrowed down what I liked about the new model to three things:

- the 3-6-9 lume
- the easy link (although less necessary on the lighter 114270)
- the AR crystal

Well, I got lucky, and someone installed an AR crystal on my 114270, already, and an Easy Link is only a few hundred bucks away, if I want it, so the lume is the last thing, which isn't enough for me...especially with the potential 32XX movement issues.

[Ksbi]

36mm for me

[173rdabn]

I've had both. I prefer the 36mm.

[Innocenti]

Honestly I would like the 36mm explorer although I think I’d prefer a 36mm white OP

[Undefeatable]

New 36mm for me too. My buddy has one of the new ones and it fits perfect on my 6.5" wrist.

It's all taste though, it's like asking a forum if chocolate or vanilla is better. Some people hate on the 39mm saying its to spread out or whatever, some hate on the 36mm saying its too small or cramped. Whatever answer someone gives you, its 100% their opinion which might not fit with yours. Take every answer with a grain of salt as most people will justify/defend the version they own.

[Jay2101]

Would love to get hands on with the 124270, but I find the 214270 fits quite well on my relatively well on my 17 cm(6.7 in) wrist. Would potentially be a tough decision if I were able to get the 36 mm at the AD.

Tapatalk を使用して私の CPH1943 から送信

[Pius XIII]

I tried on the new 36 mm Explorer on my 7.5 inch wrist and it was laughably small. I would love for them to bring out a 39 or 41 mm version.

[stark1]

My wrist measures 6.75" and I think my 36 explorer fits very well. Given your wrist is smaller, I think 36 will do just fine.

[dmash]

I think 36 is the perfect size for explorer and fills a niche, vintage like hole in the lineup. its situated absolutely perfect.

[dmash]

Originally Posted by duvals101

Literally the perfect watch. Proportions are unreal, versatile in all situations, great readability, AR is actually useful, timeless yet modern.

Here’s mine on a CB worn in coffee leather band.

THIS

So many people don't get that the Explorer is THE Rolex to sport on vintage like brown leather strap. Match made in heaven! Such a great look

[SoylentGreenChi]

Wonderful watch at both 36 and 39. One thing to note is that the 36 Explorer is a tad smaller than the 36 Datejust and the 36 mm OP. I add this because it’s not just a 36 vs 39 debate, but that the 36 Explorer is small compared to other Rolex 36 mm references. I was surprised when I put my new Explorer next to my 36 Datejust. They are both outstanding. Zero complaints.

[Heady Topper]

Originally Posted by SoylentGreenChi

Wonderful watch at both 36 and 39. One thing to note is that the 36 Explorer is a tad smaller than the 36 Datejust and the 36 mm OP. I add this because it’s not just a 36 vs 39 debate, but that the 36 Explorer is small compared to other Rolex 36 mm references. I was surprised when I put my new Explorer next to my 36 Datejust. They are both outstanding. Zero complaints.

That can’t be overstated! The bracelet width makes a noticeable difference.

[SilverFoxUK]

I think the 36 mm makes a nice contrast to the typical 40-42 mm watches that make up the majority of sports watches out there. It makes it stand out in a collection vs sub/GMT etc. I have about the same wrist size as you and I like wearing both 36 mm and 40 mm watches. Being the classic size I would choose 36, as 39 is too similar to everything else.

[taitun4life]

Originally Posted by timeaz

have seen both.
Much prefer the 39.
They should rename the 36 to "explorer 35"... It's way too small.

💯

[Lonehiker]

36mm is my favourite by a significant margin. Perfect proportions.

[marmite2005]

36 gets the vote from me

Sent from my AC2003 using Tapatalk