ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
15 July 2010, 03:45 AM | #31 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Real Name: Mikey Uí Néill
Location: Olden Texas
Watch: 14060M & 16570
Posts: 1,941
|
Owning both, I will tell you if I had to choose one I'd choose the II.
|
15 July 2010, 03:56 AM | #32 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Real Name: Mark
Location: United Kingdom
Watch: 16610 & 116710LN
Posts: 559
|
If you buy a Submariner you will want an Explorer BUT if you buy and Explorer you will want a Submariner! Either way you will end up wanting both - I should know as I do! lol
Seriously though why not try both on and see which takes your fancy the most? For me it was the Submariner, a classic watch and an ideal starting point! M |
15 July 2010, 04:03 AM | #33 |
Fondly Remembered
Join Date: May 2005
Real Name: JJ
Location: Auckland, NZ
Watch: ALL SOLD!!
Posts: 74,320
|
First Rolex? The Sub 16610 - no substitute, end of story.
Good luck - JJ
__________________
Words fail me in expressing my utmost thanks to ALL of you for this wonderful support during my hour of need!! I firmly believe that my time on planet earth is NOT yet up!! I shall fight this to the very end.......and WIN!! |
15 July 2010, 04:47 AM | #34 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Real Name: Scott
Location: Indiana
Watch: Sub & Explorer II
Posts: 119
|
I'm a big sub fan, but from the post on TRF the explorer II has more durability. As for a good place to buy, Bernard watch co. has always taken care of me. I've read alot of post about sellers on this forum that sound trustworthy also. I'm a firm believer in local AD's estate pieces. My AD overhauls every preowned piece. Sometimes you can barter with them on the price. My AD always takes care of me with nice discounts.
|
15 July 2010, 04:53 AM | #35 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Real Name: Mikey Uí Néill
Location: Olden Texas
Watch: 14060M & 16570
Posts: 1,941
|
By the way Welcome to the Forum! Where you at in Texas? I bought both mine used from a great supplier, PM me and I'll give you the details.
|
15 July 2010, 05:01 AM | #36 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Real Name: Dean
Location: Redondo Beach, CA
Watch: ing TRF All Day
Posts: 2,105
|
I agree, 16610 all the way for your (and mine) first Rolex!
__________________
Member Number 34171 "Remember: No matter where you go... there you are." Buckroo Banzai _________________________________________ |
15 July 2010, 07:05 AM | #37 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 192
|
Exp II is my 1st Rolex ... I was in the same boat as you
|
15 July 2010, 07:20 AM | #38 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 276
|
I was also in a similar dilemma. The ND Sub for me--
1. don't need the second time zone 2. the rotating bezel is quite useful 3. without the cyclops, it is even more low profile than the Exp II 4. it's THE classic Rolex sport watch IMO and the dial symmetry/simplicity is bar none I even have gotten used to not having the date. I just make an effort to remember it--+ another pt for keeping up your mental acuity. That being said, you can't go wrong with either. The Exp II is a great watch. |
15 July 2010, 08:17 AM | #39 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Europe
Posts: 603
|
Johnny you need to try them on and see how they look from a distance, say a metre or two. Sometimes watches look very different when worn than when you look at them in pictures etc. Just my piece of advice. The Exp II for instance will probably look smaller on your wrist than the Sub although they're almost precisely the same size.
|
15 July 2010, 04:28 PM | #40 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2007
Location: California
Posts: 66
|
The explorer doesn't look that good. The sub is the king of the Rolex line. So you know what to do, right?
|
16 July 2010, 01:29 AM | #41 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: Jeff
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 39
|
I think you will regret not getting the sub more than the Exp II. The 16610 is will become a classic know that they are no longer in production. The Exp will likely run for a few more years. As soon as the sub hits your wrist you be on the hunt for the Exp II. I think the white dial is a really unique piece that wears very different (more dressy) to the rest of the black dial sports models. For your first go with the Sub. It's everywhere, but there is a good reason for it.
|
16 July 2010, 02:21 AM | #42 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: honolulu
Watch: whatever runs
Posts: 551
|
have you tried both on? after a short while, you'll notice that the exp2 is more comfortable.
really, it comes down to whether or not you want a rotating bezel. |
16 July 2010, 02:36 AM | #43 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Real Name: Tony
Location: Ontario, Canada
Watch: 16610
Posts: 3,290
|
If you want ruggedness, then go for the Explorer, due to the solid bezzel !! But personally you can't go wrong with the Sub, very rugged and all around classic. The sub has the rotating bezel which may be an issue depending really on how rugged you get !!
|
16 July 2010, 03:08 AM | #44 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Real Name: Mikey Uí Néill
Location: Olden Texas
Watch: 14060M & 16570
Posts: 1,941
|
|
16 July 2010, 03:56 AM | #45 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Real Name: Jeff
Location: Kansas City, MO
Watch: Daytona & Sub Date
Posts: 256
|
i own both. had the explorer ii first. i would say get the sub first and hold off on the explorer ii until the new one comes out in 2011 (hopefully).
__________________
Johnny Bench called SS Daytona w/ White Dial (116520) SS Submariner Date (116610LN) |
16 July 2010, 09:24 AM | #46 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: California
Posts: 148
|
I have had both. E2 hands down.
|
16 July 2010, 09:43 AM | #47 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2009
Real Name: Brandon
Location: Toronto, ON
Watch: 116234
Posts: 4,141
|
I really like the explorer II it's a little more 'unique' - the white dial is absolutely pristine but black looks great too!
__________________
116234 - Blue Concentric Dial - Fluted Bezel - Oyster Bracelet |
17 December 2013, 04:48 AM | #48 |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 373
|
I would go with the Explorer II. My hairdresser wears a submariner, so does my apartment manager. Too many ordinary people wear it… you get the point….
|
17 December 2013, 06:41 AM | #49 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Real Name: Neil
Location: UK
Watch: ing ships roll in
Posts: 59,225
|
No I would get the sub and a time machine.
|
17 December 2013, 08:16 AM | #50 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Real Name: Kenny
Location: northern ireland
Watch: SDs, Subs & GMTs
Posts: 5,127
|
You cannot go wrong with either the Sub or Explorer. Whilst the Sub naturally holds the edge in water, the Explorer leads on land. It is a very well built, functional watch that is 'low on maintenance', and let's face it, waterproof to well beyond anything most of us will ever need - the 4 metre pool? Go with your gut feeling, or failing that, pick up both! Good luck!
|
17 December 2013, 09:00 AM | #51 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Indianapolis
Watch: Patek-Philippe
Posts: 16,832
|
Either works but for me it would be the SubC.
__________________
Rolex and Patek Philippe |
17 December 2013, 09:03 AM | #52 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Real Name: Tom
Location: Long Island NY
Watch: me sell games
Posts: 1,898
|
thread from 2010.... LoL he most likely made his choice.
|
17 December 2013, 09:06 AM | #53 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Real Name: gus
Location: East Coast
Watch: APK & sometimes Y
Posts: 25,995
|
Even in 2013... Still My two favorites, either could easily be my one & only.
__________________
|
14 February 2018, 02:59 AM | #54 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: New York
Watch: Rolex 116610ln
Posts: 5
|
And I have a subc and am considering trading for the 216570 explorer 2 polar. Not an easy decision. I guess there's no right or wrong answer.
|
14 February 2018, 03:19 AM | #55 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Oregon
Posts: 5,150
|
Zombie thread. Should have stayed dead.
|
14 February 2018, 03:35 AM | #56 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 469
|
IMO, it's a Sub all day long. I haven't heard the Sub bezel is fragile in the least. That watch is the icon of icons for a reason. I was anti-Sub guy for years because "everyone has one" until I tried one on and my response was, "Oh. Now I get it." Keep in mind that the Exp II bezel scratches very easily. I seriously considered one until I read that. I also recommend a ceramic bezel. They're incredible.
__________________
Rolex 116610LN, Rolex 116710BLNR, Rolex 116610LV, Rolex 126600, Panerai PAM01320, Omega Planet Ocean 232.90.42.21.03.001, Omega Speedmaster Professional 311.30.42.30.01.005, Omega Seamaster 300M 2531.80.00, Tudor Pelagos LHD 25610TNL, Seiko SBDC007, Casio G-Shock GSTS130BC-1A |
14 February 2018, 04:29 AM | #57 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 1,115
|
I've had the EXII and while its a great value for the money in terms of what you get....BUT I don't think it scratches 'the itch' quite like the Sub can and does. I'd go Sub than if you still want a GMT feature consider the EXII later. YMMV
|
14 February 2018, 04:33 AM | #58 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2017
Real Name: Ken
Location: Europa
Watch: 216570
Posts: 693
|
It hard to kill the undead though.
__________________
"My center is yielding, my right is retreating. Excellent situation, I am attacking" Ferdinand Foch |
14 February 2018, 04:44 AM | #59 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Oregon
Posts: 5,150
|
Ain't that the truth.
|
14 February 2018, 04:53 AM | #60 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Denver
Watch: This and that...
Posts: 1,640
|
As your first Rolex, go with the sub. It is the classic, iconic Rolex.
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.