Another Submariner vs Explorer Thread

[mquintie]

Hello everyone,

I have another sub vs explorer thread, but I truly can't make up my mind.

I am looking at the 2016 Rolex Explorer 39mm and the Submariner. I love the 14060, but the bracelet on the 114060 makes me lean there.

I have an SKX007, SKX009 and a Baume and Mercier Clifton. I also have an Omega Speedmaster, a vintage Seiko from my father and a gold Seiko from my father-in-law.

Is the logical choice the Explorer? or should I throw logic out the window and go with the classic sub?

I know we have seen many of these threads before, but hoping you can guide me in the right direction!

Thank you
Mike

[natosub]

In an either/or debate, the Submariner wins for me almost every time (unless circumstance warrants a more subdued watch.) Don't get me wrong, the Explorer is a classic watch in its own right, but the Sub is, well, the Submariner!

In your case, where you've already got a Speedy, you have to get a Sub to complete the Astro-Aqua set

[Etschell]

you cant go wrong with any of the three. glidelock and ceramic bezel to me is where it is at.

[Rolex addict]

Have you tried those watches on? That may help you decide.

[droptopman]

Submariner. Like both, but will always go with a Sub in a one or the other for a first Rolex.
Cannot go wrong with either 5 or 6 digit model. Had both and for a long time was a die hard 4 and 5 digit guy. I now prefer the 6 digit Subs. While the Bluesy is my favorite watch the 114060 is close to perfection for all around wearability.

[AK797]

I don't think with your collection either watch is more logical so go for the one that's best for you and sounds like it's the Subc.

[weeone]

Originally Posted by mquintie

Is the logical choice the Explorer? or should I throw logic out the window and go with the classic sub?

If I read between the lines, it looks like you want to get the Sub. Do it!

But really, try them both on in person. IMO, they are very different watches. The Submariner is my pick because I like the sport look with the bezel. Good luck with whichever you choose!

[mquintie]

Thanks everyone!

I wear a suit or sport jacket daily, and I normally wear the speedy.

I have tried both on multiple times and love the look of both. Obviously, they are different watches.

[LegalEeze]

Was in the same position as you two days ago. Those were the same exact watches I considered. I went with the Explorer ('16) and I could not be happier. I'm more of an under the radar guy, though, and love the fact that 99% of the time, no one will even know that I'm wearing a Rolex. I also have to dress up M-F, and the Explorer looks great with a suit or sport coat.

[polaris72]

I have both, get them in whatever order suites you. They complement each other.

[mattty]

Another explorer vs sub thread

After having both I can say the following.

Not sure I know which one I prefer to look at however I know which one I prefer to wear.

[Peter99]

I have an Exp 39mm Mk1 also a SubC black with date.
Both very nice watches to wear but the watch to wear at all occasions must be the Explorer, excellent for hiking to the gym & black tie dining and places in between.
But the watch I prefer to wear for those places 'in between' is the Sub!
The Exp is the more practical and more comfortable to wear watch. It fits in anywhere and it's more under the radar!

[douglasf13]

Unless maybe your wrist is over 8"+, I'd split the difference and go 114270. You'll get SELs in a classic sized, comfortable, do everything watch.

[marcotagudelo]

both are good for any occasion. but i would lean toward the SUB with the cerachrom bezel
pips it a little bit more in my eyes... but to each his own.

[wm5382]

Perhaps getting both will be a good solution to your queries, just saying...

[SeaDweller50]

Sub hands down. To me there's no comparison.

[NLYogi]

I like the 2016 Explorer for its cleaner looks, it is not over the top in any way. The sub imo is a bit of a show-off and coversation piece. I own a Exp1, it is my only Rolex.

[LegalEeze]

^^^ Agree.

[Adamkerr]

Originally Posted by NLYogi

I like the 2016 Explorer for its cleaner looks, it is not over the top in any way. The sub imo is a bit of a show-off and coversation piece. I own a Exp1, it is my only Rolex.

I actually experienced the opposite. I had a mk1 Explorer which I sold to fund a SubC date. I got maybe a handful of comments on the Explorer and not one on the sub.

[LegalEeze]

I also tend to go for things that are less common. It's always been that way for me. I feel that around here, every person who makes their first $8-10k gets the obligatory SS Sub. Small business owner, construction worker, IT guy, etc. I wanted something that few people would recognize. If I get no one for the rest of my life that knows it's a Rolex, all the better. Hell, if the Explorer was all brushed stainless, even on the bezels and sides, it would be even better. Zero bling. That'd be great. I couldn't get over how shiny the Ceramic Subs are. They really scream.

[mattty]

I love the sub, can't crib it look wise.

I just found it a tad uncomfortable that's all, otherwise it would have stayed.

Rgds Matty

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Adamkerr

I actually experienced the opposite. I had a mk1 Explorer which I sold to fund a SubC date. I got maybe a handful of comments on the Explorer and not one on the sub.

Yeah, I had a 36mm silver-stick, silver dial DJ that was noticed much more than my Sub. For the most part, I think only watch people recognize a Sub, because there are SO many dive watches at various price points out there. I'd guess that the majority of the population still sees a DJ/DD as a "Rolex," and the Explorer shares a bit of the same aesthetic.

For me, the 16570 is best combination of features. It's got the thinner profile, lighter weight, and matte finishes, and it really flies under the radar. The only time anyone has mentioned it to me was when I had it on a Rubber B, of all things.

[Marcus09]

If it helps, I got the explorer and will acquire the sub 114060 soon

[Anthon]

I have both the sub en the explorer. If you forse me to sell one, it will be the sub.
Anyway, that is my logical side speaking.
Rolexes however, do not obey logic.

[watchwatcher]

Which one do you like better?

If there's not a clear winner, then go with the more expensive choice. That way, you won't get hurt if you change your mind.

[Anthon]

Originally Posted by mattty

Another explorer vs sub thread

After having both I can say the following.

Not sure I know which one I prefer to look at however I know which one I prefer to wear.

Indeed, the exp is far more comfortable.

[LegalEeze]

It's almost like wearing nothing at all.

[henrylee]

Sub /thread

[JacksonStone]

I was facing a similar decision, but went with the SubC Date, for the simple reason of functionality. The Sub Date has three key functions I need that the Explorer doesn't:

1. Glidelock provides 18mm of adjustability in 2mm increments, so the watch will always fit right. The Explorer has the Easylink, which is an all-or-nothing 5mm extension. It's actually the finer graduations on the Glidelock that serve me better than the the full range of its adjustability. Most days, I only need to adjust the Glidelock one position in or out to accommodate the contraction or expansion of my wrist. Given that, it's clear the 5mm extension would not work as well for my needs.

2. The elapsed-time bezel comes in handy for timing any number of situations, whether it's parking meters, coffee breaks, pizza orders ("it'll be ready in 15 minutes"), or whatever. I'm always using it, and would miss not having it. The Explorer doesn't have it.

3. A date function. Since you're looking at the 114060, this is a moot point for you. For me, a date is really helpful. I have an Omega Seamaster 300, which does not have a date, and as much as I like that watch, I find it frustrating if I want to know the date, and I look down at my wrist and can't see it. I realized getting an Explorer (or the 114060, for that matter) would perpetuate the frustration, so I went with the Sub Date.

Of course, the Sub also has greater WR than the Explorer, but I don't need it, so it wasn't a factor in my choice.

I think the Explorer is a great watch, and the tweaks Rolex made to the 2016 release perfected the 39mm version. But it simply wouldn't offer the functionality I seek in a daily-wear watch, which made my decision pretty easy, once I resigned myself to the greater expense of the Sub Date. That doesn't mean I won't someday get an Explorer; it just wasn't tops on the list.

Good luck with your decision.

[varkom]

submariner by a mile.

the explorer is a very boring watch by comparison.