Sub no date vs explorer I

[balabanandabrams]

Thanks for the replies, so now I'm looking at the Submariner no date vs the explorer. I have only seen photos of both. The explorer I 36mm face seems small for the oyster bracelet while the sub no date at 40mm seems to look like a better match for the newer oyster bracelet. I am not a diver and have no real use for the rotating bezel.
Thanks,
Jared

[mattluczy]

I was faced with the same decision, and went with the No Date Sub. I use the bezel quite often, for parking meters and such, and love the way it looks.

Size and weight were the main deciding factors, though... I feel the same as you, about the Explorer seeming too small for it's bracelet, and it doesn't feel as substantial (SUB-stantial... hehe). The Submariner is perfectly proportioned in every way.

Then, there's also the "classic" factor... not that the Explorer isn't, but I mean... come on... :)

[ShawnK]

Originally Posted by balabanandabrams

Thanks for the replies, so now I'm looking at the Submariner no date vs the explorer. I have only seen photos of both. The explorer I 36mm face seems small for the oyster bracelet while the sub no date at 40mm seems to look like a better match for the newer oyster bracelet. I am not a diver and have no real use for the rotating bezel.
Thanks,
Jared

If you think the 36mm dial is small before you have it on your wrist, you will find it smaller once you wear it--especially if you wear a Rolex sport model for any length of time. I had Datejust that I recently sold because it just seemed tiny after I wore my GMT II. I sold it and bought a Sub no-date! I haven't regretted it a bit.

I say go with the Sub. It is built like a tank, versatile to wear for formal or casual, and it will hold its value over the long term. I think you will be glad you did.

[scottschoe]

ND Sub...ExpI is just too small to wear.

[balabanandabrams]

The sub no date is from around 1995 caliber 3000. no box or papers, good shape from photos. The explorer is only a few years old and comes with box papers etc, caliber 3130 movement. Does this matter?
Jared

[Tools]

Those are two great watches.. Both use the exact same movement for the year produced. The 3130 movement is just the 3000 with a balance bridge rather than a balance cock.

The Sub does not have the newer bracelet, but the Explorer, I believe, does come with the recent clasp upgrade and solid end links..

As far as size...............

Well, the Explorer is only the width of a spring pin different in radius; that's not much, and the dial, or face, is almost exactly the same size at about 30mm.. The only real difference is the bigger bezel you get with the Sub which just gives it a bit more bulk..

The Explorer is the same size as the DateJust and Day Date, probably the most popular Rolex watches ever made

Both of these are classics... It's a personal preference thing..

[f16570]

Which one smiles at you?

[SLS]

Originally Posted by balabanandabrams

....I have only seen photos of both...

You need to try each on, that will help you decide!
~Scott

[Fred2]

Originally Posted by Tools

Those are two great watches.. Both use the exact same movement for the year produced. The 3130 movement is just the 3000 with a balance bridge rather than a balance cock.

The Sub does not have the newer bracelet, but the Explorer, I believe, does come with the recent clasp upgrade and solid end links..

As far as size...............

Well, the Explorer is only the width of a spring pin different in radius; that's not much, and the dial, or face, is almost exactly the same size at about 30mm.. The only real difference is the bigger bezel you get with the Sub which just gives it a bit more bulk..

The Explorer is the same size as the DateJust and Day Date, probably the most popular Rolex watches ever made

Both of these are classics... It's a personal preference thing..

Since I buy a watch to tell the time, this is the important part:

"and the dial, or face, is almost exactly the same size at about 30mm"

I prefer the non bezel one, as it is much more discrete.

[CPTL]

I'd say don't underestimate the Explorer. I'm a huge fan--it's a classic look, and great for everything. I'm not a big watch guy, though. The Sub is about as big as I will ever want.

[Hoppyjr]

I had the Explorer 1 new in 1999 - it was my first Rolex and I loved it. Only when I started building my collection and owned the Sub 14060M did I notice the "small" size. Heck, I found it acceptable and I'm 6'3 275 lbs! Now, after owning Panerai's and other Rolex models, I like the feel of a 40-42 mm watch. I have sold my Prodiver and will be selling my Panerai soon as well..........just too big.

If you like the way the Explorer 1 looks, grab it. It is true that the new models have the SEL bracelet like the newer Sub's (with a similar clasp, but without the divers extension - so it is flatter).

Hoppy

[balabanandabrams]

Newer, papers, less$$. I'm kind of over the rotating bezel look, but I will send pics when I get whichever one I do get.
Thanks,
Jared

[Brushpup]

I was near there once and ended up going with a black 16710. I don't think I could be happier............ Still, I LOVE the Explorer 1.

Good luck in your decision making, and let the watch speak to you. When it does, you will know.
Patrick

[sea-dweller]

I have both, they are very different watches, for different occasions.

[DaveInLA]

I have the Sub-date and the Explorer I. I got the Explorer thinking that the Sub would be too big on my 6" wrist (and it was, when I first put it on), but since then, I've gotten used to 40mm watches (Seikos), making the Expy look a little small. Now, I have the Sub-date as well.

One thing worth noting-- if your wrist is small, you'll feel the Sub. Not so much the diameter of the case, but the thickness of it. Then put on the Explorer, and it'll feel super-comfortable.