Explorer (39mm) vs Explorer ii (polar 40mm)

[BrummyJames]

Thoughts on these two beauties...

In my personal opinion I prefer the older polar, however it is a tough one due to the upgraded movement and bracelet of the explorer.

[Jaycnyp]

Between those two, explorer! Though I love the polar, the 214270 is my favorite watch! Also, on the 16570 I prefer the black and on the 216570 the polar, don't know why, but I do.

[Star Ferry]

I prefer the older polar too. Due to the bezel I think it wears a bit smaller than the new Exp I. And I'd rather look down at my wrist and see a bit of color. I'm not expert enough to comment on the movement differences so my preference is based on styling.

[Snow-Dweller]

I love the GMT complication, so the Polar......and I love the modern bracelets, so the Exp.

Seriously though, it's whichever one sings loudest to you. Either that, or don't worry too much because sooner or later you'll end up with both!

[redhotmurc333]

Both are great watches~ But In my honest opinion, true the newer one has all the great upgrades so technically it's a "better" watch on paper and to me the size fits better on my wrist... BUT appearance wise, when OFF the wrist, the older one seems to have better intricate detailing as due all the older models~ Love the contrast of the red hand on the clean white dial... one of the only white dialed professional/sport Rolexes... and true I the Turnograph had a white face too but that was more in the lines of the Datejust line... so yeah... sorry if I just rambled on... lol

[SemperFi]

I would also choose the Explorer (39mm). I think it's the more versatile of the two.

[cenzor]

Polar, for better complicarion and overall looks.

[FTX I]

IMHO the problem with the 39mm Exp is the polished bezel, more than the short hands. But it's a great watch. The 40mm Exp II has the old school bracelet and clasp, so I love how it looks (more than the Exp I) but I never considered one. Between the two I vote Exp 39mm.

[sickened1]

Love 'em both so get both!

[toomuchtalk]

Explorer 2.

[redhotmurc333]

OOPS! I misunderstood your post~ Thought u were talkin about the older Explorer2 to the newer ones...

Originally Posted by redhotmurc333

Both are great watches~ But In my honest opinion, true the newer one has all the great upgrades so technically it's a "better" watch on paper and to me the size fits better on my wrist... BUT appearance wise, when OFF the wrist, the older one seems to have better intricate detailing as due all the older models~ Love the contrast of the red hand on the clean white dial... one of the only white dialed professional/sport Rolexes... and true I the Turnograph had a white face too but that was more in the lines of the Datejust line... so yeah... sorry if I just rambled on... lol

[SALTY]

Both is the obvious answer expected from TRF enablers; however as much as i appreciate the Explorer II 5-digit models, the 214270 rules. It is such a versitile and classy piece - a true go anywhere/do anything Rolex. Oh, and then there's the bracelet!

[AK797]

1 is no1 for me.

[Ticked_off]

The New explorer kicks ass! I have the 16570 in black as well but the 214270 is without a doubt a better looking watch. Just my 2 cents.

[mfer]

expy 2. I sold my 214270 b/c the hands are proportionate.

[Old Expat Beast]

Definitely the Exp II for me. I'm not a fan of the 39mm Explorer at all. In fact I much prefer the Tudor Ranger, for many reasons.

[busytimmy]

214270 is my choice in this scenario because I think it's a touch more versatile and elegant.

I do prefer the black 16570 over the white, but prefer the polar over the black 216570.

[Ragna]

is even the 39mm better than the 36mm ?

just throwing some gas into the fire..

[subking86]

I think the Exp 214270 is a better looking watch. Very classic. Although the polar exp II 16570 is at the top of my "next watch" list. While I love the look of both, the 214270 would strictly be a weekend/night watch because I need a date function for work.

[Dubarzy]

I prefer the explorer to the explorer II. The WG 214270 is my favorite exp; the polar 16570 my favorite exp II.

They are all beautiful watches, and you can't go wrong with any of them!

[iliketime]

16570 for me, already own the polar, but contemplating one in black as well. maybe a much older holed case, to beat

[Jack T]

To me the 214270 is discreet, simple and versatile. It's my favorite for an every day, all purpose watch.

[Vinyasa]

My vote goes to the polar 16570... it has more functionality, and the complications I value most - date and GMT.

[watchwatcher]

Two different watches. I personally would go for the polar b/c of the GMT function, which is useful to me.

Now if we were talking the new EXP, not so sure...

[sea-dweller]

I lone mine also:

[tomchicago]

I had a polar, now have an Explorer. I wanted a less "bezel-y" watch since I already have a 16710.

[solo-act]

Excellent discussion. I've been pondering what my first rolex would be.

I've also been considering Explorer or Explorer II polar. Leaning toward 114270 for cost and versatility.

[jinikari01]

I'm leaning towards 39mm, but I will take them both anytime.
One for casual weekend and the other for office attire.

[visualplane]

I like them both, but for me i'd pick the Explorer 214270 because of it's classic look. I also think they look great on straps.

[mschafer]

I love both of them and am actually a fan of the current issue with he orange hand. The Exp II is more sporty, modern, younger and playful, i also like to have a date and find the 24h complication very useful. On the other hand, the Exp I is over and over again a winner, the purste of Rolex tool watches out there and under the radar that goes with any outfit. If i had to choose only one, it's the Exp I. (I would miss a date sometimes.)