ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

jjnd08 · 7 May 2014, 10:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

39 is sportier, 36 is classier, IMO.

This.

HogwldFLTR · 7 May 2014, 10:41 PM

They look the same to me only slightly different in size. The sportier for me would be the one I can get at a better price.

Pete · 8 May 2014, 12:23 AM

mmmm 1016.

Challenger Deep · 8 May 2014, 12:41 AM

The 39mm if you ask me. Anything smaller than that is a dress watch IMHO.

landroverking · 8 May 2014, 12:58 AM

36 is a classic.

tkerrmd · 8 May 2014, 01:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

39 is sportier, 36 is classier, IMO.

Good answer!!

fatal · 8 May 2014, 01:46 AM

Well, it looks like most associate size with sports/tool design? 39 looks more conspicuous with the shiny numerals and rounder case but then 36 has the gloss dial. Regardless, I think this classic design is the closest that Rolex has to a pure outdoors/field/military type design. Maybe even THE template for field/military design?

skywood · 8 May 2014, 11:04 AM

36mm

RolexJNJ · 8 May 2014, 11:09 AM

Not sure which is "sportier" but I definitely prefer the 36, it looks so much better!

submariner66 · 8 May 2014, 11:09 AM

The larger watch looks sportier to me. I like the "Explorer" on the bottom of the dial. 39.

Starbucksboss · 8 May 2014, 01:34 PM

Neither...

GGGMT · 8 May 2014, 01:43 PM

36 classier. 39 sportier. But the silver number on the 39 are not cool. Shoulda kept them white

Pete26 · 8 May 2014, 08:25 PM

I like the 39mm. The white gold numerals add to the class

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The Libertine · 8 May 2014, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Challenger Deep

The 39mm if you ask me. Anything smaller than that is a dress watch IMHO.

Spot on! That was my reasoning for going with the 39mm.

Der Meister · 8 May 2014, 09:05 PM

36 for me.

jhamiltonwa · 8 May 2014, 09:37 PM

Love the 39 upgrade but could not live with hands. I want to move on but can't. As to sporty and classy they both do well enough. Just a fantastic look.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

mike · 8 May 2014, 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SaddleSC

The term "sporty" to me evokes a feeling of a watch that is a little bigger, a little bolder, perhaps with a little more wrist presence. I would say that the 214270 is sportier, while the 114270 is more classically styled and a bit more elegant.

They are both beautiful...I chose the "sportier" 214270 and I am thrilled with it:)

I'd agree with that.

Rags · 8 May 2014, 10:47 PM

I prefer the 39mm over the 36mm. IMO the 36mm is a little small to be a sport watch. The 39mm can be worn sporty with jeans & a tshirt or with a suit. The explorer is next on my list.

Quotron · 9 May 2014, 04:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Touring

36mm is "sportier" due to the lumed markers at 3, 6, and 9.

The 3/6/9 markers on the ref.(1)14270 are not lumed.

77T · 10 May 2014, 04:02 AM

I did a side-by-side comparison yesterday for myself. Both were pre-owned ands fully serviced. I was trading an older Omega and had no pre-conceived notions.

For me, and for activities with more risk, I chose the 36mm. I can adjust the old pinbar clasp with a toothpick so the new clasp was not a real factor.

What swung it to 36mm for me was less height on the wrist, lighter overall - and less mass.

subtona · 10 May 2014, 04:31 AM

Love the 36mm but feels a bit small on my wrist.

I Just do not like the 39mm, the minute hand and the chunkier look of both dial & case on this watch, aren't for me.

HogwldFLTR · 10 May 2014, 04:46 AM

Wow, pretty much the prototype adventure watch being called a dress watch...what a world, what a world, I'm melting....

Jack T · 10 May 2014, 04:47 AM

Making adjustment for the 3mm difference in case and dial size, are the hands on the 39mm any different from the 36mm? To my eye, they do not appear to be. For that matter, is the hour hand on the Submariner any longer (or closer to the marker) than the hour hand on the 39mm Explorer?
Yes, they appear a bit short, but by some comments you'd think that Rolex cut in in half.

superdog · 10 May 2014, 05:53 AM

the 39mm version is one of my all time top favorites........

GradyPhilpott · 10 May 2014, 06:01 AM

Hillary and Norgay climbed Everest with 34mm Oyster Perpetuals with leather bands.

Poor guys, it's a wonder they lived to tell about it.

MortgageGuy · 10 May 2014, 06:02 AM

39 IMHO is the sportier of the two

dysondiver · 10 May 2014, 06:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

39 is sportier, 36 is classier, IMO.

kinda says it all ,,,

fatal · 10 May 2014, 09:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

Hillary and Norgay climbed Everest with 34mm Oyster Perpetuals with leather bands.

Poor guys, it's a wonder they lived to tell about it.

sea-dweller · 10 May 2014, 02:20 PM

I'd say the 39 also, but I love my 36!

Dr. Robert · 10 May 2014, 03:23 PM

I vote 36mm!

7 May 2014, 10:41 PM	#32
HogwldFLTR 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Real Name: Lee Location: 42.48.45N70.48.48 Watch: What's on my wrist Posts: 33,256	They look the same to me only slightly different in size. The sportier for me would be the one I can get at a better price. __________________ Troglodyte in residence! https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=808599

8 May 2014, 12:23 AM	#33
Pete "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Real Name: Pete Location: Guelph Watch: 16610/216570 Posts: 678	mmmm 1016. __________________ Pete - Guelph ON - 16610 D / 216570 Member #745 RIP JJ "Always in our hearts, and on our wrists" "I am the master of my fate: I am the captain of my soul"

8 May 2014, 12:41 AM	#34
Challenger Deep "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2014 Real Name: James Location: Michigan Watch: Omega Seamaster Posts: 528	The 39mm if you ask me. Anything smaller than that is a dress watch IMHO. __________________ "Overtook The Michael..."-Mika "I need to establish my own limits. When i reach those limits, i am willing to overcome them and establish new ones. I do not know how far i can go. I have an understanding of wht i'm doing, but do not know how far it can take me."-Ayrton Senna.

8 May 2014, 10:47 PM	#48
Rags 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Chuck Location: SW Florida Watch: 16233,16610,214270 Posts: 11,183	I prefer the 39mm over the 36mm. IMO the 36mm is a little small to be a sport watch. The 39mm can be worn sporty with jeans & a tshirt or with a suit. The explorer is next on my list. __________________ 16233 Y Serial Datejust 16610 Z Serial Submariner 214270 Explorer *114300 Oyster Perpetual* *76200 Tudor Date+Day*

10 May 2014, 04:02 AM	#50
77T 2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 Pledge Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Real Name: PaulG Location: Georgia Posts: 40,736	I did a side-by-side comparison yesterday for myself. Both were pre-owned ands fully serviced. I was trading an older Omega and had no pre-conceived notions. For me, and for activities with more risk, I chose the 36mm. I can adjust the old pinbar clasp with a toothpick so the new clasp was not a real factor. What swung it to 36mm for me was less height on the wrist, lighter overall - and less mass. __________________ Does anyone really know what time it is?

8 May 2014, 12:58 AM	#35
landroverking "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Real Name: Jay Location: TEXAS Watch: Daytona Posts: 7,648	36 is a classic.

8 May 2014, 01:46 AM	#37
fatal "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 13	Well, it looks like most associate size with sports/tool design? 39 looks more conspicuous with the shiny numerals and rounder case but then 36 has the gloss dial. Regardless, I think this classic design is the closest that Rolex has to a pure outdoors/field/military type design. Maybe even THE template for field/military design?

8 May 2014, 11:04 AM	#38
skywood "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Real Name: Raymond Location: Hong Kong Posts: 158	36mm

8 May 2014, 11:09 AM	#39
RolexJNJ "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Real Name: Joe Location: Chicago Posts: 5,036	Not sure which is "sportier" but I definitely prefer the 36, it looks so much better!

8 May 2014, 11:09 AM	#40
submariner66 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2012 Real Name: John Location: New York Watch: 114060 Posts: 1,138	The larger watch looks sportier to me. I like the "Explorer" on the bottom of the dial. 39.

8 May 2014, 01:34 PM	#41
Starbucksboss Banned Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: Reno Posts: 1,028	Neither...

8 May 2014, 01:43 PM	#42
GGGMT 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Aug 2013 Location: Itinerant Watch: 79010sg Posts: 8,064	36 classier. 39 sportier. But the silver number on the 39 are not cool. Shoulda kept them white

8 May 2014, 08:25 PM	#43
Pete26 Banned Join Date: Oct 2005 Real Name: Peter Location: Australia Posts: 603	I like the 39mm. The white gold numerals add to the class Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

8 May 2014, 09:05 PM	#45
Der Meister Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: Somewhere Posts: 244	36 for me.

8 May 2014, 09:37 PM	#46
jhamiltonwa "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Perth, Australia Watch: '87 Air King Date Posts: 154	Love the 39 upgrade but could not live with hands. I want to move on but can't. As to sporty and classy they both do well enough. Just a fantastic look. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

10 May 2014, 04:31 AM	#51
subtona "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Real Name: gus Location: East Coast Watch: APK & sometimes Y Posts: 25,997	Love the 36mm but feels a bit small on my wrist. I Just do not like the 39mm, the minute hand and the chunkier look of both dial & case on this watch, aren't for me. __________________

10 May 2014, 04:46 AM	#52
HogwldFLTR 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Real Name: Lee Location: 42.48.45N70.48.48 Watch: What's on my wrist Posts: 33,256	Wow, pretty much the prototype adventure watch being called a dress watch...what a world, what a world, I'm melting.... __________________ Troglodyte in residence! https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=808599

10 May 2014, 04:47 AM	#53
Jack T "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2013 Real Name: Jack Location: The Triangle Watch: Several Posts: 6,623	Making adjustment for the 3mm difference in case and dial size, are the hands on the 39mm any different from the 36mm? To my eye, they do not appear to be. For that matter, is the hour hand on the Submariner any longer (or closer to the marker) than the hour hand on the 39mm Explorer? Yes, they appear a bit short, but by some comments you'd think that Rolex cut in in half. __________________ Sub 116613 LN; GMT 116710 LN; Sinn 104R; Exp 214270; GS SBGM221; Omega AT

10 May 2014, 05:53 AM	#54
superdog 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Real Name: Seth Location: nj Watch: Omega Posts: 24,698	the 39mm version is one of my all time top favorites........ __________________ If happiness is a state of mind, why look anywhere else for it? IG: gsmotorclub IG: thesawcollection (Both mostly just car stuff)

10 May 2014, 06:01 AM	#55
GradyPhilpott 2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 Pledge Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: New Mexico Watch: 116710 BLNR Posts: 34,347	Hillary and Norgay climbed Everest with 34mm Oyster Perpetuals with leather bands. Poor guys, it's a wonder they lived to tell about it. __________________ JJ Inaugural TRF $50 Watch Challenge Winner

10 May 2014, 06:02 AM	#56
MortgageGuy "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Real Name: Adam Location: Orlando, Florida Watch: Me Posts: 9,935	39 IMHO is the sportier of the two __________________ The richest people in the world look for and build NETWORKS, Everyone else looks for work... Robert Kiyosaki

10 May 2014, 02:20 PM	#59
sea-dweller "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Real Name: Dennis Location: Bay Area - 925 Posts: 40,018	I'd say the 39 also, but I love my 36!

10 May 2014, 03:23 PM	#60
Dr. Robert 2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 Pledge Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Real Name: Bob Location: U.S.A. Watch: 1655 Posts: 61,296	I vote 36mm! __________________ Founder & Card Carrying Member of the Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)