HODINKEE - A Week On The Wrist - The Rolex Explorer Reference 214270

[faz]

Originally Posted by poidog81

Not true it’s actually smaller and in line with the 34 and 36mm OP

With all due respect, I have owned them both and held them in my own hand side by side.

In fact, I did a search and came across this video on you tube and took this screenshot for your viewing pleasure.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[torifile]

Originally Posted by Gunnersaurus

I agree. There just doesn’t seem anything special about it to me.

There’s a depth to the dial that you can miss at first glance. The way the dial and hands catch the light is mesmerizing. It’s a watch for the wearer, not others.

[Molnboman]

Originally Posted by Gunnersaurus

I agree. There just doesn’t seem anything special about it to me.

To me, that’s a little bit of it’s charm. I didn’t want an overly obvious looking, expensive watch especially as I travel a lot in business. It does go very much under the radar in daily life except for those who are watch fans. Maybe it’s just me but when you wear it, it feels small on, but if you catch a reflection of it or see hand in the mirror it looks big enough to me.

I just liked the term the dealer described it to me as “ a gentleman’s watch” I kinda dug that.

Each to their own.

BR
MM


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Carry The Interest]

Originally Posted by smym18

Explorers listed at $15k in 3, 2, 1...

Jokes aside, glad to see the model is getting some love. Reminds of the recent feature GQ had on the Air-King...although I would take an Explorer over an Air-King every day of the week.

[SpeakWithMichael]

After seeing it in the metal and trying it on recently, it doesn't spark me. I had no qualms about not buying it given the chance. It also wears a bit too small for my liking.

[4vCoupe]

Originally Posted by nicon

I've liked it on the photos, but in the metal it's disappointing. Also 39mm version has too big poor proportions dial, 36mm is better, but still very small and bland watch. For me the ultimate simplicity and comfort but with character and proportions is the 14060M.

BTW I don't get the point of this video, it's like specs reading mixed with the most obvious and run-of-the-mill opinions (classic, timeless, simple), dull as the watch itself.

The 36mm Explorer really grows on you after wearing it for a short time. It’s very well balanced and looks great. Although the 14060m also looks and wears great.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mgsooner]

Originally Posted by Molnboman

To me, that’s a little bit of it’s charm. I didn’t want an overly obvious looking, expensive watch especially as I travel a lot in business. It does go very much under the radar in daily life except for those who are watch fans. Maybe it’s just me but when you wear it, it feels small on, but if you catch a reflection of it or see hand in the mirror it looks big enough to me.

I just liked the term the dealer described it to me as “ a gentleman’s watch” I kinda dug that.

Each to their own.

Similar feelings here. My wife is in the oil & gas industry where the gentlemen really like to show off their "wrist presence" so she really pushed me to go for a 114060. She was honestly a little disappointed when I opted for the 214270 but has grown to appreciate my choice.

There was a comment earlier in the thread that the Explorer is the Rolex for the man that wants to wear a watch that looks like a Timex. I guess I'm fine with that because that's kind of what I was going for.

As the article stated, "The Explorer doesn't pose, presume, or peacock – it's just a great watch." That's all I need.

[Pauln]

Hard to beat the Explorer. It’s a perfect design.

[Sublovin]

Originally Posted by stateman

Obviously this is entirely subjective and my opinion doesn't reflect at all upon your own opinions...but I used to lean towards the Explorer being a bit plain when I first saw one too. But over time and esp. after borrowing for a trial run a friend's over a long weekend, I've grown to love how simple and 'pure' the design is. Only 3 hands, black and white, moderately sized for a modern sports watch, nearly all brushed. Tells time, and that's it, no nonsense but with class and high quality. Goes with any outfit and can get banged around and wet.

I used to wear a Sub daily for years (sold) and still own the BLNR and other non-Rolex, but the 214270 Explorer is easily my most worn and versatile. And as I get older, I just don't care if anyone notices what I'm wearing for a timepiece.

I understand completely. Like I said, I really like the Explorer, and the simplicity and under the radar aesthetics are part of the appeal.

[JePro]

Originally Posted by stateman

Obviously this is entirely subjective and my opinion doesn't reflect at all upon your own opinions...but I used to lean towards the Explorer being a bit plain when I first saw one too. But over time and esp. after borrowing for a trial run a friend's over a long weekend, I've grown to love how simple and 'pure' the design is. Only 3 hands, black and white, moderately sized for a modern sports watch, nearly all brushed. Tells time, and that's it, no nonsense but with class and high quality. Goes with any outfit and can get banged around and wet.

I used to wear a Sub daily for years (sold) and still own the BLNR and other non-Rolex, but the 214270 Explorer is easily my most worn and versatile. And as I get older, I just don't care if anyone notices what I'm wearing for a timepiece.

I agree with you

[bonovox]

I like Hodinkee and the review, but I couldn't help when watching/reading but think the subtext is, "The Explorer 214270. The way things are going, it's really the only Rolex sports model you have a chance of owning in your lifetime."

[Fabrice M]

Frankly I would go with the new railmaster... nicer watch.

[csaltphoto]

Originally Posted by mgsooner

Similar feelings here. My wife is in the oil & gas industry where the gentlemen really like to show off their "wrist presence" so she really pushed me to go for a 114060. She was honestly a little disappointed when I opted for the 214270 but has grown to appreciate my choice.

That's funny. I don't see a lot of Rolexes in my day to day work (Marine photography) which you think I would. But most marine biologists and so on can't afford them. But when I have had assignments offshore or on an platform ship... It's all Rolex, all the time. Fishing boats too but not as pronounced.

I've mentioned this before and I think part of it is the industry, part of it is the quality of the watch and part of it is bunch of guys with 30K in their pocket and a week or two to kill in some foreign port.

[wisguy]

I owned the MKI twice, it's a great reference.

May get the MKII one day, it's a great all rounder, but thinking of a Datejust instead (not sure if 41 or the new 36)

[escobar144]

lol if you look on watchrecon one guy actually raised his price on his explorer by 100 dollars lol

[T3F]

Bought one thinking it would be the ultimate sleeper, minimalist watch (well, Rolex at least) and was hugely underwhelmed. I found it to be very sterile and soulless, and I don't think the current interpretation in 39mm looks right proportionally. I sold it about 6 months back, recently bought a 1016, and wow, what a difference.

[mgsooner]

Originally Posted by csaltphoto

That's funny. I don't see a lot of Rolexes in my day to day work (Marine photography) which you think I would. But most marine biologists and so on can't afford them. But when I have had assignments offshore or on an platform ship... It's all Rolex, all the time. Fishing boats too but not as pronounced.

I've mentioned this before and I think part of it is the industry, part of it is the quality of the watch and part of it is bunch of guys with 30K in their pocket and a week or two to kill in some foreign port.

Oh man, you should’ve heard some of the comments she came home with when she told some of them her husband was considering *gasp* a Tudor.

[mgsooner]

Originally Posted by Fabrice M

Frankly I would go with the new railmaster... nicer watch.

I like the Seamaster railmaster but wouldn’t take it over my 214270. The lack of any polished surfaces at all is a bit extreme and the dial is a bit busy. And Omega just doesn’t do bracelets like Rolex does. It is, however, an incredible value...especially from a grey or preowned.

[tipsybanker]

Trying to get my hands on one soon (either a 214270 or 114270) ... hopefully this doesnt drive prices up -_-

[gordonite]

Finally, the rise of the Explorer!!!

the 36mm is a go-to watch! Mine is the 114270 with SEL yet older clasp, a sweet transition from vintage to modern.

the debate between 39mm and 36mm is a matter of taste, both are excel in compare to OP or even DJ.

[glamorama]

Originally Posted by mgsooner

Oh man, you should’ve heard some of the comments she came home with when she told some of them her husband was considering *gasp* a Tudor.

Sounds like she needs to get you a present ;)

[glamorama]

Really liked my 114270, sold it because seemed small (later got a 214270 with too large dial) and the bracelet was not adjustable to 4 links on 6 o’clock side. Should’ve just turned the bracelet around like I now do on the 16570.

[VacherObsessive]

Originally Posted by Sublovin

I hear ya .
I actually like the watch, but admittedly it has to be the most vanilla/bland Rolex. If you want a Rolex but want others to think you are wearing a Timex, this watch is for you.

This is why you don’t get it

The exp1 is the Rolex you wear when you don’t give a sh1t what people think. That’s what makes it cooler

[Molnboman]

Originally Posted by mgsooner

I like the Seamaster railmaster but wouldn’t take it over my 214270. The lack of any polished surfaces at all is a bit extreme and the dial is a bit busy. And Omega just doesn’t do bracelets like Rolex does. It is, however, an incredible value...especially from a grey or preowned.

Same...The Railmaster was on my shopping list and I loved the tech spec of the movement, however I just thought visually it was a bit of a cold shower compared the Explorer dial.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[mosfetaus]

Originally Posted by 2nastie

Not sure why everyone says the 36mm version is better proportioned than the 39mm.

With updated MK2 dial and hands, it's just as proportional as the 36mm. The only change is the physical size. I get the nostalgia of the 36mm case, but in today's standard the 39mm wears 100% better. The black dial makes the 36mm appear even smaller than it really is as well.

No one seems to get hungover with the 36 OP vs the 39 OP. Most choose the larger case.

I currently own the MK2 39mm Explorer and considered heavy the 36mm before purchasing it. Zero regrets. Unless it is the 1016, I'll go with the modern case.

For me it's more about the dial/case/bracelet overall proportions. I owned both 114270 and 214270m2 at the same time for a few months. I just found the 214's bezel too wide, and its case too flat and wide compared with the bracelet. Whereas the 114's all proportioned beautifully. The dial is not as striking as the 214 and of course the 214's bracelet destroys the 114, but it still wasn't enough for me. The 114270 is a supremely comfortable and light watch, yet with huge visual presence, and it's the one I kept, and sold the 214 on at a profit.

Originally Posted by T3F

...and I don't think the current interpretation in 39mm looks right proportionally...

Yep.

Originally Posted by gordonite

...the debate between 39mm and 36mm is a matter of taste...

I suppose this is what it all boils down to :)

[HogwldFLTR]

OP, thanks for posting the link; interesting to watch and read!!!

Originally Posted by mgsooner

I’d love to try a 36mm Exp in person some day. When shopping I tried a 36mm OP and to me it appeared small on my 6.75” wrist.

Yes even on my 6.5 in wrist the OP seems smallish. I guess the size is an acquired taste. Pretty certain the preference is tied to what ever one is used to wearing.

Originally Posted by Sublovin

I hear ya .
I actually like the watch, but admittedly it has to be the most vanilla/bland Rolex. If you want a Rolex but want others to think you are wearing a Timex, this watch is for you.

I believe that honor goes to the OPs. This (Exp) has better lume and is more legible due to the Mercedes hand. Of the two I'd choose the Explorer. Colored dial is the only reason to choose the OPs.

[CalSRQ1]

[QUOTE=Sublovin;9573505]I hear ya .
I actually like the watch, but admittedly it has to be the most vanilla/bland Rolex. If you want a Rolex but want others to think you are wearing a Timex, this watch is for you.[/QUOTE

Envisioning/hearing this in the most disdainful upper crust accent.

I actually think it’s relative stealth is one reason it’s a great travel watch.

[Abdullah71601]

Originally Posted by faz

With all due respect, I have owned them both and held them in my own hand side by side.

In fact, I did a search and came across this video on you tube and took this screenshot for your viewing pleasure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think the dial size is larger than the SubC. The bezel on the divers is wider and creates a perception of size.

[Sublovin]

Originally Posted by VacherObsessive

This is why you don’t get it

The exp1 is the Rolex you wear when you don’t give a sh1t what people think. That’s what makes it cooler

I’m pretty sure that’s what I said. I like it.
You don’t get it...clearly

[Frits1980]

Said it before, its such an overlooked watch. Everyone is chasing Daytonas and BLRO's and complaining they cannot get it while the exp1 is right in front of them. I have all the hot models but the exp1 gets the most wristtime by far. Its all you need. it's beautiful in its simplicity but it needs a bit of time to see and appricate it.

Great watch if you are not in the mood or have the time deciding which watch to wear today. Exp1 will Always work. Perfect or travel as well. No need to bring your watchbox. Exp1 will work on the beach and with a suit. Perfect and one of the last classy Rolex watches.