Used Explorer 114270 vs New 214270 (2016)

[MagnumsGMTMaster]

Hello all:

I haven't posted in ages (and have only posted a time or two). Thanks for all the informative advice to others that I have found useful as well.

I've come out of the shadows because I'm now in the market for an Explorer 114270 or 214270, and would like some feedback.

I like smaller watches, around 36mm, and have my eye on an 114270, but have begun to wonder how many links the bracelet would need to fit my 7.5 in. wrist. So many used 114270 don't come with all of the links. Should I be looking for one with a minimum of 11 links, 12 links?

Also, how about service history? If it's running at COSC standards, should I worry about service history? What should I look out for with a watch that is 15+ years old?

Finally, with these concerns in mind, would I just be better off buying a new 214270? Cost aside, does the 39mm version wear all that much bigger? I tried on an Explorer and Datejust 36mm at an AD and really liked the 36mm DJ. But that was a DJ and not an Explorer. So I'm not sure it was an accurate comparison.

Thanks for any feedback.

[Atleo]

Only worn the new reference for any significant length of time. But it's awesome. It's not a large piece but it's not nearly as small as the 36mm. I've tried on the smaller reference and it is a really nice piece. But it's also lacking the lume on the numbers. The new reference has that and it adds something to the watch.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[clpski]

I love the proportions of the 114270. However; I owned one and sold it because it was too small on my wrist, and my wrist are average at best. I'd love to own another but it will have to be the 39mm variety.

[Old Expat Beast]

I have a 7.25 wrist and 12 links on my 114270. There's probably enough adjustment in the clasp for another quarter inch.

[Rol604]

I'd go for the 39mm. It has the updated oyster bracelet+Clasp.

[Mick P]

Chaps

The Explorer tends to be purchased by the more level headed owner who prize quality and simplicity above all else. They tend to keep the watch and then pass it on to their kids. This is why there are not that many for sale.

So if I was in the market for an Explorer, I would buy it new with my name on the paperwork and wear it until the day I drop.

Regards

Mick

[travisb]

The 214270 is worth trying on before making your decision.
If you're happy with the size and fit of the 114270, finding a complete set with full links shouldn't be difficult.
I love the look of the 114270 but just find 36mm a tad small for my taste.

[cab56]

I bought the 39mm Explorer 1 (214270) a few months ago. It's a wonderful all-occasion stealth Rolex. It works with a suit and it works with jeans. I have the newest version with the long minute hand and the 3-6-9 lume. The lume is amazing. It's still readable at 5 in the morning. The bracelet is the modern version with the easy adjustment (Easy Link?). There's a folding link that allows a quick, small extension by unfolding the link.

I wear it more often than my 36mm Datejust (an elegant watch with white dial, white gold fluted bezel, and oyster bracelet with polished center links) or my 40mm Submariner no date (a casual watch with oyster bracelet).

I have purchased watches from my AD and from trusted sellers. Both have worked well for me.

Good luck with your search.

[watchwatcher]

Originally Posted by travisb

The 214270 is worth trying on before making your decision.
If you're happy with the size and fit of the 114270, finding a complete set with full links shouldn't be difficult.
I love the look of the 114270 but just find 36mm a tad small for my taste.

Spot on.

[franklin]

I purchased my explorer (14270) new in 2011.
Have used it every day and enjoyed it like lots.

[franklin]

It's a keeper.

[Splash]

You may prefer a smaller size, but the 39mm is definitely not too large for your wrist size. There is a lot to like about the latest version. As suggested above, you really need to try it on and see for yourself. My wrists are smaller than yours, and the 39 fits fine- and I very much dislike oversize watches.

[Rich M]

I already own an air king and wanted to buy an explorer. I then tried the 214270 initially and found it too heavy for my taste. The 114270 was a perfect weight and size for me. Purchased one a month or so ago and love it. I have an 8" inch wrist and the 11 links fit are a perfect fit. As an aside, my series model (M) had the rehaut engraving and was purchased with no papers.

[Voltesvdx]

I was debating this as well. I can't say I love the size of the 42mm but in the end, the upgraded movement, bracelet tipped me over to get 216570 instead.

[doramas]

Originally Posted by franklin

I purchased my explorer (14270) new in 2011.
Have used it every day and enjoyed it like lots.

How beautiful it is

[douglasf13]

The 114270 is the best 6-digit watch, IMO.

[tuantuanbo]

Tough decision... Just a data point, I have 7.25 inch wrist and feel 214270 is perfect on me.

[mtgjr]

Originally Posted by franklin

I purchased my explorer (14270) new in 2011.
Have used it every day and enjoyed it like lots.

That's actually a 114270. Great watch. One of my favorites.

[mtgjr]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

The 114270 is the best 6-digit watch, IMO.

Agreed.

[rolexnub]

214270 would look better on your 7.5" wrist.

[Hollister]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

The 114270 is the best 6-digit watch, IMO.

Along with the current Oyster Perpetual, I agree. They are the same apart from some cosmetic differences. The OP 39 has the exact same 3132 movement as the Explorer, so its equally tough, and it also has the (somewhat debatable) historical kudos in that it's a direct descendent of the real Everest/Hillary watch, which was a Rolex Oyster Perpetual and not an Explorer.

https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/fo...e-pics-details

[Thuilln]

I own both the 114270 and 214270 and I strongly recommend the smaller 114270. It's perfect. Wearing it makes you realize how big, heavy and disproportionate is the 39mm version.

[Thuilln]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

the 114270 is the best 6-digit watch, imo.

+2.

[Atleo]

Posted by accident.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[nckwlch]

Personal view: my 36mm explorer has a thin feel after wearing the 39mm 214270. It is the bracelet that makes the bigger watch so much of a pleasure to put on. I like the additional weight. Also i appreciate the adjustable bracelet feature.)

[MagnumsGMTMaster]

OP here.

Well, things moved a little faster than I was planning. But I'm happy with my choice. I got the 114270. It's the perfect size for my as-it-turns out just shy of 7 inch wrist. I could have sworn I had a bigger wrist. But anyway, thanks for all the input.

Btw, the 214270 is a great watch, I'm sure, with all the upgrades, etc. But the price differential was just too great, considering I would always be wanting the smaller 114270.

Photos that follow are with my previous daily wearer for the last 5 years for comparison. I wore that watch to death and it looks it. It's 38.5mm. But it sure looks huge next to the Explorer! Hopefully I'll be mindful to be more careful with the new one.

(Sorry for the poor photos and smudged timepieces.)

[Atleo]

I think you made a hell of a choice.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Hollister

Along with the current Oyster Perpetual, I agree. They are the same apart from some cosmetic differences. The OP 39 has the exact same 3132 movement as the Explorer, so its equally tough, and it also has the (somewhat debatable) historical kudos in that it's a direct descendent of the real Everest/Hillary watch, which was a Rolex Oyster Perpetual and not an Explorer.

https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/fo...e-pics-details

Agreed. I like the 114270 slightly more, so we can say I like the Oyster Perpetual the most of currently available watches (I'd probably go 36mm.)

OP, great decision, and cool Sinn, too!

[polarinda]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

The 114270 is the best 6-digit watch, IMO.

yep

i know it looks small, but that proportion (markers, numbers and hand size) is perfect.

[Brny11]

If you are into <=36mm then it is tough to give an opinion. The 2016 214270 is perfect. However it may never feel that way, if you think it is too big on your wrist.

I’d say 214270, which will also get rid of your other concerns but this decision is entirely up to you and your size preferences.

Why not a modern 36mm datejust?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk