New 2016 Explorer

[PatrickJ]

Originally Posted by gregmoeck

can current 39m explorer owners now order the correct hands?

No the RSC will not change the hands to the longer version, even at service. I asked already

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by nobbylon

please no! didn't they already? it's called an oysterdate ;)

It's called an Explorer Date (refs 5700 & 5701).

[Splash]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

It's called an Explorer Date (refs 5700 & 5701).

Wow! Never seen one of these before.
Thanks for posting the picture!

[nobbylon]

nice

[shay2nak]

wish the dial was black lacquer like the Sub. Not really a fan of the matte. Especially with polished bits on the dial.

[Dauntless]

IMG_1081.jpg

Just a picture of the outgoing model versus the incoming model. I have not seen many pictures on the Internet comparing the two. Sorry for the limited quality of the quick cell phone picture.

I was visiting a friend in another state last weekend and stumbled upon an authorized dealer that had the new one in stock. I ended up trading in my old one and purchasing new one.

[tomchicago]

Still prefer those gorgeous WG numerals over the lumed...the new one won't go as well with dressier situations.

[7ww7]

The lume of new Explorer is green color, not blue as presented on official website. My eye sees green lum but the photos its turns blue. I do not know how this is possible, but it is.

Anyway great watch!

[strange]

I'm not going to argue which version looks best, but for me the Explorer is a watch that's supposed to promote functionality. And having a minute hand that reaches the minute markers makes it a lot easier to read.

Same with the Chromalight arabics: they're not as elegant, but much easier to read under both light and dark conditions.

I think the update makes the distinction between the WG arabic OP and Explorer a little more obvious and adds a needed notch between the Explorer II and the OP in terms of sportyness. And there's no arguing that the 214270-0003 is also a little closer to the original Explorer design.

Sometimes, when I read the comments here, I think to myself that what many users should ask for is a WG arabic OP with a glossy black dial instead of a more dressy Explorer.

That said, my perfect Explorer would be 37.5 mm and use another font for the arabic numerals (something closer to Explorer 6610, but crisp and with WG outlines ... or just a little narrower version of the current font).

[franklin]

I like the Explorer in all its iterations.

[Friar]

Stopped in my local AD yesterday and compared my 2014 Explorer with the new model. From the posted pictures, I was expecting a greater difference but it seemed quite subtle actually. While I prefer the slightly broader hands on the 2016 Explorer, the improvement is not worth the cost of "upgrading" to me. Then went to another AD and picked up my wife a Cartier watch! Better "investment" all around :-)

[Gomler]

My 2015 Explorer with large hands...

Mark



[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[PaulChronometer]

Originally Posted by Dauntless

Attachment 785879

Just a picture of the outgoing model versus the incoming model. I have not seen many pictures on the Internet comparing the two. Sorry for the limited quality of the quick cell phone picture.

I was visiting a friend in another state last weekend and stumbled upon an authorized dealer that had the new one in stock. I ended up trading in my old one and purchasing new one.

Last week I visited an AD to check out the new model, and to compare it side-by-side with the Mk I (like in the pic in this thread). Here is my impression:

- I think the update is slightly better: the lumed 3/6/9 are nice, as well as the longer hour hand - although I do think that it now is slightly too long

- I was not able to notice any difference in the black dials (matt vs gloss etc.)

Otherwise, without the Mk II for a side-by-side comparison, I think the Mk I is very nice and balanced, with WG 3/6/9 and elegant short hands. It is still a beautiful watch, in its own restrained way.

[shay2nak]

Originally Posted by PaulChronometer

- I was not able to notice any difference in the black dials (matt vs gloss etc.)

The 2016's dial is gloss black? I have yet to see one in person.

[Engi.]

Originally Posted by shay2nak

The 2016's dial is gloss black? I have yet to see one in person.

No it's matte black

[mattty]

All is identical to the mk1 version, even the colour of the lume.
When you put them side by side at certain angles you cannot see any difference.
The new style version pictures better than the mk1 due to the photograph picking up better with the white.
In real life the new dial looks like somebodys gone mad with the lume. I was very disappointed when I saw it to be honest after spending hours looking at it on the net I was hell bent this was my next watch.

[jkth]

Just got it 2 weeks ago. Very nice watch.
31274050296_2778921d76_k.jpg

[rolexnub]

Here is mine ...

[Berlin]

Was the swap done at a Rolex Service Center or a 3rd party watch dealer? What was the cost? Thanks and Happy New Year...

[dodosa]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dkpw]

Originally Posted by red.earth

So... the hands on the older 39mm Explorer were too short after all!

And the new ones hands are too fat ....

[tomchicago]

Here's my V1IMG_20170123_145114.jpg

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

[jeffersondc]

My V1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BDL]

I am now 100% obsessed with the 2016 version........

[nathandyck]

Originally Posted by dkpw

And the new ones hands are too fat ....

Lol. It wouldn't be funny if it wasn't so true.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[baw331]

If you have jnstagram check out Submarinate's page. Amazing photos of the explorer, and other Rolexes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Travis C.]

I have the new one and imo it's finally perfect. The lugs are 20mm, too. I've heard the lug width was 19mm. I don't know about previous version but I can confirm the lug width on the new version is 20mm. Perfect.

[cmajpwc]

Originally Posted by Travis C.

I have the new one and imo it's finally perfect. The lugs are 20mm, too. I've heard the lug width was 19mm. I don't know about previous version but I can confirm the lug width on the new version is 20mm. Perfect.

Lugs on the previous version are 20mm as well. I'm still not sure where the 19mm measurement came from.

[jdpny]