The Explorer II Enigma. Historical Thread

[mgd55]

Originally Posted by mineral

Agreed and black and white make great pair.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Nice! Thinking of maybe throwing a jubilee on one too...first things first though gotta get the polar


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RichardF]

The Explorer II is my favorite for travel.

[mgd55]

Originally Posted by RichardF

The Explorer II is my favorite for travel.

Beautiful shot, beautiful watch! Just ordered a polar to go with my black 16570 and can't wait to wear both to awesome places like that! Enjoy good sir!

[RichardF]

Originally Posted by mgd55

Beautiful shot, beautiful watch! Just ordered a polar to go with my black 16570 and can't wait to wear both to awesome places like that! Enjoy good sir!

Thanks, enjoy yours !

[mineral]

Originally Posted by mgd55

Nice! Thinking of maybe throwing a jubilee on one too...first things first though gotta get the polar


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Highly recommend the polar. Beautiful white dial and make great pair with white Daytona




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[mgd55]

Originally Posted by mineral

Highly recommend the polar. Beautiful white dial and make great pair with white Daytona




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Funny timing—just ordered a polar this morning and was just looking at your posts about the jubilee bracelet on the 16570 a few minutes ago! A Daytona is a few years down the road...this forum is full of too many great, albeit very expensive, ideas :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mineral]

Originally Posted by mgd55

Funny timing—just ordered a polar this morning and was just looking at your posts about the jubilee bracelet on the 16570 a few minutes ago! A Daytona is a few years down the road...this forum is full of too many great, albeit very expensive, ideas :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Big Congrats and you can’t go wrong with polar. The jubilee bracelet works very well on explorer in my opinion. Must try this combo.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mgd55]

Originally Posted by mineral

Big Congrats and you can’t go wrong with polar. The jubilee bracelet works very well on explorer in my opinion. Must try this combo.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Really does look great—thanks for the motivation on both the Daytona pairing and the jubilee—cheers


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Johnmdall]

Does anyone know why the hour markers on the 42MM black dial and 42MM polar dial are different? If you look closely side by side you will see the outline from the lume is different sizes.

[dannyp]

I was thinking a little more about this and have another theory that may or may not have anything to do with its traditionally lower desirability; it's not a watch anyone ever needed. They say it was designed for spelunkers, but I cannot figure out what specific "need" it was responding to.

The Sub, SD and GMT all represented true innovations in watchmaking, needed in order to allow certain tasks to be completed by divers, pilots and world travelers. They were watches you needed. The Exp. I wasn't exactly that, but did have a similar association (Everest).

But not the Explorer II, which feels to me as though it was designed first, with its purpose "assigned" retroactively.

When the GMT II was released, but prior to discontinuation of the GMT, Rolex essentially offered a dual and triple timezone version of the same watch, since only one had an independent 12hr hand. Rather than visually identical watches with different movements, perhaps there should have been a "fixed-bezel" version with two zones (the Exp. II) and a triple zone version (the GMT II).

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by Johnmdall

Does anyone know why the hour markers on the 42MM black dial and 42MM polar dial are different? If you look closely side by side you will see the outline from the lume is different sizes.

If I was to guess, I would guess that the white gold hour markers are the same, but since the paint on the outside of the markers on the white dial takes up some space, there's slightly less room for lume in the middle.

[ferrissteve11]

Originally Posted by dannyp

I was thinking a little more about this and have another theory that may or may not have anything to do with its traditionally lower desirability; it's not a watch anyone ever needed. They say it was designed for spelunkers, but I cannot figure out what specific "need" it was responding to.

The Sub, SD and GMT all represented true innovations in watchmaking, needed in order to allow certain tasks to be completed by divers, pilots and world travelers. They were watches you needed. The Exp. I wasn't exactly that, but did have a similar association (Everest).

But not the Explorer II, which feels to me as though it was designed first, with its purpose "assigned" retroactively.

When the GMT II was released, but prior to discontinuation of the GMT, Rolex essentially offered a dual and triple timezone version of the same watch, since only one had an independent 12hr hand. Rather than visually identical watches with different movements, perhaps there should have been a "fixed-bezel" version with two zones (the Exp. II) and a triple zone version (the GMT II).

Well said. I also think that since the EXii doesn't really have the signature Rolex 'look' that it is a turn off for some as well. I had one for about 6 weeks and ended up trading it for a Sub. Figured out that I was/am more of a diver watch fan at heart.

[rgwarden]

Originally Posted by dannyp

I was thinking a little more about this and have another theory that may or may not have anything to do with its traditionally lower desirability; it's not a watch anyone ever needed. They say it was designed for spelunkers, but I cannot figure out what specific "need" it was responding to.



The Sub, SD and GMT all represented true innovations in watchmaking, needed in order to allow certain tasks to be completed by divers, pilots and world travelers. They were watches you needed. The Exp. I wasn't exactly that, but did have a similar association (Everest).



But not the Explorer II, which feels to me as though it was designed first, with its purpose "assigned" retroactively.



When the GMT II was released, but prior to discontinuation of the GMT, Rolex essentially offered a dual and triple timezone version of the same watch, since only one had an independent 12hr hand. Rather than visually identical watches with different movements, perhaps there should have been a "fixed-bezel" version with two zones (the Exp. II) and a triple zone version (the GMT II).

This is interesting to me, as it hits upon precisely why I flipped a GMT II (the beloved BLNR) for the black 16570. I found that I was effectively never turning the bezel, and the talk of three time zones seemed like overkill (it’s just my opinion, don’t shoot me)
It also explains why the GMT Master (the later 16700s) are the GMTs I’m most interested in.
But I still (I know, I’m nuts) prefer the explorer II because I really like the 3185 with separate hour jumping.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bonatto]

Originally Posted by rgwarden

This is interesting to me, as it hits upon precisely why I flipped a GMT II (the beloved BLNR) for the black 16570. I found that I was effectively never turning the bezel, and the talk of three time zones seemed like overkill (it’s just my opinion, don’t shoot me)
It also explains why the GMT Master (the later 16700s) are the GMTs I’m most interested in.
But I still (I know, I’m nuts) prefer the explorer II because I really like the 3185 with separate hour jumping.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agreed. The jumping hour hand is masively useful. I have family living a few timezones away, enough to make for sometimes inconvenient contact times. 24h hand is set to 'family time's and hour and minute set to wherever I am. Since I also TZ hop on occasion, it's easy to just jump forwards or backwards as necessary. Same for DST. Like yourself, my GMT II's bezel was seldom touched. I can see it being useful for a banker in London dealing with Middle East and Asia simultaneously.

[rgwarden]

Also -to give you all a laugh - I’ve just been on holiday, and when I’m on a beach I prefer to wear my explorer II on a rubber B. At the hotel breakfast I’m obviously looking out for gents or indeed ladies wearing decent watches, and I spotted an oyster bracelet on a guy a few tables away. The closer I got the more I thought ‘wow that’s a great looking watch, clearly not a sub, in fact none of the ceramics, is it a Daytona? No looks like a brushed steel bezel oh, it’s a black 16570, just like mine.
Only the second I’ve ever seen in the wild. Looked great. Then I remembered I have one on my wrist....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mgd55]

Originally Posted by rgwarden

This is interesting to me, as it hits upon precisely why I flipped a GMT II (the beloved BLNR) for the black 16570. I found that I was effectively never turning the bezel, and the talk of three time zones seemed like overkill (it’s just my opinion, don’t shoot me)
It also explains why the GMT Master (the later 16700s) are the GMTs I’m most interested in.
But I still (I know, I’m nuts) prefer the explorer II because I really like the 3185 with separate hour jumping.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Honestly small percentage need a third time zone and the Exp II is better suited to most. But I’m fine with keeping it under the radar, don’t need a bunch of fanboys on it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mgd55]

Originally Posted by rgwarden

Also -to give you all a laugh - I’ve just been on holiday, and when I’m on a beach I prefer to wear my explorer II on a rubber B. At the hotel breakfast I’m obviously looking out for gents or indeed ladies wearing decent watches, and I spotted an oyster bracelet on a guy a few tables away. The closer I got the more I thought ‘wow that’s a great looking watch, clearly not a sub, in fact none of the ceramics, is it a Daytona? No looks like a brushed steel bezel oh, it’s a black 16570, just like mine.
Only the second I’ve ever seen in the wild. Looked great. Then I remembered I have one on my wrist....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Next level under the radar lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by rgwarden

This is interesting to me, as it hits upon precisely why I flipped a GMT II (the beloved BLNR) for the black 16570. I found that I was effectively never turning the bezel, and the talk of three time zones seemed like overkill (it’s just my opinion, don’t shoot me)
It also explains why the GMT Master (the later 16700s) are the GMTs I’m most interested in.
But I still (I know, I’m nuts) prefer the explorer II because I really like the 3185 with separate hour jumping.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agree on my love of the jumping hour (and the cool, but reasonably useless, aside of being the only two watches on which the date can be set backwards). I think the third time zone was incidental, as Rolex wanted to keep the same rotating bezel even after developing the independent 12hr hand.

It still looks very “Rolex” to me, because of the unmistakable case shape and bracelet, but I see what you mean. However, I do believe that if the watch had been associated with any truely groundbreaking innovation its look would be as recognized as its color-bezel brethren.

[dannyp]

Actually, come to think of it, I wonder if this is perhaps why the Daytona was initially so unsuccessful. Sure, the bezel markings were intended specifically for race car drivers, but this was hardly a true game changing innovation on the level of the Sub's water resistance, the SD's gas escape valve or the GMT's second timezone. Race car driving, while exhilarating, is also not on the same level of exploration/discovery as diving, mountain climbing or traveling.

[rgwarden]

I’ve got a strange aversion to Daytonas. They ‘look’ absolutely fantastic, but the idea of a complication I would never use, or more correctly, one of the sub dials effectively never turning (does it count hours?) just prevents me wanting one on my wrist. If I did, I’d want the chronograph forever turning! I wonder how many Daytona users do just that, to know that the sub dials are actually turning. I’d be forever worried about them seizing up through never turning.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RichardF]

Originally Posted by mineral

Highly recommend the polar. Beautiful white dial and make great pair with white Daytona




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Nice pair !

[Vaxe]

The Explorer II will likely be the first Rolex that gets a GID bezel.

[Locust]

Originally Posted by Vaxe

The Explorer II will likely be the first Rolex that gets a GID bezel.

What’s GID?

[puckbw11]

Originally Posted by Locust

What’s GID?

Glow in dark?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fskywalker]

Trully an under the radar watch, specially on black. On Oyster band again!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[SPMN]

Originally Posted by Vaxe

The Explorer II will likely be the first Rolex that gets a GID bezel.

Fixed and lumed ceramic bezel? That would be a hot watch.

[Rolex fan 61]

But why do you need a GID bezel????????

[ferrissteve11]

Why wouldn't you want a GID bezel :)

[bonatto]

Originally Posted by ferrissteve11

Why wouldn't you want a GID bezel :)

No thanks, pelagos reports of chipped away luminous?

[firstOwatch]

The Explorer II wore and looked smaller than all the other 40mm Rolex Sport models. The slope down and the not catchy serrated edge bezel made it under radar as well.

White Dial is considered RARE in my Rolex Sport model watches!

Go POLAR
both M serials , 3186 movements .