What is the future for the Explorer II?

[rolexryan329]

I hope my bias doesn't show but I love this reference. I feel like it's the only one that's stayed true to its roots, a tool watch first and foremost. There haven't been any PM variants in its ~40 year history. There hasn't been too much buzz behind it or any major advertisements for it as of recent. It's stayed pretty much the same since day 1. In fact, the only major change has been an increase in the size which actually helps it's purpose: an easy to read watch in all light conditions that can measure multiple time zones

This leads me to wonder, will Rolex ever really update this watch? Will they put it on a Jubilee? A ceramic bezel? A lumed bezel? I don't think it needs any of this. Could they discontinue it? I think Rolex is comfortable where the Explorer II is and that's why it's stayed so simple. What do you think?

[playford]

Leave it alone!

[dreyep]

It's a corker. I recently acquired a polar 40mm, and while it took me a while to get acquainted with it, I now love it.

Having said that, I wouldn't half mind a 40mm version with a glacier blue sunburst dial.

[TurboTim14]

I think it will get a redesign and they will go back to a style like the 1655 Exp II.

[sapper]

I think when the 50th anniversary hits they will change the movement to the newer version, and the orange 24 hour hand and text will be replaced with green. All else will remain the same.

[Tools]

Originally Posted by rolexryan329

. . .

This leads me to wonder, will Rolex ever really update this watch? Will they put it on a Jubilee? A ceramic bezel? A lumed bezel? I don't think it needs any of this. Could they discontinue it? I think Rolex is comfortable where the Explorer II is and that's why it's stayed so simple. What do you think?

Update!!!

It just had a complete make-over from end to end less than a decade ago.

[Syed117]

Just go back to red.

I hate the orange.

[Cooper33]

Maybe add a ceramic bezel in the future?

[1665fan]

They made it 2mm larger they have updated it lol

[173rdabn]

I own a 42 mm 216570 black dial. Absolutely love it. I think a black ceramic bezel would be great. The bezel would be more legible in odd or poor lighting.

[KFP55]

I absolutely love it the way it is. Threw it on a RubberB for my week at the beach - the perfect “tool” watch. Don’t worry with banging it around, super legible, no sand in the fixed bezel and looks at home on the comfy rubber strap. Would not be the same with a ceramic bezel...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Chester01]

God I hope they leave it alone and keep the crockery off what is a proper tool watch. I may be in the minority here, but I’m not impressed with slapping ceramic on a watch and then oohing and ahhing over it. Sorry, Ceramics have been used on watches since about the 70’s and Rolex was late to the game. What they should have done is explored using a different more precious material or left as is. This business of slapping a ceramic bezel on something like they did with the Daytona just comes off as pure marketing gimmick. May work on 90 percent of the folks that think it’s some new fantastic material, but not this guy.

[ras47]

I'm personally hoping for ceramic bezels.

[Cooper33]

Originally Posted by Chester01

God I hope they leave it alone and keep the crockery off what is a proper tool watch. I may be in the minority here, but I’m not impressed with slapping ceramic on a watch and then oohing and ahhing over it. Sorry, Ceramics have been used on watches since about the 70’s and Rolex was late to the game. What they should have done is explored using a different more precious material or left as is. This business of slapping a ceramic bezel on something like they did with the Daytona just comes off as pure marketing gimmick. May work on 90 percent of the folks that think it’s some new fantastic material, but not this guy.

Agreed in parts, but the whole point of the ceramic is because it will (in theory) never fade. Same reason why they constantly upgrade their SS alloy, to prevent corrosion as much as possible. Having said that, while I think a ceramic bezel might be in play for a future iteration of the Explorer, I prefer it just the way it is (and with the orange hand).

[herts9]

I love the way it is currently, with the brushed bezel. That said, it'll go the way of the Sub, Daytona and GMT and get fitted for a ceramic insert, in due time.

[dori]

Originally Posted by KFP55

I absolutely love it the way it is. Threw it on a RubberB for my week at the beach - the perfect “tool” watch. Don’t worry with banging it around, super legible, no sand in the fixed bezel and looks at home on the comfy rubber strap. Would not be the same with a ceramic bezel...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

May I ask you where did you purchase the strap from? It’s beautiful on that watch

[jsausley]

Ceramic bezel and a downsize to 40mm would put me on the waitlist for the Polar dial.

[JP.]

I love both, old and new.

I just recently acquired mine. I was in two minds between the 16570 and 216570 but in the end of the day the old design won (although I like the new bigger size).

[KFP55]

Originally Posted by dori

May I ask you where did you purchase the strap from? It’s beautiful on that watch

RubberB: https://rubberb.com/en/rolex-watch-b...ected-color=57

Pretty easy to swap if you have the tools. I got a blue one for my Pepsi and it didn’t really work, but I love my Explorer on it. Makes it feel like an entirely different watch

[darrenho]

They actually look pretty nice in the pictures!
Looking forward to what Rolex would do on the next gen Exp II.

Originally Posted by ras47

I'm personally hoping for ceramic bezels.

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by Cooper33

Agreed in parts, but the whole point of the ceramic is because it will (in theory) never fade. Same reason why they constantly upgrade their SS alloy, to prevent corrosion as much as possible. Having said that, while I think a ceramic bezel might be in play for a future iteration of the Explorer, I prefer it just the way it is (and with the orange hand).

I can get onboard with that. But it’s Rolex and my expectation is that they don’t follow others, but rather come up with something that is hard, scratch/fade resistant, but also less brittle and get rid of the excessive shine. In my mind trading scratch resistant for a more brittle material is not a net gain. I mean after 30 years of the ss/aluminum use the bezel fades. Well big deal your out 60 bucks. If the unguarded ceramic gets a whack, it’s several hundred. I will take fade over failure risk any day.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Cooper33]

Originally Posted by Chester01

I can get onboard with that. But it’s Rolex and my expectation is that they don’t follow others, but rather come up with something that is hard, scratch/fade resistant, but also less brittle and get rid of the excessive shine. In my mind trading scratch resistant for a more brittle material is not a net gain. I mean after 30 years of the ss/aluminum use the bezel fades. Well big deal your out 60 bucks. If the unguarded ceramic gets a whack, it’s several hundred. I will take fade over failure risk any day.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I love me some vintage faded bezels, so we're in the same page!

[georgekart]

I hope Rolex releases a new 44mm rose gold Explorer II with ceramic bezel on a pearlmaster bracelet.

In truth though I hope they release a new Explorer II with 32xx movements, 1655 style dial and hands (retaining the polar option) and ceramic non rotating bezel. Oh and add Glidelock for the heck of it. But leave it a SS brushed links actual tool watch.

[007_Omega]

I have a feeling the 50th anniversary is going to be a stunner and thus completely unattainable. I don't see them going back to 40mm. Rolex have been making conscious efforts to distinguish their lines and I agree with that decision. The 5 digit range of watches are clones of each other. I do think the 42mm Explorer II is too big because it doesn't even wear like a 42mm.

The GMT is 40mm so the Explorer II will probably remain the bigger and toolier option. With the jubilee a standard on the GMT, they could justify a 40mm Explorer II since it would have a standard brushed Oyster bracelet.

If I were Rolex though, I wouldn't even release a 50th anniversary Explorer II. I'd create an Explorer III and show that the company can still progress.

[carwashchris]

I don't have one but it's next on my list, I favor the white in 40 mm , I have a small wrist. I think it's a heck of a watch for the money compared to others. The one thing that is bothering me as I start looking at what's out there for sale is that there A LOT of them FOR SALE.

Great thread. Thanks Chris

[dreyep]

Originally Posted by 007_Omega

I'd create an Explorer III and show that the company can still progress.

Which gets one to thinking, would the one after that be an Explorer IV or an Explorer IIII?

[TswaneNguni]

Explorer II in 42mm is awesome .I have the white dial .Don't judge it in pics,judge it in the metal .

Ceramic bezel does not suit the design .They should keep it as is .

[007_Omega]

Originally Posted by dreyep

Which gets one to thinking, would the one after that be an Explorer IV or an Explorer IIII?

The real question is if the ADs will transfer your spot on the wait list after 20 years of waiting for the Explorer III to the Explorer IV/IIII?

[Dirt]

Who knows what the future holds?
All I can say is that it think the model lost something when they upsized it. The 40 mm was a nicer watch overall IMO.

On reflection, I think the hands on the latest version leave a lot to be desired. Where as the previous hand set gave the watch more versatility.
I really loved the old 5 digit models.

[onnomon]

Considering that one of the design uses of the Explorer II is spelunking (hence the 24-hour hand), it would be disaster if you whacked your ceramic bezel against rock, and see it shatter. Needless to say, metal accepts the blow with a character-forming (and a test of your character) dent. Somewhere inside the Rolex corp, there is probably a design manifesto for each model, and this would be a consideration.