Explorer I weight?

[towns03]

Hi all,

I'm looking at buying my first Rolex. The two in the running are 214270 and 114270, the last two generations of Explorer I.

1) I like the idea of the smaller 114270 (36mm), but I don't like the mess of wading through used watches online


2) I really like the easy link adjustment on the 214270 for comfort's sake, but I'm concerned about the larger size and weight (39mm)


Does anyone here have an accurate weight on either model? I hope the comparison will swing my internal debate one way or the other. Comfort is my #1 concern when changing from a plastic luminox…

TIA!

[1mlee0916]

Had the same concern. Ended up getting the new one. You won’t regret it. Love the bracelet and it’s super comfortable. I recall seeing somewhere 144 grams. Google is your friend ;)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[towns03]

did you handle the 114270? Was it much lighter? I'm scared to death I'll get one or the other and not like how they feel - either too big/heavy (214) or not like the un-adjustable band on the 114...

[WatchGuy1966]

214270 is 4.7 ounces / 132 grams

[nqb289]

My 214270 is about 130g. Comfort depends on style of watch you think the Explorer is. To me Explorer is a sport watch, so 130g is light

[Jmbarrack]

Comfort is never really an issue with Rolex. 5 digit or 6 digit models. Not many people ever complain here on the forums about certain models being uncomfortable very often. Explorer especially.

Just out of curiosity what is your wrist size? I think that would go a long way in determining what advice people may give.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mmalek1]

I’m not sure on exact weight, but the 214270 39mm size is great for me on my approx 7.25-7.5 wrist. I had one link removed and it’s perfect. I experience wrist swell during climate changes and the modern bracelets especially with easy link are amazing. The bracelets are still wearable even when they are tight. Modern Rolex bracelets are just comfortable and have that silky bracelet feel that wins me over. Just one day for me thus far, but loving it. Good luck with your decision.

[Pauln]

I’ve owned both. The 114270 feels much lighter on the wrist. IMO, that’s good.

[towns03]

thanks for the input!

I wonder if I can get the easy link clasp put on a 114270? the AD near me acts like they don't do any work at all on these watches.

[mpv232323]

I’m 3 months into the new model. Small wrist and first Rolex. I love it — super comfortable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Brny11]

I thought weight was a typo considering the general Rolex shortage!

In terms of comfort, the Explorer was a real treat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jmbarrack]

Originally Posted by towns03

thanks for the input!

I wonder if I can get the easy link clasp put on a 114270?

I think you’d have a difficult time sourcing a clasp without a full 6 digit bracelet .. If it were interchangeable at all. Someone else would have to answer that question.

For me personally I just switched from a 6 digit reference to a 5 digit sub. While the bracelet is noticeably thinner, lighter and well, cheaper feeling — it’s just as comfortable if it not more comfortable than the 6 digit with easy link. If you’re a fellow with with a smaller sized wrist, the bulk of the new clasps may not be as comfortable for you. If you have larger wrists and they tend to swell in the summer and contract in the winter, then the easy link is a savior as some have already mentioned.

I have a 6 3/4 inch wrist which always stays that way. And although the 5 digit bracelet rattles like hell and feels cheap compared to the new ones, I wouldn’t trade the non-super case sub in for the bracket upgrade. I just prefer the way the 5 digits look on me and in general. They’re more true to the originals.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rph08]

I've owned both. Started with the 39mm, which I traded off, and later purchased a 36mm that I still own. The 36 is most definitely lighter than the 39, but I just like it better. I have 7.5 inch wrist, and the watch looks great to me.

[csaltphoto]

Originally Posted by Jmbarrack

I think you’d have a difficult time sourcing a clasp without a full 6 digit bracelet .. If it were interchangeable at all. Someone else would have to answer that question.

For me personally I just switched from a 6 digit reference to a 5 digit sub. While the bracelet is noticeably thinner, lighter and well, cheaper feeling — it’s just as comfortable if it not more comfortable than the 6 digit with easy link. If you’re a fellow with with a smaller sized wrist, the bulk of the new clasps may not be as comfortable for you. If you have larger wrists and they tend to swell in the summer and contract in the winter, then the easy link is a savior as some have already mentioned.

I have a 6 3/4 inch wrist which always stays that way. And although the 5 digit bracelet rattles like hell and feels cheap compared to the new ones, I wouldn’t trade the non-super case sub in for the bracket upgrade. I just prefer the way the 5 digits look on me and in general. They’re more true to the originals.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've read of both easy link and glidelock swaps on the older style oyster bracelets.

I did a similar move and prefer the older design. I don't find that the bracelet rattles at all on the wrist. It was also pointed out in some other post that the hollow center links and end links are actually more work to produce. Someone has to mill out that steel (the very old ones were folded steel but have been milled for some time). The SEL's and solid center links are just machined and drilled. It does not actually add strength but it does add weight. Up in the air about the Glidelock. My wrist doesn't change much in size so sort of a non issue for me. The Glidelock is kind of clunky and huge. But actually useful for fitting over clothes/gloves or a wetsuit. The diver extension on the older bracelets is about useless. Way too much extension for most wetsuits. About right for a dry suit. But only one size.

I think a competent jeweler could remove the divers extension and replace the rivet in the end of the last link with the one that "clicks" into place when you fold it. You could pop it out and pop it back in mm increments. That would mean that the bracelet is not "permenently" anchored to the clasp... But not sure that would matter with safety clasp.

[Thuilln]

Last time I checked (really) it was 78g vs almost 150g; literally double from one to another. Needless to say I prefer the smaller one.

[Jmbarrack]

Originally Posted by csaltphoto

I've read of both easy link and glidelock swaps on the older style oyster bracelets.



I did a similar move and prefer the older design. I don't find that the bracelet rattles at all on the wrist. It was also pointed out in some other post that the hollow center links and end links are actually more work to produce. Someone has to mill out that steel (the very old ones were folded steel but have been milled for some time). The SEL's and solid center links are just machined and drilled. It does not actually add strength but it does add weight. Up in the air about the Glidelock. My wrist doesn't change much in size so sort of a non issue for me. The Glidelock is kind of clunky and huge. But actually useful for fitting over clothes/gloves or a wetsuit. The diver extension on the older bracelets is about useless. Way too much extension for most wetsuits. About right for a dry suit. But only one size.



I think a competent jeweler could remove the divers extension and replace the rivet in the end of the last link with the one that "clicks" into place when you fold it. You could pop it out and pop it back in mm increments. That would mean that the bracelet is not "permenently" anchored to the clasp... But not sure that would matter with safety clasp.

What you’re saying makes a lot of sense with the hollow vs solid bracelets. I think the quality and strength argument is more perception. You hold something heavier, more solid, and cost more ... you immediately think better quality when that might not be the case. And like you said, the rattle is more when it’s off the wrist than on.

I think what I’m trying to say to the OP is - don’t let things like the bracelet or clasp change if you’re really after one of the older 114 models because of the 36mm size suiting you more. I know it’s not very easy to hunt down later model non-super case / 5 digit pieces - but they do pop up on the forms and in shops from time to time in good Condition with box and papers.

The hunt is half the fun.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[towns03]

thanks again for all the input!

My wrist swells daily. I make an adjustment on my current rubber band more than once a day. (maybe I'm wearing too loose... it gets cocked to the side of my wrist and feels tighter than it is) The easy link sounds attractive and maybe necessary.

I also like the idea of a lighter watch. if the 114 is 1/2 the weight that might be just as attractive as the adjustable bracelet.

I think my wrist is from 6 7/8 to 7 1/4, FWIW.

[javier]

Wrist = or < 6,5 inches = 36 mm case

[dreyep]

101g with 5 and 7 links