Don’t understand. Why go from 36 to 39 then back to 36mm

[Marcjvr]

I cannot fathom why Rolex decided it was time to retire the 36mm Explorer back in 2010. Upgrade it to 39mm. Then refine the 39mm with the MK 2 dial. You have arguably the perfect modern Explorer!!

Then out of the blue, with this release, throw it all out the window and go back to 36mm!!

Can someone please explain what they are thinking or what their intent is? I am baffled.

[ciceroyeah]

They made a mistake and then corrected it.

[Old Expat Beast]

They realised the error of their ways. The 39 never looked quite right to me.

[vh2k]

Correct me if I’m wrong... but isn’t the X136 just a DJ36 with a different dial and minor changes (polished vs brushed case or whatever)?

[Arid]

Originally Posted by ciceroyeah

They made a mistake and then corrected it.

[huncho]

we don't have all the data on sales and whatever else that they do so i'm sure there was a reason, just not one that we know lol

[GradyPhilpott]

I agree that the 39mm never looked quite right and tried a few tricks to make it work.

I never had anything against a 39mm Explorer, but I did think that the 36mm should come back.

Originally Posted by Marcjvr

Can someone please explain what they are thinking or what their intent is? I am baffled.

No one ever knows what Rolex is thinking.

[Duey]

I've been waiting years for this !! I couldn't be happier

[Yachtbuoy]

The 36mm is basically God's Own Size, 39mm for that kind of watch looked weird.

[Maxy]

Originally Posted by ciceroyeah

They made a mistake and then corrected it.

Mistake for 11 years?

Rolex basically clubs cases wherever possible. As OP39 and Explorer 39 were sharing cases and they discontinued OP 39 and released OP36 and OP41, the next step would be Explorer36 and Explorer41.

Discontinuing one in between model at 39 will give them optioon for 2 models at 36 and 41.

Wait and watch, next year it'll Explorer41. Giving a gap for larger model is good instead of releasing both at same time.

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by Duey

I've been waiting years for this !! I couldn't be happier

[Krash]

I predict they’re going to 41 in the future.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DramaTurtle]

It is quite surprising, I never thought they'd do this again since the DJ2. I'm definitely sticking with my 39 but wouldn't mind adding a 36...maybe...

[ellio32]

I don’t think we’ll ever know. I certainly don’t think it’s because the 39mm was a mistake though. I wouldn’t be surprised if they released a 41mm Explorer in the next couple of years.

[RolexSimon]

I think they'll regard the 36 explorer as the "heritage" model and I agree they realised the 39 was a mistake. Some may have liked it but the majority preferred the 36.

[ellio32]

Originally Posted by RolexSimon

I think they'll regard the 36 explorer as the "heritage" model and I agree they realised the 39 was a mistake. Some may have liked it but the majority preferred the 36.

The majority preferred the 36, eh? What are you basing that off of? A bunch of enthusiasts in a echo chamber who in no way represent the larger watch buying public?

[Frank McKay]

Originally Posted by ellio32

The majority preferred the 36, eh? What are you basing that off of? A bunch of enthusiasts in a echo chamber who in no way represent the larger watch buying public?

Agreed. If anything I would say it’s the opposite. The

[jpwv]

My interest in Explorer is relatively recent as I became intrigued by all the love on this forum for the 36mm 114270. I recently had the opportunity to try one on and it wore much smaller than I expected. It even seems smaller than a DJ36, which I think is a great size

Couple questions...1) Is the Explorer 114270 actually smaller than a modern DJ36? If so, is it due to a difference in the case shape? 2) Is the new Explorer 124270 expected to be the same size, case shape, etc. as the Explorer 114270 or since it is a new model should it be more like a modern DJ36?

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by ellio32

The majority preferred the 36, eh? What are you basing that off of? A bunch of enthusiasts in a echo chamber who in no way represent the larger watch buying public?

Well, Rolex didn't make the decision hoping they'd sell fewer Explorers.

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by jpwv

My interest in Explorer is relatively recent as I became intrigued by all the love on this forum for the 36mm 114270. I recently had the opportunity to try one on and it wore much smaller than I expected. It even seems smaller than a DJ36, which I think is a great size

Couple questions...1) Is the Explorer 114270 actually smaller than a DJ36? If so, is it due to a difference in the case shape? 2) Is the new Explorer 124270 expected to be the same size, case shape, etc. as the Explorer 114270 or since it is a new model should it be more like the new DJ36?

The lugs of the 114270 are much thinner than on the DJ36 of the same period.

[Max 66]

My opinion is that a 36 mm case is too little for a sporty watch and by the way to me it is too little also for a DJ.
I know that the original Exp was 36 mm, but also the original Daytona was 37 mm and I do not believe that people regret not having a 37 mm Daytona.

[jltait]

I don’t think it was a mistake necessarily. The two sizes could coexist simultaneously. I imagine everyone commenting here would like to have a choice between the two. I think Maxy’s thought above makes sense. From a supply chain perspective it’s easier to produce only 36 and 41 cases. 39 may have just been a casualty of right sizing tooling to increase throughput all around.

Selfishly I’m glad the new 36 will soon be available to adorn my puny wrist. May even spring for the unloved tt version.

[Phvase]

Originally Posted by Marcjvr

I cannot fathom why Rolex decided it was time to retire the 36mm Explorer back in 2010. Upgrade it to 39mm. Then refine the 39mm with the MK 2 dial. You have arguably the perfect modern Explorer!!

Then out of the blue, with this release, throw it all out the window and go back to 36mm!!

Can someone please explain what they are thinking or what their intent is? I am baffled.

I wouldnt be surprised if re added the 39mm later down the track as a white dial and have 2 variations just like the explorer 2. Cause now that they discontinued the 39 in both the op and explorer. Maybe they are testing the waters to see how much people really want the 39. Cause they must of listen to all the screams for the 36? Just my thoughts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TimeAZ]

Correct me if I am wrong but I believe the 36mm 114270 was actually a 35mm watch, and yes, it wears smaller than the DJ36.

I think the 124270 will be a slight bit larger than the 114270, but still wear small due to its black dial and thin lugs. It's a little more dressy than the sporty 39mm version. I could see both co-existing in a collection.

[forcinitijp]

Originally Posted by ciceroyeah

They made a mistake and then corrected it.

And make another mistake with the explorer two tones now

[emersm]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

They realised the error of their ways. The 39 never looked quite right to me.

I own the Mark 2 version and I agree.

[Pimpsy]

Originally Posted by Krash

I predict they’re going to 41 in the future.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agree. They’re definitely making room for a 36mm and 41-43mm option. 39mm Is a weird size that just doesn’t work well with that model and today’s aesthetic.

[llvhhui]

I'm excited and pissed off at the same time. Now there is finally a perfect explorer, but I just bought a 114270 a few months ago.

[Paul7]

Originally Posted by Yachtbuoy

The 36mm is basically God's Own Size, 39mm for that kind of watch looked weird.

Agree, it is too big for a time only watch.

[vlps]

I think they are getting rid of 39 across the board like they did with the OP. Setting up for a 36/41mm option just like the datejusts and OP's. Easier to hit your females with the 36 and males with the 41.