ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
17 September 2018, 01:18 PM | #121 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Los Angeles
Watch: VTNR, 214270, FXD
Posts: 439
|
Quote:
|
|
17 September 2018, 01:34 PM | #122 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Real Name: Linn Axis
Location: CA
Watch: Rolex 114270
Posts: 4
|
I have 114270s (2) and a 214270 mk1. Bother are very comfortable and generally work with anything. The 114270 is light and I generally don’t notice I’m wearing it. The 214270 bracelet is heavy and while comfortable, I always remember I’m wearing it.
I like the 214270 mk1 as the hand proportions and white gold numbers give it a different look than the 114270. The 214370 mk2 is just a larger 114270 and it wouldn’t make sense to me to have both. Obviously the Explorer is my jam :) |
17 September 2018, 11:09 PM | #123 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: PA USA
Watch: Explorers
Posts: 278
|
Quote:
I purchased mine 2/18. 214270. Matte dial. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
18 September 2018, 01:24 AM | #124 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: New England
Posts: 248
|
I purchased a 39mm Explorer last year, had it for about 6 months and traded it, along with with another watch, for a Hulk. I missed having an Explorer so much that I ended up getting a late model 36mm (114270) about 3 months later for about half of what I paid for the 39mm. I prefer the dimensions/proportions of the 36mm MUCH more than the 39mm. The 39mm just looks "off" to me. It looks bulbous or bloated...maybe I'm crazy. With that being said, I'd probably buy it again just because the dial and bracelet of the 39mm are simply awesome. I think about going back to the 39mm all the time as it was probably the most comfortable watch I've owned and it's the only modern Rolex that really speaks to me. Either way, you can't lose.
|
18 September 2018, 04:48 AM | #125 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 901
|
Quote:
|
|
18 September 2018, 08:28 AM | #126 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: N/A
Posts: 175
|
I totally agree. A 37-37,5 mm modern Explorer 1 would be a home run. Although I think most people would still think that the 1016 is the ultimate Explorer.
|
18 September 2018, 09:51 AM | #127 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: New Zealand
Watch: 114060
Posts: 2,630
|
A vote for the 39mm.
|
18 September 2018, 09:55 AM | #128 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 6,523
|
39 for me (that’s if the OP is still looking)
__________________
Wear the watch you like, not the one they tell you to wear! |
18 September 2018, 11:19 AM | #129 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Sydney
Posts: 26
|
36mm for me- a real classic
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
18 September 2018, 03:09 PM | #130 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 12,356
|
I like the 36mm classic size. But I also have a smaller wrist @ 6.375"....YMMV I gues sin terms of what you're looking for.
|
18 September 2018, 07:23 PM | #131 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Asia
Watch: Explorer 214270
Posts: 149
|
Quote:
I noticed it since I got it but no one can provide a certain answer compare to the 214270Mk1, |
|
18 September 2018, 07:44 PM | #132 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Real Name: Francisco
Location: San Juan, PR
Watch: Is Ticking !
Posts: 24,603
|
Easy choice: 114270
__________________
Francisco ♛ 16610 / 116264 Ω 168.022 / 2535.80.00 / 2230.50.00 Zenith 02.470.405 Henry Archer Eclipse 2FA security enabled |
18 September 2018, 08:23 PM | #133 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Houston
Posts: 17,622
|
size wins in the end. Ultimately its probably the most important factor to me as its part of the overall appearance. Getting into the finer details doesnt really matter if the size isnt right.
__________________
Instagram: tyler.watches current collection: Patek 5164A, Patek 5524G, Rolex Platinum Daytona 116506, Rolex Sea Dweller 43 126600, Rolex GMT II 116710LN, AP 15400ST (silver), Panerai 913, Omega Speedmaster moonwatch, Tudor Black Bay (Harrods Edition) |
9 October 2018, 02:15 AM | #134 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 901
|
I do think that both the 36mm and 39mm models were actually made to fit the same sized wrists (maybe why the bracelet size hasn't changed), but the 39 fulfills the "modern" proportions of today's market, whereas the 36 has the more classic look. It's less "big vs. small" and more "vintage vs. modern".
|
9 October 2018, 03:18 AM | #135 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: New York
Watch: GMT II BLNR
Posts: 196
|
try them both on. took me a while but ended up picking up the 214270. just felt better, i have a 6.75" wrist.
|
9 October 2018, 03:43 AM | #136 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 5,615
|
|
9 October 2018, 04:48 AM | #137 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Real Name: Mike
Location: Knoxville, Tn
Watch: 16610,16710,214270
Posts: 427
|
After having some misgivings about the 14270 being too small, I'm coming around to the idea of wearing a 36mm. If Rolex ever decides to bring the Explorer back down to 36mm and keep a fully-lumed dial, I'd definitely consider buying one.
__________________
♛- 16610 (1999) ♛- 16710 (2018) ♛- 214270 (2018) ♛- Yet to be determined, but a white 16520 is on the short list. (I believe that I'll be able to read it better than my old 116520) |
9 October 2018, 05:07 AM | #138 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 173
|
Had a 36, flipped it when the new 39 came out. I couldn’t get away with the solid 3/6/9 numerals and the undersized hands on it. I sold that one and after a hiatus of 3 years or so I got the new 39 with the full lume. It’s a great watch and I’ve been wearing it loads. I love it but the idea of a 37.5 or 38 mm version with the same proportions is a real winner.
|
9 October 2018, 07:29 AM | #139 |
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2018
Real Name: James
Location: Wimbledon, London
Posts: 451
|
I went for 39... no regrets. New lumed version, it looks fantastic. I wear it mostly on this MN strap, because of the superior comfort. And well its my exploring watch... its my active, hard wearing watch. For sports / outdoors etc etc
|
9 October 2018, 08:12 AM | #140 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: N/A
Posts: 175
|
I recently got the chance to compare both side by side. Although the 36mm fits me better, it's such an inferior watch. The bracelet and clasp particularly are so inferior IMO.
And to be honest 36 is a bit too small for most people. I am absolutely on board with the ideia of a 37-37.5 Explorer, keeping everything else the same (or maybe updating the movement to have the new longer power reserve). In the mean time, I will enjoy my 39, which is easily my favorite watch. |
9 October 2018, 08:53 AM | #141 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 5,615
|
While the newer bracelets/clasps are unquestionably built better, outside of some controversial spot welding, things get tricky when you start taking comfort into account. I find the older, lighter weight bracelets (and watches) to be more comfortable.
|
9 October 2018, 09:11 AM | #142 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: N/A
Posts: 175
|
Quote:
Do you guys think Rolex will ever size the Explorer back down? Or expecting that is being unrealistic? I can see them never going back, since 39 is far from oversized... |
|
9 October 2018, 09:24 AM | #143 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 5,615
|
Quote:
I kind of doubt we'll see another Explorer size any time soon, although I wouldn't be shocked if they brought back 36mm to go along with the 39mm. |
|
9 October 2018, 10:59 AM | #144 |
2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Real Name: George
Location: Cape Cod
Watch: 216570 Explorer II
Posts: 2,317
|
I've had both and it's really what you prefer. The 36 is stealthy, but the 39 has a much nicer bracelet and it's not obtrusive.
|
15 October 2018, 10:55 AM | #145 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: London
Watch: Royal Oak/Tank 18k
Posts: 262
|
The 36mm generally going around the £3.5k mark. The 39mm around the £4K mark (pre owned). In your opinion do you think they will hold their value? Thank you.
|
15 October 2018, 11:49 PM | #146 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: London
Watch: Royal Oak/Tank 18k
Posts: 262
|
Bump
|
15 October 2018, 11:58 PM | #147 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: N/A
Posts: 175
|
Not to the extent of the other popular sports models. But you should be better off than buying pretty much any other model from pretty much any other brand.
|
26 October 2018, 11:06 PM | #148 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 901
|
Hey can someone confirm or deny this. Do the 36mm versions 14270/114270 have solid white gold 3, 6, 9 numbers or do they have non-luminous white paint in the center? It's very hard to tell in photos because of the shine.
|
26 October 2018, 11:11 PM | #149 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: N/A
Posts: 175
|
As far as I know it has non luminous white paint outlined in white gold.
|
26 October 2018, 11:29 PM | #150 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: the Far West
Posts: 1,282
|
36mm, hands down...
__________________
Rolex & Patek Philippe |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.