Sub-C VS. Explorer II 42mm

[z32turbo]

I've tried on both and my choice was the SubC. Well actually it was the SubC LV.

[masterserg]

Originally Posted by Psmith

I had the same reservation when the new Exp II was released, but I find the crown is plenty big enough and very easy & smooth to operate. I also think that if a Triplock had been used, it would have necessitated larger crown guards and thrown off the overall proportions of the case (my guess is that the lugs would then have to be wider to balance the crown guards). The crown snugs down nicely into the guards, but with enough protruding to give it some 'presence' (if that makes sense!)

I think a Triplock was used on the GMT II C to make it easier to operate with the rotating bezel (edge protrudes further than a fixed bezel), and also to give it more of a 'Submariner look'

Interesting perspective indeed.

[Redmy]

The very first Rolex I wanted was a Sub. I was finally in the market for one and I found TRF. After doing some reading and shopping I saw some EX2 images and damn... never could I've imagine that I would fall in love at first sight.

[Singslinger]

Originally Posted by Psmith

I had the same reservation when the new Exp II was released, but I find the crown is plenty big enough and very easy & smooth to operate. I also think that if a Triplock had been used, it would have necessitated larger crown guards and thrown off the overall proportions of the case (my guess is that the lugs would then have to be wider to balance the crown guards). The crown snugs down nicely into the guards, but with enough protruding to give it some 'presence' (if that makes sense!)

I think a Triplock was used on the GMT II C to make it easier to operate with the rotating bezel (edge protrudes further than a fixed bezel), and also to give it more of a 'Submariner look'

Thanks, makes sense to me!

[Solo118]

Guys put a deposit on the Exp II... once I sell my 16710 Pepsi... it will be mine!!!

[Psmith]

Originally Posted by masterserg

Interesting perspective indeed.

Originally Posted by Singslinger

Thanks, makes sense to me!

Thanks guys

Originally Posted by Solo118

Guys put a deposit on the Exp II... once I sell my 16710 Pepsi... it will be mine!!!

Congrats Sol

[supertrooper]

One more for keeping the Sub-C.

[mmmk604]

I've always thought my next purchase was going to be a SubC
But this weekend I went to try the GMT Master II and I loved it.

Have u tried it??

[sea-dweller]

I would get both!

[bayerische]

Keep the sub.

[jimbones43]

I never tell anyone what to do after all its your money and your wrist. But it sounds to me that you're not digging the SubC but on the other hand you're not totally sold on the exp II either. Maybe wait awhile until you can make a more clear cut decision.

Don't listen to what you hear about resale value or what movement someone claims to be better than the other, that's just hogwash IMO. Either watch will perform wonderfully and bring you years of enjoyment if cared for properly. Get what you like best and are comfortable with.

Good luck!

[p3l3r]

even though i own the new exp 2 42mm. i would say keep the subc.
subc is on my "next" list....

[Solo118]

I got the Exp II Black.

I said if I don't like it I can always flip it and get another Sub-C. It is a fantastic watch thus far but did not have much time to play with it.

The size is not bad at all, it fits very nicely. I will post up an "incoming" thread tomorrow hopefully.

[RC83]

I have been on the fence with both the EXP II and the Sub for over 6 months now. I finally pulled the trigger and purchased the Sub this weekend because of its strong history (peer pressure). I spent the weekend with the Sub and all I can think about is the EXP II. The black dial exp ii is just an amazing timepiece and really sings! The sub is a stunning watch and there is a reason it is so popular, but there is just something very magical about the EXP II. I'm heading to the AD tomorrow and see I can possibly make an exchange. I would strongly suggest you get what you really love and put little stock in others opinion. I listened to people who love their subs, but ultimately made the wrong decision.

[andyol1966]

If you had got the ExpII, would you have been thinking about the sub? Human nature, wanting what we haven't got? I own both and love them equally. Good luck with the exchange

[ND10]

You won't know for sure until you take the plunge. I had a SubC/gmtC dilemma earlier this year. Bought the GMT first and after a month knew that I should have gotten the sub and went for it. And later thought a polar ex42 would be a great compliment to the subC. Forced to pick only one? I'd pick the subC as i feel i can dress it slightly up or down. The explorer is for me to go with casual attire. There's really no right or wrong as it really depends on your lifestyle or preference. I have small wrists and the slightly smaller sub fits me better overall. Good luck

[submariner66]

Get the one that is the most "magical" like you said. For me the orange hands and ss bezel were a no go, but others love those features. I prefer the exp. 1 over the exp. 2. But I really love the red hands on the older exp. 2.

Each model is going to speak to different people in different ways. Subs are always going to win polls, more votes because they speak to more people.

[Dennis2005]

Explorer II for sure!

[samuel019]

I also had the same dilemma. I tried on both months ago. Every time I looked at the SubC I kept saying I want something different than everyone else. So I went with the Exp II first. No regrets. I will never ever flip or sale that watch. It's my favorite. Very comfortable to wear and looks amazing. Then as the months past by I started thinking of the SubC. Constantly. Since I knew I would never sale or flip my Exp II. I eventually added the SubC. If you can't do two at one time which I couldn't either. Get Explorer first. Then try like hell to add the SubC later. Here are some of my pics.ImageUploadedByTapatalk1351568540.939848.jpgImageUploadedByTapatalk1351568582.062016.jpgImageUploadedByTapatalk1351568598.782084.jpgImageUploadedByTapatalk1351568611.724290.jpg

[Castor]

Depends what you're doing with the watch. Personally I wouldn't buy anything based on its resale value, but for the value it gives me.
I got the Explorer II because it kind of flies under the radar, the hands are bigger so that I can more easily read it, and because I tend to get into places where there is a lot of dust and sand and crap and a rotating bezel would be a dust and sand magnet. I don't scuba dive so I don't really need the rotating bezel.
Plus the Explorer II (Polar 216570) looks really nice with a suit.
It's a very versatile.

[Roller07]

Keep the Sub

[RRGHOST1]

Even though i have a TT Blue SubC i do have a leaning towards GMT's and Explorers having a two time zone feature or three time zones in some cases. Both have features that make a good watch,difficult decision. As said there is no bad choice.

[Vincent65]

keep the Sub

[Ardalan]

Sub C

[AK797]

Subc.

[beetleything]

Good thread.

For me the Explorer 11 is one cool watch.
As has been said - everybody seems to have a Sub nowadays & the Sub C looks way to boxey & shiny!
The Explorer 11 is more individual & unique - not as common.

[herbie911]

I voted Sub C. It is a gorgeous looking watch and the clasp is an amazing piece of work. Just like a Beemer 3 series, there are lots of reasons why it is so popular. However, a white dial Explorer 11 also looks incredible. Personally, I will keep the Sub and save up for the Explorer!

[sheldonsmith]

Interesting perspectives indeed. I have both a GMT-C and the Explorer II. I see the GMT and the Sub as being very similar with respects to the dial and readability. I do like the rotating bezel of the Sub-C; very smooth. I do appreciate the rotating bezel of the GMT that the Explorer II does not have, but it is just a small drawback.

I would second all the points made about the Explorer II. The Expy II is my daily wearer and the face is the easiest to read of all the Rolexes I have owned (16710, 16610, DateJust, TOG, SeaDweller).

What pulls me to the Explorer II over my GMT-C (and for the Sub if I had owned it) is the black matte face, and the understated bezel. The Explorer II looks different from all the other Rolexes, especially the Ceramic ones, is only available in stainless (no gold, platinum variants), and has the easiest to read dial in day and night. The orange in the 24 hour hand makes this watch unmistakable with any other model. I too was reticent of the TwinLoc crown after wearing the GMT-C as my daily wearer for five years, but it is the largest of the TwinLoc crowns (same as used on the Milgauss).

As an added option, I purchased separately from the sales forum a Sub-C glidelock clasp. I like the larger clasp cover and the ability to adjust for when I wear the watch outside of long sleeve thermal t-shirts (skiing, cycling). The half-link on the Exp II is usable, but the Glidelock adds functionality that only Rolex can.

I'd go Explorer II...

-Sheldon

[strafer_kid]

Both are beauties - was toying with both and then decided on the Explorer 2 (black face) - delighted with it -go for it - you wont regret it.

[mmmk604]

I voted for the SubC...I actually just picked one up last week