ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
13 March 2018, 12:26 AM | #1 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: London
Posts: 23
|
114270 Explorer vs 11610
Back in November 2016 I acquired a 2008 V serial 114270. This was my second Rolex, having bought a M serial 11610 Submariner in 2008 Below are my thoughts on the watch, with some comparison made to my Sub. Technical observations I will leave to those more qualified that me, but they have practically the same movement, but the Sub has a date wheel and therefore a new ref.
Why the 114270? Being a huge James Bond fan the first Rolex had to be a Submariner, and a collection of NATOs were purchased not long after to recreate that Sean Connery look. But even then the Explorer appealed to me. I have always like the Explorer for its simplicity. I view it as a hybrid, part sports watch, part dress watch. I am also a fan of the GMT and the Daytona, but in the former is too similar to the Sub and the latter too expensive. I admire the DJ, but prefer the versatility of the Explorer. It looks great under a tough jacket going on a walk through the woods, and at the same time looking great under a shirt cuff. In an ideal world I would be writing up a review of the 1016 Explorer, but sadly the price of these beauty's is far beyond my budget. I did try on a 'short hands' 39mm Explorer last year, but the step in size was noticeable. I didn't hate it per say (apart from the polished numerals - too dressy), but the increase in size gave it similar wrist presence to my existing Submariner. It is also a good 30% more expensive that a pre-owned 36mm. After 2 years of obsessing over an Explorer, and settling on the 36mm version, I managed to acquire a 114270 with 5 months remaining on its RSC warranty for £3,760. Initial Thoughts After wearing a 40mm Tag Heuer Link Chrono for the last 12 years, and a 40mm Sub since 2008, the 36mm did take a while to get used to, but I absolutely love it. It sets it apart from my Sub, and indeed many of the watches I see around London and my place of work. On a watch like this 36mm is all you need, and it has a lovely profile on my wrist with the 78960 bracelet that has a slimmer profile than the 93150 Sub bracelet with the divers extension. The inky black dial is absolutely gorgeous, and I love its no nonsense look. Watches that just tell the time will no longer be underestimated by me any longer! It’s just so easy, and a welcome change from my Tag which has a very busy dial, and the Sub with its date bubble that can sometimes distract. The arabic numbers are well proportioned, but I wish they were more in keeping with the style and font of the 1016 numbers. And as a bit of a lume fiend I wish they were filled with some lovely green stuff. This has now been corrected on the 39mm Explorer, but I still think the proportions don’t quite work in the 39mm size, despite the elongated hands. vs 16610 One of my main concerns with purchasing the Explorer was that it was too similar to my Sub. Same brand, same oyster bracelet style, black face, same mercedes hands. All a bit similar, especially to part with £3,760 for. Thankfully I can report that this is not case at all. Anyway since when was one Rolex enough?! The Explorer has a completely different look, despite the similarities listed above. When I want a chunky sports watch I strap on the Sub. When i'm at work I tend to strap on the Explorer. I find it is less in your face than the Sub, and it fits much better under a shirt cuff. I also work in finance in London, and I must see at least 3-4 Subs on peoples wrists per day, so the less popular Explorer makes a nice change. But the great thing is that by having both, I can immediately appreciate their respective differences when I change them over. I never considered this before my purchase, but in adding another Rolex to my collection I have fallen in love with the Explorer, but also fallen deeper in love with my Sub. To have both is absolutely fantastic, and I am incredibly fortunate that I have the means to own both. Overall To those that love the Explorer, I urge you to try the 36mm - it could be for you despite what you may think about the size. To those that are contemplating a second Rolex - you must do it. You will find your appreciation of both watches can only get higher. |
3 April 2018, 02:52 PM | #2 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Brunei
Watch: Rolex GMT Master
Posts: 3
|
Great review!
I too recently acquired the Explorer 114270. It’s my go-anywhere do-anything watch when i’m not flying, my other Rolex is a GMT Master 2, 16710 with a Pepsi bezel. And i like how both watches are different , one is busy and classy and the other simple yet elegant. Both are keepers and make me wonder why i even have my other watches. Thanks for making me appreciate them even more. |
3 April 2018, 09:17 PM | #3 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Real Name: H
Location: North Carolina
Watch: M99230B-0008
Posts: 5,672
|
Great review.
I love this watch. Had one. And it was great. But it was just too small for me. Otherwise I would still have it. It is definitely a class act.
__________________
The King of Cool. |
4 May 2018, 01:53 AM | #4 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 1,262
|
I prefer the 2016 Mk2 39mm version.
|
29 June 2018, 11:46 AM | #5 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2018
Real Name: Scott
Location: Hampton, Virginia
Watch: 2008 Submariner
Posts: 224
|
NEW 2016 Mk2 39mm version
I bought my MK2 version yesterday. I have had it for 34 hours and it is only 1 second fast, AMAZING. it was one second fast when I woke up this morning and has not gained any more time all day. even if it were 2 seconds by tom morning, that is only +1 per day, below the +2/-2. it is new, so it may settle in and who knows? by the way, i placed it dial up, flat on my desk at night. that may speed it up?
anyway, i am reading about the 36mm and am interested and it has me curious. i was between a 1999 sub (for 7k plus tax) OR the explorer. I also tried on the blue dial oyster perpetual and fell in love with it. I almost bought it over the explorer, it wore better IMOP. but, the classic hands on the explorer, the black dial, etc etc, I just figured I would regret if I got the oyster perpetual. i am enjoying this thread and learning more about the explorer variations. too late now for me as i bought this new and am keeping it. here is a thought, i am 52 years old and have so many dive type watches, like the omega 300m seamaster. the explorer is a dress/sports watch, a nice change. i was thinking about it, will i want to wear a Sub at age62, 72? i dont know. the explorer would prob be more to my liking as i age. i'd like to hear from others out there who are older and still like wearing a sub. i always see them on younger or middle age people, rarely anyone over 50. scott |
3 August 2018, 01:17 AM | #6 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: NYC
Posts: 22
|
Interesting take....
|
15 August 2018, 06:15 AM | #7 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 2,143
|
Lovely review...
|
15 August 2018, 06:25 AM | #8 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Ilkeston
Posts: 6
|
I got a hulk and still miss my 16610 which I moved on to find it
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro |
1 September 2018, 05:32 AM | #9 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Germany
Posts: 11
|
Nice review... I would prefer 114270
|
23 September 2018, 11:01 PM | #10 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Doha, Qatar
Watch: Polar 16570
Posts: 535
|
Interestingly, I started with the 114270 as well...then picked up an16610 a few months later. Totally different watches, but I love them both. I don’t find the 36mm too small...but then I wouldn’t wear anything over 40-41mm.
__________________
Explorer II 16570 Polar (3186) GMT Master II 116710LN GMT Master II 126710BLRO (jubilee) Explorer 124270 Omega Seamaster GMT 50th Anniversary |
10 October 2018, 04:53 AM | #11 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: DFW, TX
Watch: 214270
Posts: 26
|
Great review, I like the comparison to the sub. As someone with smaller wrists, the 36mm Exp appeals a bit more to me, just wish it had more lume like you said.
|
10 October 2018, 08:00 AM | #12 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 342
|
review
good review.
|
12 October 2018, 12:05 PM | #13 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Rome
Posts: 18
|
Very nice review
從我的iPhone使用Tapatalk 發送 |
1 November 2018, 11:58 AM | #14 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Sheffield, AL USA
Posts: 35
|
Nice take on a great pair of watches - Sub & Explorer. My 114270 spends more time on my wrist than the rest of my 14 watches...and that's a good thing!
|
2 November 2018, 05:04 AM | #15 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 117
|
Great review.
|
2 November 2018, 09:38 AM | #16 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: usa
Posts: 31
|
I prefer the 114270, thanks for the review. Kudos
|
16 November 2018, 07:02 AM | #17 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: TR
Posts: 19
|
Great review
LG-H960 cihazımdan Tapatalk kullanılarak gönderildi |
16 November 2018, 07:03 AM | #18 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2018
Real Name: Jonny
Location: West Coast-Denver
Watch: Yachtmaster 2
Posts: 708
|
Very nice review!
|
28 December 2018, 12:12 PM | #19 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2018
Real Name: Greg
Location: Camarillo, ca
Watch: Tudor Blackbay 58
Posts: 17
|
I'm a fan of the diver style of watch. I have an Explorer 214270 sitting in its box in a drawer, although I think that the dial design is near perfection it does not get any wrist time!
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.