Question for "mature" owners of BLRO, BLNR, LN

[12o'clockhigh]

I'm interested in a GMT II, with the BLNR being my current favorite. However, in looking at pictures on the Rolex site today, I noticed that without my reading glasses, the GMT hand on the BLNR wasn't as easy to see as the other two. Can anyone with real-world experience with these (preferably all three) who needs reading glasses for close-up work comment on their "read-ablility" (for lack of a better term)?

Actually, the white dial Explorer II with the orange GMT hand seems best, but I need GMT's rotating bezel, so that's not an option. Yet.

[jclaraperea]

Hi the BLNR Is a good option without glasses.
For me is clear and awesome.
The Explorer II New version is better but for me both Watches are excelent options.






Enviado desde mi iPhone utilizando Tapatalk Pro

[Roger Lococco]

Owned the BLNR and now own the BLRO. Owned a 5-digit Pepsi for 15 years as well.

The red hand is notably easier to see than is the blue hand.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Halothane]

No issues reading the GMT hand on either my Pepsi or BLNR. I wear glasses.

[Andad]

I’m old but not ‘mature’.

I wear varigrad glasses. -1/4 to +2.

The GMT hand is always in focus.

But even without my glasses I can sort of still see the GMT hand on my 16710 Pepsi and my 116710TTc

[TimeRookie]

I don’t think there’d be much difference in visibility between the various colours of 24HR hands on the GMT’s. I wear cheaters to read and I can see the 24HR hand without glasses unless it’s very low light. Good luck with your choice.

[macrowatch]

Had the LN for 10 years. Added BLNR about 2 years ago. The “green” hand for the 24 makes the LN. This isn’t to say the triangle of the BLNR is Not legible for aging eyes, just that the green is much more visible than the light blue assisting in making it more legible.

[Greenwich Mean Time]

My LN is easy enough for me to read without glasses however, the date for some reason is difficult for me to bring into focus.

[Duey]

Great question.

I have all 3 can say without a doubt the LN is the easiest to read . With aging eyes, and I have them, the green reads better for some reason. The light blue BLNR is the worst by far, love the watch though.

[Yoda_Eating_Pizza]

In bright light, the 24HR hand is easy to see. In "mood" lighting or darker, it's harder for me to see the blue hand but the triangle tip is always visible. When reading 24 hour time, I'm only looking at the triangle anyway. My eyes are pretty bad.

Edit: this is for a BLNR.

[bonovox]

I haven't noticed any issues with the BLNR and I use that function often.

[Nikrnic]

The Blnr hand is is easy enough for me but it doesn't jump out like the Expll which is the ultimate in high visibility for sure. I have 20 20 vision but I'll use weak reading glasses occasionally if l read or desk dive too much.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[BigBoy17]

That polar is sweet

[G8RDPM]

For me,it's hard to judge watch legibility on my computer or phone. My eyes are getting old. I can see my GMT LN without reading glasses pretty well. I originally wanted a black face Daytona but when I tried it on,I couldn't see it clearly!

[superstarmar]

Originally Posted by tomalf123

No issues reading the GMT hand on either my Pepsi or BLNR. I wear glasses.

Given , the red on Pepsi reads easier in all shades of light ,

[ArtNouveau]

My reading glasses are 2.0. I can see the GMT hand on both BLNR and BLRO without them.

[HogwldFLTR]

66 years young and no problem reading any Rolex. If you need glasses you need them.

[avega357]

Red easier to read than blue but in the real world you look at white pointer ( the triangle pointer) not blue or red stick so it does not matter




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Shamorai]

Head to an optometrist and get your eyes tested. Best thing I ever did. No more squinting and I can easily read all the text on my dials now, and your watch will look awesome all the time. Multi focals are great! Plus I’ve been told I look better with glasses. Ha!

[t65tampa]

No prob reading GMT hand on my BLNR or my 116713 without reading glasses. Now actually being able to read the 24 hr disc on my Sky-Dweller without reading glasses is a different story!

[Pongster]

BLRO legible for me


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bob the brush]

I wear glasses for reading, +1.75, however, I can easily read the GMT hand on my watch, 116710, I just have to focus with my wrist a little further from me than with my glasses on.

[Macnavara]

Originally Posted by roger lococco

owned the blnr and now own the blro. Owned a 5-digit pepsi for 15 years as well.

The red hand is notably easier to see than is the blue hand.


Sent from my iphone using tapatalk

x2

[HogwldFLTR]

My Exp II is currently at the AD waiting for me to pick it up following servicing. I can't wait to get it back!!! Again no problem reading it or any Rolex.

[Rashid.bk]

I had a BLNR and honestly there were times I had to search for the hand on the dial. But honestly, it's not such a real big issue. I kind of prefer this because the hand sort of blended in to dial at a quick glance creating a less cluttered dial.
Had the LN as well, exact same thing. I know it seems weird that a green or blue hand can hide against a black dial but it's angles and lighting. It always took about point something milliseconds to find in reality vs just seeing it at first visual contact with the dial.

I imagine the red hand works best.
In the end I think you can feel confident in buying either of the models based on which you like.

[RTG]

Originally Posted by 12o'clockhigh

I'm interested in a GMT II, with the BLNR being my current favorite. However, in looking at pictures on the Rolex site today, I noticed that without my reading glasses, the GMT hand on the BLNR wasn't as easy to see as the other two. Can anyone with real-world experience with these (preferably all three) who needs reading glasses for close-up work comment on their "read-ablility" (for lack of a better term)?

Actually, the white dial Explorer II with the orange GMT hand seems best, but I need GMT's rotating bezel, so that's not an option. Yet.

I wear the Explorer II daily and my wife’s daily is the BLNR. There is no match for the Explorer II clarity but the BLNR is no slouch. Both offer good visibility. The larger dial and hands of the EXPII are unbeatable, and the orange GMT makes it unmissable. The GMT Masters GMT hand is more suttle and your eye won’t be drawn to it unless you are looking for it.

Hopefully you can try on both before buying. For my first Rolex I went to buy a GMT but side by side I greatly preferred the Explorer II.

[12o'clockhigh]

Good answers, all. Thank you for your input.

[MountEverest]

Originally Posted by 12o'clockhigh

I'm interested in a GMT II, with the BLNR being my current favorite. However, in looking at pictures on the Rolex site today, I noticed that without my reading glasses, the GMT hand on the BLNR wasn't as easy to see as the other two. Can anyone with real-world experience with these (preferably all three) who needs reading glasses for close-up work comment on their "read-ablility" (for lack of a better term)?

Actually, the white dial Explorer II with the orange GMT hand seems best, but I need GMT's rotating bezel, so that's not an option. Yet.

I own both the BLNR and now the BLRO. The GMT is much harder to see on the Batman compared to the BLRO. I also wear glasses and I am almost 50 years old. I have a lot of difficulty with the Batman watch reading the GMT time

[Brikev]

My opinion-Explorer 2 hands down the most legible dial of all Relex

[beshannon]

The large arrow on the hand of the BLNR is very easy to see