Reply With QuoteA nice 16570 can still be had for reasonable money. DJ's too I suppose.
Hi guys, looking for opinions to help guide a possible future purchase scenario. I have Rolex playing on my mind.
If you were to buy a used Rolex under £4K, preferably closer to £3k, what would you go for and why? I don't know my Rolex references very well, what's popular and what's not, what holds its value better than others etc.
I like the Explorer 1, but the 36mm version might be a little small and I think the 39mm version that would sit within the budget had a short minutes hand?
What's the general consensus on the older model Explorer 2s?
Thanks, Berty.
A nice 16570 can still be had for reasonable money. DJ's too I suppose.
Last edited by -Ally-; 24th April 2017 at 23:34. Reason: Pic Added
My avatar gives it away but I'm a big fan of the 40mm polar explorer. Probably within your price range and wears well, its just a decent watch with 2 practical & useful complications (date & GMT).
One downside is that its not very recognisable as a Rolex to the public but that suits me.
Nonsense that the 36 explorer is too small.
I have the 39, and it's a garish thing by comparison.
Bubble Backs are under valued and often found at great prices.
I need to try one of these in the metal. It looks incredible.Originally Posted by -Ally-
A nice 16570 can still be had for reasonable money. DJ's too I suppose.
That's a positive for me, a more subtle Rolex :)
- - - Updated - - -
Good to know it isn't as small as it sounds
I picked up one of these the other day for 3k under a year old and it 39mm
That's an amazing deal! They seem to generally be going for 3.5? Nice one.I picked up one of these the other day for 3k under a year old and it 39mm
For under 3k, I'd bite someone's hand off... If it had a rhodium dial. Presumably you got yours via a private sale?I picked up one of these the other day for 3k under a year old and it 39mm
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
If it were me (and your wrist isn't too big) I'd look for a vintage gold datejust. If you don't like those (look amazing on a leather strap IMHO) then possibly a nice Explorer 2.
EXP 2 would be my choice. Flies under the radar which may often be a benefit.
14060m no date sub
Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk
Sadly, not for between 2 and 3k though...
He did say under £4k..im a firm believer of going that little extra mile for the right watch first time round (not saying the 14060m is at all) as it would cost more in the future if were to flip models..
Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk
At that budget, the 16200 Datejust for sure.
It's perfected — a sports watch that goes with everything, tougher than its more-costly cousins with rotating bezels that use the same movement, and though smaller and larger cases have been in fashion, 36 mm has been the normal size since the dawn of the man's wristwatch.
Beautiful watch, if it wasn't for that horrendous cyclops...
Well, it is very easily removable if you prefer the lame-o plain look, but you'll likely come to appreciate its distinctiveness eventually.Beautiful watch, if it wasn't for that horrendous cyclops...
1601 gold Datejust on nice leather strap - what a classic. Several at about £3.5k on chrono24. The right one would be pretty solid value-wize and probably go up........ Nice to have a gold watch in the collection, and these aren't expensive in the context of Rolex watches (where steel sports watches go for such strong money). Not 'wide' or 'bling' if worn on a leather strap. But it all depends what the OP's tastes (and other watches) are like.
Last edited by tom waring; 25th April 2017 at 16:13.
Explorer II 40mm, superb watch and very under valued compared to the GMT. I have a white dial and it gets a lot of wrist time.
ktmog6uk
marchingontogether!
That's nice, for the uninformed (me) can you say what the model number is?I picked up one of these the other day for 3k under a year old and it 39mm
I was in a similar position not long ago when I wanted to spend maximum of around £4000. I ended up purchasing a Rolex Sub 14060 two liner, I absolutely love the watch.
It did cost £4200 but for the extra few hundred worth every penny.
My advice would be go for a watch/model you actually want, even if it costs your maximum budget.
Last edited by boring_sandwich; 25th April 2017 at 17:06.
Its a 39mm Oyster Perpetual Red Dial
https://www.rolex.com/watches/oyster...4300-0002.html
I think I'm going to pull the trigger on one of these soon. I like subs but for value I think exp2 wins hands down... question mark on future value perhaps?
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
^
It's a decent-looking steel sports Rolex in a normal size. It'll do just fine.
I've been harbouring similar thoughts and keep coming back to the Explorer, I could cope with 36mm but the 39mm is also of interest. For some reason the Exp II doesn't do it for me, it's the bezel I think - admittedly this is TZ-UK surfing I've not yet tried either one for size.
As above the DJ is ruined with the cyclops IMO.
OP - a classic Air King could be a nice way to start, and should be much less then 3k?
Is there any value in paying a premium for a four liner, which were only produced for two years and has become a collectable piece in its own right. Putting to one side the debate about which looks best, two lines of detail or four - the four liners do tend to carry a financial premium over the two liners.
Four liners are closer to £5k for full sets these days. Sorry to highjack the OPs thread whilst we trip down this cul-de-sac.
Justified? Any thoughts anyone.
The 16570 is scrumptious
I do not think there is any difference in price between the 4 or 2 line dials as such. The 4 liners are obviously newer than a two liner hence why they are dearer.
I dare say if you had a NOS 2 liner it would in fact sell for a premium over a NOS 4 liner.
The White Explorer 2 and the 36mm Explorer 1 are looking like a direct shoot out in this scenario.
For background, I have a Tudor Black Bay Black in house and an Omega Speedmaster FOIS. The white Explorer 2 would provide a great contrast...
Need to slow it down and spend a few months thinking about my options! As per my intro thread lower down the forum page, I'm still deciding whether to go for something like this soon or add something cheaper for a while.
Keep coming back to Rolex though.
Last edited by Berty234; 25th April 2017 at 19:53.
I picked this up a couple of months ago for under £3k, it wears very nicely with a suit as a daily but too small for me as a casual watch.
Gold datejust on a lizard strap.
Really like the colour, it's certainly different. I looked at them but went for the Rhodium dial instead. Can see me adding that colour at some point though.I picked up one of these the other day for 3k under a year old and it 39mm
The 36mm Explorer 1 is a superb watch, but the small size does put some folks off thesedays. The Oyster bracelet, slim lugs and smooth bezel make the design 'flow' better than most bigger watches; it's almost like an integral bracelet design when seen on the wrist. This effect is actually accentuated on a slightly larger wrist, these watches were never supposed to fill the wrist in the the manner that people now see as 'correct'.
The Explorer 1 is a watch I never tire of, mine hasn't been out for a while but I still enjoy owing it because it feels so right when it does get worn. It wears well with anything, it has an understated classy look because the design is straightforward. Failing that my vote would go for a 116200 Datejust, although the polished centre links don't suit everyone. The 116000 Oyster is another favourite of mine but only with the blue Explorer style dial.
All these watches have one big plus in their favour: they're all easy to refinish if they get scratched or damaged. No expensive fancy bezels or inserts to worry about. Many will dismiss this fact but it's important for a watch that's going to get regular daily wear.
Paul
Last edited by walkerwek1958; 25th April 2017 at 20:06.
Possibly a sub at around that price.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
What a great post, thank you. I need to try one on
What's this model? Big fan of the contrast between the silver and blue...Really like the colour, it's certainly different. I looked at them but went for the Rhodium dial instead. Can see me adding that colour at some point though.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This. Best bang for buck for sure. A real sleeper.A nice 16570 can still be had for reasonable money. DJ's too I suppose.
What sort of money we talking? £4K seems around standard from what I've seen - that about right?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Another vote for the 36mm Explorer from me. It's a great daily 'under the radar' Rolex and I don't think it wears small.
Roger W Smith wears one and he knows a thing or two about watches.
At that price point I would agree that an Explorer II 16570 is tough to beat assuming it is a sports watch you are looking for.
I paid about £2k for that one last year (without box & papers). Probably more like £3k now for the same thing.
114300.
Another tick for ExpII. Holds its own easily with these guys.
post image
Berty, I was thinking about the Explorer one weekend last summer. I'd always admired it from afar. But I'd never been a big 'fan' of Rolex. Too much for show offs. Too obvious. I thought 'I'm still too young for a Rolex!' But at the same time I wanted to have a Rolex. Because it would be a Rolex. And if you ask someone at random what is the best watch they will likely say Rolex. And I knew there was some deep psychological brand desire in me that no amount of rationalisation could remove. The Explorer was clearly a gateway model for me. Blingy, but not too blingy. Dressy and yet sporty. A Rolex but not a 'Look a Rolex!'. Anyway, I was thinking about all this as I walked into town that weekend last summer and I did my usual glance into the local Jeweller/pawn shop window to see what interesting watches they had in. As if by some divine intervention, there was not one Explorer in the window but two! The 36mm and 39mm Explorers. Realising such opportunities don't come very often, I spent the next couple of hours inspecting, comparing, verifying and haggling. It became pretty apparent that it had to be the 36mm Explorer for me. That deep psychological imprint in my brain put there years ago by marketing geniuses was for the 36mm oyster case, no doubt about it. The 39mm looked wrong next to it. It looked like a compromise to modernity that I simply couldn't respect. Was the 36mm too small? Certainly. Stand next to a window display of modern fashion watches and then look at a 14270. It looks ridiculously small. But do a mental about turn and consider that it is the right size and just about every watch is ridiculously too big. Padded out and stretched for no good reason. Wear the 36mm Explorer on its own terms and it is the perfect tool watch, dress watch, sports watch, bling watch all at the same time. And the perfect size for its design and function.
Anyways, I bought the 36mm Explorer for a good price and I'm really pleased with it.
I'mgoing to recommend the 16570, but in contrast to most posts, I would go for the black dial. I found the polar very underwhelming in the flesh, but I adore the black dial. In addition it has all the virtues of the GMT, but without the currently insane prices ;)
I tried it back to back with the 36mm Explorer, but I find the 16570 more interesting visually, and it has an interesting complication. As others have said, it had all the Rolex virtues, without screaming Rolex.
I love mine
Dave
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's all you needed to say.
The rest was unadulterated BS.
Paragraphs Jimmy, paragraphs. Makes for easier reading.
Another vote for the Explorer 2. I sold my black face version (with B&P) for around GBP 2600 last year to a mate. I used the money to 'upgrade' to a GMT2 Pepsi but often I think the EXP2 is more discreet and certainly rarer in the wild.
Not necessary IMHO.
Agreed, but also proof that the Rolex marketing machine works. Not that they make good reliable mid range watches or anything
Posting Permissions
