timefactors watches
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 51 to 93 of 93

Thread: rolex explorer, ugly duckling?

  1. #51
    Quote Originally Posted by Robsmck View Post
    That point hits the nail on the head for me. Looks meh in the watch box but looks great on the wrist.

    Sent from my SM-G920F using TZ-UK mobile app
    Interestingly I keep having the exact opposite reaction with the 1655 (freccione). Looks great in photos and shop windows, but whenever I consider getting one and try it on, it just doesn't work on the wrist.

  2. #52
    Master danmiddle2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Midlands
    Posts
    1,712
    I've owned a handful of Rolex watches over the years, but never found a 'keeper'. Oddly (given the thread) the 42mm white dialled explorer 2 I had probably came the closest.

  3. #53
    Craftsman Gullers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Solihull, UK
    Posts
    804
    Quote Originally Posted by Lukeott View Post
    The best watch to have when going on an arctic expedition:

    https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=345242

    Not something I'm likely to be doing soon.
    I wish you could still see the pics in this thread


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  4. #54
    Master Neilw3030's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Exeter, Devon, UK
    Posts
    2,566
    Quote Originally Posted by blackal View Post
    This.....

    The appeal of the fat casing, ceramic bezel, the garish blue - all designed IMO to 'shout'

    Al
    Nothing wrong with a shoutey watch, could well be my next watch to sit alongside my Ym2. It would have to be white as well

  5. #55
    Craftsman Harry Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Wolverhampton
    Posts
    574
    I know, horrible aren't they?


    Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app

  6. #56
    Master -Ally-'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    4,470
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Smith View Post
    I know, horrible aren't they?

    On straps like that yes

  7. #57
    Journeyman Redwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    London
    Posts
    56
    I really like the white dial with that orange hand. Makes it stand out.


    Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app

  8. #58
    Craftsman Harry Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Wolverhampton
    Posts
    574
    Quote Originally Posted by -Ally- View Post
    On straps like that yes
    Jealous?

    https://www.abpconcept.paris/
    Last edited by Harry Smith; 10th October 2017 at 22:02. Reason: insult to injury

  9. #59
    Master jukeboxs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    1,807
    Quote Originally Posted by Lukeott View Post
    The best watch to have when going on an arctic expedition:

    https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=345242
    Yeah, I remember this - post #173 for those interested. One of the more intriguing threads on TRF.

    I prefer the dial of the 16570, but the bracelet of the 216570 - it makes for a tough choice.

  10. #60
    Master Pitch3110's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Suffolk
    Posts
    3,578
    Blog Entries
    1
    Had my Polar 16570 four years now and it has hardly left my wifeís wrist, she loves it. After reading this I really must try it, itís only a quick swap of the bracelet on my 14060

    Great to see so much love here.

    Pitch

  11. #61
    Master murkeywaters's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Near the sea
    Posts
    1,656
    Quote Originally Posted by -Ally- View Post
    On straps like that yes
    Expo 2 is a really great watch and left in the shadows at the moment with all the hype over the latest subs/gmt's but I agree on the strap, I prefer leather or Nato for comfort and looks on lots of watches but the 16570 is made for a bracelet and just looks better balanced.. but each to their own.

    The one for me if def the 16550 with aged lume -

    Last edited by murkeywaters; 10th October 2017 at 23:37.

  12. #62
    Master oldoakknives's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Brussel land.
    Posts
    2,788
    Quote Originally Posted by Belligero View Post


    Suits me fine.
    I really didn't need to see that!

  13. #63
    White 42mm. Itís almost perfect!
    It's just a matter of time...

  14. #64
    Master helidoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    1,247
    I've said it before, but the black dial 16570 is my absolute favourite watch. I think what I appreciate is the blend of Rolex quality, excellent Rolex quality and a subtle appearance. It isn't an obvious watch on the wrist in contrast to the fat cased ceramic subs and GMT. The 16570 shared such a lot with the 16710, yet the GMT is a good 50% more to buy. That makes the Explorer II an easy used buy,and easier for me to wear than modern GMT or Dub at almost £7K. The 216570 is wrist size dependent, certainly too big for me. I do like the matt black dial with orange accents a lot, but size notwithstanding its proportions are off, and the dial and hands are too "maxi-plus".

    Dave




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  15. #65
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cheshire
    Posts
    937
    Another massive thumbs up for the Exp II, in my case the black 16570. I really like the 216570 too but do think it too big IMO. Think Rolex got the case proportions correct though, had it been 40mm, I'm sure it would have suffered the fat-lug syndrome of the maxi Subs and GMTs.

    My 16570 has performed flawlessly in the 3 months I've had it, seems to run rock solid at just over +2s p/d. Wish the lume was a bit better though but I'm sure the previous gen Subs/GMTs are hampered somewhat in this department too.

    I absolutely love the 16710 but the current used prices are eye watering. My Exp II came from WF and was reasonably priced but there are 10yr old 16710s on there now at nearly £9.5K !!!! Cheapest are around £6k for the same watch as mine but with a twirly bezel I wouldn't use.

  16. #66
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Bristol
    Posts
    122
    I likes them. It's good to see a tool watch which isn't a diver and despite having written rolex off previously im seriously considering holding off a pelagos purchase and saving my pennies for an E2. Its not shiney either! Can't decide black or white but there's no rush!

  17. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by murkeywaters View Post
    Expo 2 is a really great watch and left in the shadows at the moment with all the hype over the latest subs/gmt's but I agree on the strap, I prefer leather or Nato for comfort and looks on lots of watches but the 16570 is made for a bracelet and just looks better balanced.. but each to their own.

    The one for me if def the 16550 with aged lume -

    What's the diameter of that one? Hopefully not another 42er as that's the nicest Ex2 I've ever laid eyes on.

  18. #68
    I've thought about flipping or trading mine plenty of times but there's just something about it that means I can't let it go. (A bit like the wife!)





    Sent from my iPad using TZ-UK mobile app

  19. #69
    Master Dave+63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    East Sussex
    Posts
    8,340

    rolex explorer, ugly duckling?

    Quote Originally Posted by hughtrimble View Post
    What's the diameter of that one? Hopefully not another 42er as that's the nicest Ex2 I've ever laid eyes on.
    All the tritium dials are 40mm. You're looking at pre1998 if you're thinking of buying one.

    Notice the "Swiss -T<25" not the dial at 6; later non tritium had "Swiss" or "Swiss Made" on the dial.

  20. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave+63 View Post
    All the tritium dials are 40mm. You're looking at pre1998 if you're thinking of buying one.

    Notice the "Swiss -T<25" not the dial at 6; later non tritium had "Swiss" or "Swiss Made" on the dial.
    Brilliant - much appreciated

  21. #71
    Master Dave+63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    East Sussex
    Posts
    8,340
    Quote Originally Posted by hughtrimble View Post
    Brilliant - much appreciated
    Just to add that the later 42mm models can be differentiated at a glance as they have much thicker hands.

  22. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by bigvic View Post
    I've thought about flipping or trading mine plenty of times but there's just something about it that means I can't let it go. (A bit like the wife!)
    Indeed, as others have said, the E2 is brilliant for actually wearing instead of just looking at in a box.

    While I prefer the white dial option for the 216570, any black-dialled 40 mm is magic on the wrist, and a perfect one-watch-for-everything candidate. It doesn’t get any better for practicality, quality and versatility in an everyday watch than the 16550/16570.

  23. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave+63 View Post
    Just to add that the later 42mm models can be differentiated at a glance as they have much thicker hands.
    That's handy to know for a quick suss, thanks

  24. #74
    Master
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI USA
    Posts
    1,734
    Quote Originally Posted by Belligero View Post
    It doesnít get any better for practicality, quality and versatility in an everyday watch than the 16550/16570.
    From a wearability perspective, I much prefer the 16570 with it's easily obtained replacement bezels. A 16550 with a new style bezel is a big no-no for me.

  25. #75
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    London
    Posts
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by Belligero View Post
    Indeed, as others have said, the E2 is brilliant for actually wearing instead of just looking at in a box.

    While I prefer the white dial option for the 216570, any black-dialled 40 mm is magic on the wrist, and a perfect one-watch-for-everything candidate. It doesnít get any better for practicality, quality and versatility in an everyday watch than the 16550/16570.
    This ^
    All of it


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  26. #76
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    London
    Posts
    225
    Although I was holding a 42mm black dial only yesterday and thought it was great. Like theyíd dragged the correct proportions into the larger model, lugs, crown, hands, plots and all. Struggling to think of Explorer II I donít like, though (paradoxically given the OPís initial post) the 1655 - by far the most valuable - has for me a dial I canít easily read at a glance, and a complication that would kind of drive me nuts given that I use and enjoy the second time zone so much.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  27. #77
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Manchester,UK
    Posts
    111
    I love mine 42mm black face.

    TBH i was a hater until i tried it on.

    Now its my daily wear.

  28. #78
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Cheltenham
    Posts
    115
    Quote Originally Posted by Lawbreaker5000 View Post
    I love mine 42mm black face.

    TBH i was a hater until i tried it on.

    Now its my daily wear.
    Exactly the same here


    Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app

  29. #79
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Manchester,UK
    Posts
    111
    Quote Originally Posted by Smiffy333 View Post
    Exactly the same here


    Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
    i hear that ! :-)

  30. #80
    Quote Originally Posted by JP Chestnut View Post
    From a wearability perspective, I much prefer the 16570 with it's easily obtained replacement bezels. A 16550 with a new style bezel is a big no-no for me.
    Good point. The 16570 is definitely the one to have for wearing, whereas an all-original 16550 would be far more painful to scratch.

    On the other hand, I struggle to think of any watch that wears its scars better than a 4- or 5-digit Explorer II.

  31. #81
    Master
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI USA
    Posts
    1,734
    Quote Originally Posted by Belligero View Post
    Good point. The 16570 is definitely the one to have for wearing, whereas an all-original 16550 would be far more painful to scratch.

    On the other hand, I struggle to think of any watch that wears its scars better than a 4- or 5-digit Explorer II.
    About ten years ago I wanted a black out Explorer 1 and a cream 16550. I should have bought both. They're so expensive now.

  32. #82
    Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Livingston
    Posts
    1,224
    Well... I'm quite fond of my ugly duckling.
    May well be 42mm but due to the slim profile/sloping bezel, for me at least, makes it an ideal daily wearer.


    I'd fully intended to buy either a GMTc or polar 216570.... tried both... thought the GMTc was a bit too blingy for me as a daily (scratches on the PCLs would annoy me also). Thought the polar would be fantastic for summer. As soon as I put the black Exp2 on my wrist though, decision was made. I love how the dial in certain lights seems to pick up an almost coffee tone to it as well.

  33. #83
    Grand Master Raffe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    LŽtzebuerg & Berlin
    Posts
    10,193
    As others have already said, 42mm is a big NO for me. I have a bog-standard 16570 and find it the most universal and versatile watch I own. Also looks great on a 15 quid rubber strap.

    Last edited by Raffe; 12th October 2017 at 07:48.
    All good things to those who wait.

  34. #84
    Master Dave+63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    East Sussex
    Posts
    8,340
    Quote Originally Posted by Raffe View Post
    As others have already said, 42mm is a big NO for me. I have a bog-standard 16570 and find it the most universal and versatile watch I own. Also looks great on a 15 quid rubber strap.

    I agree with you re both the 40mm and 42mm (I've just bought a 16570) but the 116570 allows those with larger wrists to enjoy the explorer II too!

    Everybody wins.

  35. #85
    Apprentice
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Palmer
    Posts
    29
    The Polar Explorer II is a kind of grail for me. Unfortunately, as others have said, 42mm is just too big for me. Iím looking for a good 40mm late in the series.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  36. #86
    Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    N Ireland
    Posts
    1,107
    I had admired the 116570 since my student climbing club days, suppose I bought into the marketing bs, but always felt it a little small. Just loved the 126570 and got one for my 50th birthday. Always makes me smile to wear it.

    Sent from my SM-G920F using TZ-UK mobile app

  37. #87
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Bristol
    Posts
    122
    Tried one on at schiphol air port today. The size is perfect for me. Despite the majority opinion, I preferred the black I think. Lovely watch.

  38. #88
    Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Southampton, UK
    Posts
    2,500
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave+63 View Post
    Just to add that the later 42mm models can be differentiated at a glance as they have much thicker hands.
    And the GMT hand is quite different between 40mm and 42mm too

  39. #89
    Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Southampton, UK
    Posts
    2,500
    I've always liked the white dialled explorer 2 and reading through this thread has confirmed, and that I think I would prefer the 42mm.

    This is my current GMT, but would need to make way for the Rolex.

  40. #90
    Master
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    location, location
    Posts
    1,370
    Blog Entries
    1

    rolex explorer, ugly duckling?

    I regret failing to pick up a cheap 16750 when they were great used value. The polar on a grey nato is a great combo.

    Archie love a used ROOLLLLLLEXXXXXXX polar so they must be good.
    Last edited by Middo; 13th October 2017 at 04:38.

  41. #91
    Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Northern Ireland
    Posts
    4,229
    I sold everything in my small collection and was left with a black 16570, a decision I have not come to regret.

    The only watch I might add in the future is the Polar version, though I've tried them and the wife says white dials don't suit me.

    Great watch, understated and very good value. The 42mm is too big for me though.

  42. #92
    Master murkeywaters's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Near the sea
    Posts
    1,656
    I would go for the 40mm Exp due to my wrist size 6.75" but recently I tried on a Speedmaster Professional at 42mm and it looked spot on.. funny how watches the same size can look dramatically smaller or bigger depending on bezel and dial size.

  43. #93
    Quote Originally Posted by murkeywaters View Post
    I would go for the 40mm Exp due to my wrist size 6.75" but recently I tried on a Speedmaster Professional at 42mm and it looked spot on.. funny how watches the same size can look dramatically smaller or bigger depending on bezel and dial size.
    I think it's the steel bezel. Those with a black bezel insert like the Speedy, Seadweller and a 42mm Planet Ocean look fine to most, whereas many say the 42mm Explorer is too big.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •