Reply With QuoteThese are going to shoot up now. I reckon 6-7k by 2022.
Is it just me , but I read a comprehensive review like this and I end up wanting an Explorer more now than ever! Ive missed out on two already this year.
https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/ro...u-need-to-know
Steve
These are going to shoot up now. I reckon 6-7k by 2022.
Very interesting and agree with the earlier post on prices moving up now.
That was a really good read and likewise reignited my desire for the ‘humble’ Explorer.
Hodinkee effect in full flow!Originally Posted by Sammers23
Did you see last night's Bark and Jack about all the Explorer 1s disappearing from the market?
"The whole purpose of mechanical watches is to be impertinent." ~ Lionel a Marca, CEO of Breguet
I've had a WTB up on here for one for an age now, and not a sniff. If anyone has one to move on then pls let me know, I'll pay the right price for the right one.
FFS, now you tell meLoads of them on TRF
Thanks Tony
There is still the same amount in existence, it's just that people are slowly latching on that it rarely makes sense to sell a Rolex. They are now becoming keepers.
I don't understand why the fuss over the 14270 when for more or less the same money a 114270 gives you the same look but with a better bracelet and a better movement.
36mm Explorer still in production and in the trendiest colour blue. Wasn’t the first watch worn on Everest actually an Oyster Perp (or smiths) anyway.
I guess it because its a sports model, starting to fall into the vintage category and is one of the only model available under £5000.
- - - Updated - - -
It does not feel nothing like an sports model on the wrist it felt to me way more dress watch.36mm Explorer still in production and in the trendiest colour blue. Wasn’t the first watch worn on Everest actually an Oyster Perp (or smiths) anyway.
Agreed, the 114270 is a better choice if you want a modern 36mm Explorer. Also in production for a shorter time for people who care about such things.
Sigh, IF only they did it in 39mm.36mm Explorer still in production and in the trendiest colour blue. Wasn’t the first watch worn on Everest actually an Oyster Perp (or smiths) anyway.
Felt sporty enough to me, I wore my purple grape 36 skiing
Well, it seems Hodinkee is suddenly deemed reliable and trustworthy again. It’s just another bit of boosterism by a bunch of greedy cynics. Anything to lure people into paying higher prices.
Next week it will be something else.
Or you could cash-in on a travel clock.
Last edited by paskinner; 2nd August 2020 at 10:11.
Surprised HODINKEE haven’t sprinkled the vintage magic dust on the Seadweller 16600.
Problem with these is the price keeps moving faster than my savings pot! I think it’s the best model out of all the explorer 1s that have been produced. The 36mm is the perfect size for such a simple design. Loved the review
Did anyone watch the Bark and Jack video on the lack of Explorer 1 in the market? He mentions that in the 90’s the Explorer 1 was a really popular model? Was that ever the case? I know the Daytona was hard to get but I didn’t know if the Explorer 1 was the next sought after model?
Toning it down was the flavour after the flash city type displays of the Big Bang eighties. People wanted wealth but didn't want to boast about it. Therefore an Explorer was the ideal mode back then.
Good price when it's not even have alarm and desktop stand. 🤣🤣🤣
Yes the double 1's have cal 3130 and SEL.
Agree, they sell a junk clock for $5,900, this is certainly not beyond hoodwinkee. Hoover it up with dealer friends then release an ode to the watch article, easy money.
The Bark & Jack video was interesting. I would agree prices will move up, partly the Hodinkee effect, and partly (artificially?) constrained supply. I like the 36mm Explorer, but not at the level I think asking prices will become.
Dave
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
How long before a few turn up in the Hodinkee shop at higher prices? Can’t help feel cynical about these guys.
A little unfair perhaps, I think their finger is on the pulse here as this model is being reassessed and looks increasingly appealing. 1016s are sky high and the current model is too large for some. So inevitably this model, which may have been written off as the 1016s slightly blingy replacement, is now starting to have an almost vintage appeal. The fact that you can’t buy a 36mm Explorer any more only makes it more desirable.
The sportiest of Rolex watches doesn't feel much like a sports watch anymore with the advent of smart watches.
The 112470 is a nice watch and in many ways is probably better than the 14270 but having owned a 112470, it didn't feel to me like a £4k+ watch and so I can't imagine me feeling that the 14270 is a £6-7k watch! I almost never picked it over the Seamaster which was 1/3rd of the price or my Datejust which was also a lot less.
Don't get the point about "it rarely makes sense to sell a Rolex." I imagine it makes a lot of sense if you want to buy a larger house, extend your house, invest in your business or all manner of other things!
I've sold 2 Rolex and don't regret selling either of them when I did, indeed one of them I doubt I could sell for as much now as I did when I sold it.
I had a 114270. It was my first Rolex. I found it underwhelming so sold it and bought a 14060
Sent from my EML-L09 using Tapatalk
Bark & Jack channel just released a video on exactly this
This! Balls. Stinks of insider trading/knowledge.
I sold mine too for the same reason! I found the explorer a smart watch but after owning for 6 months quite boring.
Sent from my iPad using TZ-UK mobile app
Smart watches are sensible but dull. Mechanical watches are pure madness but mega cool and interesting. No contest.
I agree with this.
I did try a 14270 back to back with a 16570 some years back, and bought the Explorer II as it was just much more interesting to me.
I like the 36mm Explorer, it’s nice enough, but I find the other sports Rolex watches, and even some Datejust models more interesting,
Dave
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Pretty much every Explorer is lovely, a bit dull, understanded yet elegant but not very interesting and that's the point. As part of a collection they're great and serve their purpose but as an only watch I couldn't do it. Fantastic office watch if you have spare cash.
I disagree and think due to there simplicity and understated elegance are a perfect ‘only’ watch.
They very much follow the form follows function principle.
Last edited by boring_sandwich; 2nd August 2020 at 20:26.
The Explorer is very understated and simple, which is the appeal to me. It does not have a wow factor. It does not need one in my opinion.
The number of these watches in existence around the world has not changed. The appearance or innards of this watch has not changed. The knowledge of its existence has not changed. Anybody who knows anything knew this explorer existed already. So if prices go up now, what exactly has changed?
It's not original anymore to say that watch appreciation is not what it used to be, but I'm going to say it again anyway.
The internet ruins everything
A great deal has changed. It’s no longer available, and the current model is a much larger watch that’s fine for some, but others find unwearable. There’s always a clear distinction between a modern Rolex fresh from the shop, and a vintage model, it’s two different markets, two different aesthetics and impressions. With the passing of time a watch that felt like modern model has just started to feel on the cusp of being, if not vintage exactly, then at least nostalgic and perhaps a bit different. You only have to look at the clasp, as with the 16570 Explorer II it belongs to a different era, before the brand started to look for ways to make iconic watches larger. Time changes everything.
I bought my first Rolex, a 39mm Explorer MK1, in 2014. Both the AD and his salesman wore a 36mm Explorer and to be honest they don't look all that different when on the wrist.
I now think the Explorer MK2 is the technically better watch which has recaptured the original ethos of the Explorer.
I have been wearing my Explorer since becoming trapped out in Spain in February and it really is the perfect watch that sails below the radar.
They don’t look that different until you see them on a 6.5” wrist, when suddenly one fits and one doesn’t. But discussions of what size is ‘right’ are somewhat pointless, as everyone is different. All you can say is that unlike the Oyster Perpetual and Datejust, there is now only one size of Explorer, and at 39mm they’ve chosen a relatively generous size that’s fine for most people and slightly too large for some people. It is after all the same as the largest size of Oyster Perpetual, so what the older model provides is a choice that’s currently missing. As ever I wish they’d settled on something in between 36mm and 39mm if they were only going to have one size, but then they might have ended up with a watch that’s perfect for me and wrong for most others.
The OP would be my first choice. I visited WoS on Saturday, they have none in their whole system, supposedly partially due to supply issues from Rolex.
I tend to agree with this. I had a 114270 a while ago as my only watch worn daily. Loved it at first but as nice as it was it started to feel bland and eventually I decided to sell it. In some ways I really wish I still had it as it would work well as part of my small collection now (although the similarly styled Grand Seiko SBGX061 takes up that space). Looking at current prices, to get a similar replacement 114270 would probably cost me an extra £1k to £2k on top of what mine sold for.
Regarding sizing, the 39mm doesn't scale up well in my eyes so I'd still go 36mm over 39mm.
I have a. 6.75" wrist and the best fitting watch I have is a 1655 Explorer11 at 40mm.
That doesn't surprise me, I can happy wear a 16570 Explorer II on a 6.5" wrist while I find the 39mm Explorer looks oversized as it's all dial, and they are much the same size. I could still wear it but not without the nagging feeling that it would look better a mm smaller. On a 6.75" wrist a 1655 should look great.
But discussions of watch sizes are a bit pointless in the end. One person says they tried a 39mm Explorer and found it too large, another person indignantly replies that they're wearing one right now and it's perfect. What have we learned? Nothing at all, they are probably both right. People come in all shapes and sizes, but the current Explorer doesn't.
It was certainly very popular in Japan for a while... started by a character wearing one in a widely-watched TV show of all things, if I remember correctly.
The 14270 is a great watch in and of itself; but, when compared to the 114270, only has lug holes in its favour. Even tritium patina (which looks good on 90s Subs etc.) looks a bit cack on these because the white infill on the ‘3, 6, 9’ remains white - making for quite an odd look. As such, I’d rather have the better movement and working lume of the later 36mm watch.
Would be good to see a 36mm Explorer option again, they could keep making the 39mm one.
Thought I'd read these were only 39mm mick...though what's a mm when alls said and done.
Posting Permissions
