closing tag is in template navbar
Time Factors Watches



TZ-UK Fundraiser
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 69

Thread: Rolex Explorer - the least popular of the sports models?

  1. #1
    Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Northener
    Posts
    2,662

    Rolex Explorer - the least popular of the sports models?

    Not as far as I am concerned. I love them

    Rolex Explorer reference 1016 the larger 36 mm model



    Rolex Explorer 5500 regular sized 34 mm version. The perfect size for me. Dial and hands appear mismatched it could be a redialed Air King, but comes with certification of authenticity from Rolex expert, James Dowling



    Three of them together, the 5500 Superprecision, 5500 Precision and 1016 Chronometer

  2. #2
    Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,758
    Blog Entries
    1
    I think they are superb 3 hand models.

    The 36 is for me perfect, the combination of the 39 and fairly small bezel makes the current model a bit too flat if that makes sense. That said I saw someone on the tube last year wearing a 39 and it looked ace.

  3. #3
    Rolex Explorer - the least popular of the sports models? Not in these parts.

    Possible the title of the least popular sports model belongs to the Exp II?



    Shot from the web.

  4. #4
    Journeyman M1011's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    419
    It would be interesting to know how many of these Rolex sold versus other models, but I guess we never will. Personally it's my favourite watch from today's line-up. I am of course biased.

  5. #5
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    Hove,UK
    Posts
    128
    Quote Originally Posted by dkpw View Post
    Rolex Explorer - the least popular of the sports models? Not in these parts.

    Possible the title of the least popular sports model belongs to the Exp II?
    ]
    I don't think so....
    Maybe the yacht master?

    Sent from my SM-G988B using Tapatalk

  6. #6
    Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Lancashire
    Posts
    1,064
    The Skydweller is uglier than Michael Gove.

  7. #7
    Journeyman Seal-Dweller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Sherfield-on-Loddon
    Posts
    120
    I donít think so either. As you can see my trusty Explorer II is no safe-queen, but itís my go-to daily wearer.

    Itís everything that I need in a watch, comfortable and bullet-proof and can handle everything that I throw at it (evident from the marks and scrapes). The fact that I see very few of these being worn is a positive too!




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  8. #8
    Exp II owners, don't get me wrong, I like them, especially the older polar models. I don't believe though, that they are/were widely appreciated compared to Subs, GMTs and as this is an Explorer thread, Explorers.

  9. #9
    Master jukeboxs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    2,827
    dkpw - you're the one that dragged the ExpII into an Explorer thread (i.e. an Explorer I thread, not Exp IIs).

    P.S. Everyone knows the Milgauss wins that Fugly Rolex prize.

  10. #10
    Master
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Lancashire
    Posts
    2,182
    Quote Originally Posted by dkpw View Post
    Exp II owners, don't get me wrong, I like them, especially the older polar models. I don't believe though, that they are/were widely appreciated compared to Subs, GMTs and as this is an Explorer thread, Explorers.
    I think you make a valid point...i have an Explorer II the polar but the later model in 42mm.

    At one point you could get these for a discount as no one wanted them...the problem now is everyone wants one because they will be discontinued next year and Rolex are running down the supply of them(Confirmed by a very good contact at my Rolex dealer) so from an investment point of view a good buy.

    The new model out next year is probably going to be like the new Seamaster...white faced with a black ceramic bezel and being a new model everyone will want one.

    I am glad the Exp II isn't popular because i don't see many about unlike the subs and seadwellers which i have previously owned.

  11. #11
    Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    England and Spain
    Posts
    4,597
    I have been wearing my 39mm Explorer non stop since February and to me it is the perfect watch. Another of its attractions, or so I thought, is the anonymity of it, in the sense that no one ever notices it.

    Two weeks ago I was passing through an almost empty Murcia airport and was approaching the security part where you have to put your hand luggage through the Xray machines etc.

    I was about 10 ft away from a female guard who told me in a loud voice to put my belt and Rolex in a basket. I looked around to her to work out how on earth she knew I was wearing a Rolex but she just walked away. If she spotted the Explorer, any scrote can and it was a trifle worrying. I may wear the old 1655 next time, that looks nothing like a normal Rolex.

    I still think the Explorer is the iconic Rolex.

  12. #12
    Craftsman JamieTheBarber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Southwest
    Posts
    362
    Quote Originally Posted by jukeboxs View Post
    dkpw - you're the one that dragged the ExpII into an Explorer thread (i.e. an Explorer I thread, not Exp IIs).

    P.S. Everyone knows the Milgauss wins that Fugly Rolex prize.
    You must be joking or are completely un-aware of the Yachtmaster 2! That takes the prize for not only Fugly Rolex but Fugly watch of all time.

    As for the Explorer, Rolex sports perfection in any reference. I absolutely love my 114270 itís my daily wearer!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  13. #13
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    East Midlands
    Posts
    302
    I prefer the larger modern version for the size and the bracelet/clasp, but the overall design is more or less the same. I really like the Explorer and I contemplated buying one for my son as a birth year watch (which was when I discovered how scarce sports watches had become).

    I think itís hugely versatile, can dress up or down and itís the sort of watch, bullet proof as I think it is, that could really be a Ďone watch to do it allí.

    Great find. Hope it serves you well.

  14. #14
    Master Toshk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,570
    I tried really hard with the 39mm. Three times actually!

    So much wrong with it. Dial too big, bracelet too narrow for the case....

  15. #15
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    england
    Posts
    653
    Best watch out there for me. Under the radar and foes with anything !

    Iíve got the 39mm and ive currently got it on a rubber B.

  16. #16
    Master daveyw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,677
    Quote Originally Posted by dkpw View Post


    Shot from the web.
    Is that the 214270 mk1 version?
    What a photo !!!

  17. #17
    Air-King is probably the least popular, most people forget it even exists.

  18. #18
    Grand Master oldoakknives's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Brussel land.
    Posts
    17,111
    Quote Originally Posted by dkpw View Post
    Rolex Explorer - the least popular of the sports models? Not in these parts.

    Possible the title of the least popular sports model belongs to the Exp II?



    Shot from the web.
    Nah. That'd be the Milgauss every day of the week.

    Little polar loveliness to brighten up the thread!

    ďThe more I learn about people, the more I like my dog.Ē

  19. #19
    Master
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,742
    Explorer the least Popular of the Sports models?

    No not for me. I much prefer the 114270 than something like a 14060. Mind you I am probably in the minority in also preferring the 16570 to a 14060.

  20. #20
    Journeyman Caminos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    London
    Posts
    76
    I think the explorer II in white is one of the most beautiful design of Rolex. Is in my must list since many years!


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  21. #21
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    London
    Posts
    171
    114270 was the perfect modern Rolex sports watch in my opinion

  22. #22
    Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    South Wales
    Posts
    1,262
    Blog Entries
    1

    I love mine

  23. #23
    Understated class whatís not to like.


  24. #24
    Size, proportions, bezel and dial ;) None work as well as on the 36mm model, imo. The lumed numerals are an improvement though.

    Quote Originally Posted by boring_sandwich View Post
    Understated class whatís not to like.


  25. #25
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    London
    Posts
    171
    Quote Originally Posted by ColDaspin View Post
    Size, proportions, bezel and dial ;) None work as well as on the 36mm model, imo. The lumed numerals are an improvement though.
    Its a real shame they dont offer the 36mm anymore - cant see why they couldn't do it alongside the larger model...

  26. #26
    Tbh, I was going to put the 36mm on the 'most overrated' list on the other thread! It's actually the only watch I've owned twice, and it's certainly nice enough, but I struggle with the enormous hype it gets. It seems almost de rigour for 'serious' enthusiasts to declare their undying love for it as the ultimate statement in timelessly classic, understated, Rolex cool.

    Of course, the watch itself is blameless in all of this!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ummar01 View Post
    Its a real shame they dont offer the 36mm anymore - cant see why they couldn't do it alongside the larger model...

  27. #27
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    London
    Posts
    265
    When did they switch from 36mm to 39mm on the Rolex Explorer? Was it in 2010? Just asking as am interested in a 2004 version - but fear that 36mm may be too small for the wrist that I have it in mind for...

  28. #28
    Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Leicester
    Posts
    1,034
    Itís a boring watch and whatís the deal with the ugly 3 6 9?

  29. #29
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Kent UK
    Posts
    744
    To the OP, what a lovely set of watches.

  30. #30
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    164
    Definitely wouldn't say its the least popular, has a great story and simple clean dial.

    Sent from my SM-N976B using Tapatalk

  31. #31
    Craftsman davidj54's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    938
    My best pal has the newest, 39mm Explorer and I used to think it was a watch I really wanted. But having a lend of his Iíve kind of gone off it. People say itís understated and under the radar, but itís actually got a fair size dial in the new size, a lot of shiny surfaces including all the polished arabics, plus a large amount of text on the dial. To me itís actually quite a busy, blingy watch and Iíve gone off the idea of having one.

    Iím not sure about it being the least popular, itís the darling of watch you tubers and a large amount of the watch community.

    For me Rolexís best watch in recent years were the black or white OP39ís, given the choice Iíd take one over an Explorer in a heartbeat.

  32. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by davidj54 View Post
    newest [...] polished arabics
    I wonder are you conflating the pre- and post-2016 iterations of the 214270? The latter is somewhat less blingy.

  33. #33
    Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cheshire
    Posts
    1,340
    Quote Originally Posted by Toshk View Post
    I tried really hard with the 39mm. Three times actually!

    So much wrong with it. Dial too big, bracelet too narrow for the case....
    Twice for me ! Kept my 114270 instead, just so much more balance to the design IMO.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  34. #34
    Master Toshk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,570
    Quote Originally Posted by JGJG View Post
    I wonder are you conflating the pre- and post-2016 iterations of the 214270? The latter is somewhat less blingy.
    Precisely! 369 design just doesnít work on larger dials. Also Rolex logo is too big on the 214270.

  35. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Toshk View Post
    Precisely! 369 design just doesnít work on larger dials. Also Rolex logo is too big on the 214270.
    Eh?

  36. #36
    Master Toshk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,570
    Quote Originally Posted by JGJG View Post
    Eh?
    Meh

  37. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by daveyw View Post
    Is that the 214270 mk1 version?
    What a photo !!!
    Yes that's the pre 2016 version.

    It's one of my favourite shots of the watch, which I found somewhere on the web. I tried a reverse photo search to see if could find the photographer, but was unsuccessful.

    It's the version I have and which I prefer, over the fatter hands and lumed 369 on the latter model. I don't consider the hands to be too short and the solid gold 369 doesn't affect nighttime viewing at all. The thinner hands are more elegant, to my mind, and match those on my 16610.

    Mine was bought in Amsterdam six years ago and is still running at +2 a day.

    There are many things I like about the watch but if I had to pick one feature above all others, it would be the slimness of the case. The lugs drip over your wrist and with the oyster bracelet, it feels part of you. I like the large real estate of the dial on a smallish watch. The very thing which turns some people off.

    But as this thread has shown, tastes differ!

  38. #38
    Master daveyw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,677
    Itís the version I have too. I had the choice between mk1 and mk2 dials/hands and went with the mk1. The watch seems to wear smaller with the non-lumed numerals and appears more discreet. It was this that won me over as I wanted a watch I could wear everywhere without attracting unwanted attention. As you say I also have never had a problem with the hands.
    Great accurate movement, wrist hugging lugs, strong clasp, under the radar and waterproof enough for my needs

  39. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by daveyw View Post
    It’s the version I have too. I had the choice between mk1 and mk2 dials/hands and went with the mk1. The watch seems to wear smaller with the non-lumed numerals and appears more discreet. It was this that won me over as I wanted a watch I could wear everywhere without attracting unwanted attention. As you say I also have never had a problem with the hands.
    Great accurate movement, wrist hugging lugs, strong clasp, under the radar and waterproof enough for my needs
    Your reasons for wanting the mk1 were exactly the reasons I sold mine and got the mk2.

    I found the mk1 was less discreet due to the white gold arabica reflecting light, plus the shorter thiner hands made the dial look bigger and unbalanced where I find the mk2 aesthetically pleasing.

    Its obviously all subjective and also interesting how we all view things differently.

  40. #40
    Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    England and Spain
    Posts
    4,597
    I have the MK1 model which fortunately I like, however, I also think that the MK2 does look better.

    It will be interesting to see how the market pans out in say 20 years from now, will the short run of the MK1 make it more desirable or not?

    Only time will tell.

  41. #41
    Craftsman Blueboy1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cheltenham
    Posts
    957
    Vintage Explorer 1 & II models have definately appreciated over the years, so there must be some interest there. I used to have a '57 Explorer with original Marche de Temps, Certificate, Guarantee - sadly no more...

  42. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich View Post
    When did they switch from 36mm to 39mm on the Rolex Explorer? Was it in 2010? Just asking as am interested in a 2004 version - but fear that 36mm may be too small for the wrist that I have it in mind for...
    Yes the size went to 39mm in 2010 when the 214270 was released


    Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app

  43. #43
    Journeyman Waldorf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Lancashire
    Posts
    248
    Always loved the Explorer but after obtaining the newest incarnation it just wore to big at 39mm. I have watches at 40 - 41 but it just seemed bigger. It was beautifully engineered and for me at 36mm would have been a definite keeper.

  44. #44
    Craftsman Kevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Location
    Hove East Sussex
    Posts
    323
    I love my 214270. I have owned mine a few months now, it was my first Rolex and it always brings a smile to my face when I wear it.
    I tend to wear a watch for a week before rotating and I am always a bit regretful when the end of the week comes.
    As to whether it's the least popular, well maybe it is.

    I rang my local AD on a Tuesday morning (With whom I had no previous relationship) got told they had none in stock but would put me on the register.
    I had read the forums and seen You Tube vids so resigned myself to a long wait.

    On the Saturday morning I got a call saying they had a delivery the day before and my watch was there. By Saturday afternoon it was on my wrist!

    So it may be the least popular sports watch but it is very popular with me

  45. #45
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    england
    Posts
    653




    Explorer on a rubber B

  46. #46
    Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Unknown
    Posts
    2,241
    Rolex Explorer Ė 2002 114270

    Less popular than the divers but least popular has to be Yachtmaster or Millgauss.



    [url=https://postimg.cc/image/g7t9dxior/]
    [/url<https://s17.postimg.org/dqhi6nysf/explorer_114270.jpg%5b/img%5d%5b/url>]

  47. #47
    Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Leicester
    Posts
    1,034
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivan Drago View Post




    Explorer on a rubber B
    That looks terrible, why not just leave it on the nice bracelet?

  48. #48
    Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Wales
    Posts
    2,117
    So all this talk of comparisons between 14060ís and the 114270. As an owner of both I woUld say I can always feel my sub as it slips down my wrist. The 114270 whilst still being a solid end link watch it feels lightweight compared to the sub. So you cant feel it , until you look down at it and enjoy the simplicity of a 3 6 9 dial.

    Which watch is most showy 14060M definitely Rolex
    Which watch is more comfortable to wear and nicer to look at .........Explorer all day

  49. #49
    Master Toshk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,570

    Rolex Explorer - the least popular of the sports models?

    Quote Originally Posted by Montello View Post
    Rolex Explorer Ė 2002 114270

    Less popular than the divers but least popular has to be Yachtmaster or Millgauss.




    Fantastic! Lovely size and perfectly balanced dial - seconds/minute indices all around!

    No need to bolder hour markers imo.

    Hopefully they will fix the modern Explorer next year or 2022. New Submariner proved they can.
    Last edited by Toshk; 31st October 2020 at 21:28.

  50. #50
    Master Routers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Northampton, UK
    Posts
    2,115
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivan Drago View Post




    Explorer on a rubber B
    Looks great on a rubber B or the original bracelet.
    The pick of the current range for me.

Posting Permissions

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

Do Not Sell My Personal Information