Rolex Explorer Ref# 214270 Mark I or Mark II

[2nastie]

MK2, overall better looking watch.

There is a probably a few that prefer the look of the MK1 but not let's kid ourselves, the majority of MK1 advocates is for the investment standpoint because many think it has been produced for a shorter period of time and therefore "rarer".

In fact, MK1 is from 2010 to 2016 (+/- 6 years) vs. MK2 is 2016-present (+/- 4 years). If you want to speak about rarity, technically there should be more MK1s than MK2s. If Rolex comes out with another dial tomorrow, suddenly the MK2s are produced less.

Go with the watch you like more. Simple as that.

[PLNYC]

I prefer the Mk2. The lume is my favorite part of the watch.

[Friar]

I have a Mk I but probably prefer the Mk II because of the slightly longer and broader hands. I believe the hands might improve legibility. While I love the Explorer, I have the same issue I have with virtually any other black dial watch with white gold or rhodium plated hands. Often the hands appear dark gray and blend into the dial making quick readability challenging for my older eyes. My Ranger has broader hands and more lume so is quite readable.

[dabelM]

In 2015 i buy Mark I.

Sold 2018

Now from February waiting for Mark II.

[CDNWatchNut]

Originally Posted by 2nastie

MK2, overall better looking watch.

There is a probably a few that prefer the look of the MK1 but not let's kid ourselves, the majority of MK1 advocates is for the investment standpoint because many think it has been produced for a shorter period of time and therefore "rarer".

In fact, MK1 is from 2010 to 2016 (+/- 6 years) vs. MK2 is 2016-present (+/- 4 years). If you want to speak about rarity, technically there should be more MK1s than MK2s. If Rolex comes out with another dial tomorrow, suddenly the MK2s are produced less.

Go with the watch you like more. Simple as that.

I don't think either is much of an investment in financial terms, however I do wonder if fewer Mk1's were sold simply as they weren't very desirable, vs the Mk2 which is very well loved. Also, some (or many) Mk1's will end up converted to Mk2's at service time as most prefer the Mk2.

[2nastie]

Originally Posted by CDNWatchNut

I don't think either is much of an investment in financial terms, however I do wonder if fewer Mk1's were sold simply as they weren't very desirable, vs the Mk2 which is very well loved. Also, some (or many) Mk1's will end up converted to Mk2's at service time as most prefer the Mk2.

I'm agree with on those points. Simply put, I think some people will be clouded with the fact that the MK1 are "produced less" therefore there is some sort of investment value.

Same logic has also been applied to the MK1 and MK2 SD43.

Too many investment driven ideology when it should come down to which dial you like more.

[Jster]

Mark II for me. I love mine. Just over a year old. Can’t get over the short hands on the Mark I.

[AJMarcus]

Mark I is unique. In fact these are getting much harder to find these days

[JBrown717]

Mk ii

[AJMarcus]

Originally Posted by 2nastie

MK2, overall better looking watch.

There is a probably a few that prefer the look of the MK1 but not let's kid ourselves, the majority of MK1 advocates is for the investment standpoint because many think it has been produced for a shorter period of time and therefore "rarer".

In fact, MK1 is from 2010 to 2016 (+/- 6 years) vs. MK2 is 2016-present (+/- 4 years). If you want to speak about rarity, technically there should be more MK1s than MK2s. If Rolex comes out with another dial tomorrow, suddenly the MK2s are produced less.

Go with the watch you like more. Simple as that.

I like the mark I much better. The uniqueness of the dial for me is awesome. The white gold numerals look amazing in the sunlight. It more easily slides from sporty to dress due to the white gold numerals. It is definitely more rare since it did not sell well during its years of production. And some owners chose to swap the dial and hands at service for Mark II. I believe it will certainly be a collectors piece down the road

[vitadine]

Originally Posted by Homo Sapien X

Mark 2 is awfully large on wrist even for a 7” size. The flat bezel is a real scratch magnet and is too flat. An Explorer is meant to be a stealth sport piece, Mark 2 is a disappointment.

Mark 1 is a classic. The 36mm case is simply spot on.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Mark 1 is not 36mm in diameter.
You are talking about the 114270.
The Mark 1 and Mark 2 are 214270, both at 39mm.

[gg922]

Thank you all for you comments and suggestions.

[toolr]

There was a member a couple years ago trying to hype the Mk1 as the next big collectible, to no avail, he hasn't posted in almost a year.
I would go for the MK2, just looks better and more balanced.

[MoosicPa]

I like both versions.... however if you are only getting one version I would go for the MK2 dial.

009 by [url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/150333170@N07/]

[drblowfin]

Mark 2 for sure, it’s the perfect watch


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gg922]

I really appreciate everyone's recommendations.

[Ricky Rolex]

Mk2 no question.

Clearer eligibility, hands, dial, lume all improved.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[juve]

I had both. There is no big difference. Choose what you like more.

[DJ39]

Mk2

I expect Rolex to release a new movement for the explorer this year


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Erin07]

I have Mk 1 and yes, between the two I prefer Mk 2 sporty & proportional dial. That being said, Mk 1 is pretty unique in its own way (solid white gold numerals are stunning when under all kind of lights and also gives out dressier look) and I wouldn't part with it in order to persuit a Mk 2.

[F1polesitter]

Thought I like the MK2, but with them side by side, I ended up choosing the Mk1. That was in 2016, still happy with my decision.

The MK1 is a dressier than the MK2 and is truly a GADA watch (go anywhere, do anything) as long as the hands don't bother you.

[mg Barcelona]

mk 2 all day everyday and twice on Sundays. To my eyes the lume filled 3,6,9 and the hands just look better.

[scoot4nat]

Originally Posted by Ricky Rolex

Mk2 no question.

Clearer eligibility, hands, dial, lume all improved.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Eligibility?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Commonproject]

MK1 = more classy
MK2 = more sporty

It's that simple

[Ricky Rolex]

Originally Posted by scoot4nat

Eligibility?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yea it’s a bit of rain mate. Don’t panic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fed_fan]

MK2. The short hands on the MK1 stand out too much

[Boothroyd]

Originally Posted by Commonproject

MK1 = more classy
MK2 = more sporty

It's that simple

Agreed. So, OP, which are you going to get?

[jrs146]

Personally I’m not a fan of the lume on the 3,6,9. I like the white gold numbers and for that I’d go MK1. The lime just looks odd on them. Don’t know why. Maybe because Rolex has always used 3,6,9 with no lume.

But the true answer. Get an Air-King!

[Itgb]

Lume on all the indices and numbers looks more cohesive to my eyes. It’s the same reason why the colored OP39 models look worse than the white and black dials with full lume. Glad I went with the MK2.

[gg922]

I really want to thank you all for your recommendations. I ended up purchasing a MK I. I liked both versions I just got a decent deal on the MK I so I went with it.