New Explorer II Looks Right!!

[TswaneNguni]

You know,when we start hair splitting on differences ,their are no real practical differences .They really look the same !!

[sxdcfv]

Originally Posted by TswaneNguni

You know,when we start hair splitting on differences ,their are no real practical differences .They really look the same !!

Agree

[jason042779]

The beauty of the 216570 is the dramatic, elegant taper from the large case to the slim bracelet. All Rolex has done in the 226570 is replace lug thickness with bracelet thickness, which is a step down IMO.

I love my 216570 and if there was a true anniversary model this year I would have had to seriously consider scrambling to get one. Thanks to Rolex for making that a non-issue.

[Daytonaman799]

I think it’s still one of the underrated models in the line up. It’s just a GREAT watch.

[chloebear]

Originally Posted by jason042779

The beauty of the 216570 is the dramatic, elegant taper from the large case to the slim bracelet. All Rolex has done in the 226570 is replace lug thickness with bracelet thickness, which is a step down IMO.

I love my 216570 and if there was a true anniversary model this year I would have had to seriously consider scrambling to get one. Thanks to Rolex for making that a non-issue.

The Explorer line has long been my favorite in the catalog; both the Explorer and Explorer II. Of the many, many things I love about the Explorer II is the way they took a very masculine watch and made it elegant. It's big and sporty with an amazing bracelet taper. It's a big watch, but really thin. It's a masterpiece.

Conversely, I think other brands (Omega comes to mind) are following Rolexes lead and starting to work in better tapered bracelets. It's a subtle difference that makes a watch look better and feel better on the wrist.

[afmars]

Originally Posted by jason042779

The beauty of the 216570 is the dramatic, elegant taper from the large case to the slim bracelet. All Rolex has done in the 226570 is replace lug thickness with bracelet thickness, which is a step down IMO.

Personally I disagree. I think the bracelet to case ratio was a slight miss in the 216570 and makes the watch look a bit top-heavy. I think they corrected it with the 226570.

[Aquaholic_user]

A gaudy double crown i can go without. Lovely piece otherwise.

Sent from my balloon knot

[Oystersteel]

Originally Posted by TswaneNguni

You know,when we start hair splitting on differences ,their are no real practical differences .They really look the same !!

This. So much this!

[Maxy]

Originally Posted by afmars

Personally I disagree. I think the bracelet to case ratio was a slight miss in the 216570 and makes the watch look a bit top-heavy. I think they corrected it with the 226570.

Deepsea JC was also refined with wider bracelet & updated movement but I don't see any fanfare or differences between those versions. Both are equally popular and neither is preferred over another. Similarly the slight changes will prove no difference to Explorer II. It's not the type of changes which will make difference in the sales.

[njc313]

The difference I see on the black dial 226570, there are no floating hands. They are no longer black.

[Maxy]

Originally Posted by njc313

The difference I see on the black dial 226570, there are no floating hands. They are no longer black.

That's actually good and gives better visibility IMO.

[njc313]

Originally Posted by Maxy

That's actually good and gives better visibility IMO.

I agree, I like it a lot more.

[Prism]

Originally Posted by Maxy

That's actually good and gives better visibility IMO.

It's only good now because the phantom hands weren't properly executed (glossy on matte dial), but in any case it was only better to have, since it is in the spirit of the original 1971 edition.

[Annan]

Originally Posted by Prism

It's only good now because the phantom hands weren't properly executed (glossy on matte dial), but in any case it is better to have since it is in the spirit of the original 1971 edition.

I agree the new hands are easier to see. I had not noticed the glossy over matte but have to say it's not an issue for me personally.

I had the Polar when they first came out and thought it was the most legible dial ever! Recently I bought a black dial and think the WG hands, although less easy to see, look richer, more "Rolex" than the painted hands on the Polar. And like you say, the phantom hands are more in the spirit of the original.

[Liga]

I think a lot of you have lost the vision to see why Rolex is still going strong.
A Rolex watch is instantly identified because they don't change the basic design of their watches year to year.
You see the visual clues from across the room. Instantly.
Rolex knows that the basic design is what keeps us coming back for more, because everybody knows that you are wearing a Rolex.

You get all excited when release time comes around, only to see that there were very little changes to the line up.
Of course nobody saw the Yactmaster II or the Skydweller coming.
But mostly all models get minor changes to improve quality at minimal monetary increases.


And to clarify for some of you who are looking on the outside to see the changes to the all new case.
When they say that, they have changed the internal dimensions to accept the new movement inside.
Outside may stay exactly the same.
However, you can't just plunk a 32XX into a case designed to take a 31XX
You just can't do that.

[WalterE]

Originally Posted by Liga

And to clarify for some of you who are looking on the outside to see the changes to the all new case.
When they say that, they have changed the internal dimensions to accept the new movement inside.
Outside may stay exactly the same.
However, you can't just plunk a 32XX into a case designed to take a 31XX
You just can't do that.

Indeed!

[afmars]

Originally Posted by Maxy

Deepsea JC was also refined with wider bracelet & updated movement but I don't see any fanfare or differences between those versions. Both are equally popular and neither is preferred over another. Similarly the slight changes will prove no difference to Explorer II. It's not the type of changes which will make difference in the sales.

I don’t doubt that they will all sell great. Just saying aesthetically the 226570 is a small/iterative step in the right direction.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by Liga

I think a lot of you have lost the vision to see why Rolex is still going strong.
A Rolex watch is instantly identified because they don't change the basic design of their watches year to year.
You see the visual clues from across the room. Instantly.
Rolex knows that the basic design is what keeps us coming back for more, because everybody knows that you are wearing a Rolex.

You get all excited when release time comes around, only to see that there were very little changes to the line up.
Of course nobody saw the Yactmaster II or the Skydweller coming.
But mostly all models get minor changes to improve quality at minimal monetary increases.


And to clarify for some of you who are looking on the outside to see the changes to the all new case.
When they say that, they have changed the internal dimensions to accept the new movement inside.
Outside may stay exactly the same.
However, you can't just plunk a 32XX into a case designed to take a 31XX
You just can't do that.

Just to clarify for you.

The bracelet is wider. The lugs are therefore slimmer.

There are external changes


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by Maxy

Deepsea JC was also refined with wider bracelet & updated movement but I don't see any fanfare or differences between those versions. Both are equally popular and neither is preferred over another. Similarly the slight changes will prove no difference to Explorer II. It's not the type of changes which will make difference in the sales.

On the contrary. Some do prefer the wider bracelet version. And some prefer the original.

To be fair, Rolex could do pretty much anything and it wouldn’t make a difference to sales


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[oxblood]

Originally Posted by afmars

personally i disagree. I think the bracelet to case ratio was a slight miss in the 216570 and makes the watch look a bit top-heavy. I think they corrected it with the 226570.

+1

[C0d]

Has anyone done a size comparison with the previous model? I haven't been able to scour the web to find one but if anyone has come across one, please share. Thank you.

[Annan]

Originally Posted by afmars

Personally I disagree. I think the bracelet to case ratio was a slight miss in the 216570 and makes the watch look a bit top-heavy. I think they corrected it with the 226570.

As the owner of a 216570 I might agree with you but would really need to see them side by side and try the 226570 on the wrist.

Just have to say that in all the years the 216570 has been around, to my knowledge, no one ever noted an issue with the bracelet/case ratio. It just amuses me that often the smallest, most miniscule tweak will bring out observations such as this on many "updated" references.

[EEpro]

Originally Posted by Annan

As the owner of a 216570 I might agree with you but would really need to see them side by side and try the 226570 on the wrist.

Just have to say that in all the years the 216570 has been around, to my knowledge, no one ever noted an issue with the bracelet/case ratio. It just amuses me that often the smallest, most miniscule tweak will bring out observations such as this on many "updated" references.

The case and bracelet of your 216570 are some of the most aesthetically pleasing I've ever seen for what it's worth. Similarly the SD43.

[SeaDweller50]

Gloss dial on an Explorer? What a terrible decision. The current satin dial is perfectly suited to this perfect tool watch.

[afmars]

Originally Posted by Annan

As the owner of a 216570 I might agree with you but would really need to see them side by side and try the 226570 on the wrist.

Just have to say that in all the years the 216570 has been around, to my knowledge, no one ever noted an issue with the bracelet/case ratio. It just amuses me that often the smallest, most miniscule tweak will bring out observations such as this on many "updated" references.

I also own the 216570 and had this thought long before the release. It doesn’t bother me, just something I noticed that could be be improved. The folks at Rolex obviously noticed the same thing.

To be clear, I have no intention of trading in my 216570 for the new one. It’s a great watch and I’ll keep it for life. That said I’m happy to acknowledge an improvement when I see one.

[Doood]

Originally Posted by jason042779

The beauty of the 216570 is the dramatic, elegant taper from the large case to the slim bracelet. All Rolex has done in the 226570 is replace lug thickness with bracelet thickness, which is a step down IMO.

I love my 216570 and if there was a true anniversary model this year I would have had to seriously consider scrambling to get one. Thanks to Rolex for making that a non-issue.

The taper was very sensual, like a full figured gal, and just loved those curves. Now, Rolex give us a tomboy.

[ddaly12]

It’s the same watch guys.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[afmars]

Originally Posted by ddaly12

It’s the same watch guys.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AJMarcus]

Originally Posted by TswaneNguni

You know,when we start hair splitting on differences ,their are no real practical differences .They really look the same !!

Well said.

[Malum]

I think the reason behind all the issues with the new Explorer II is so many people over payed for the 216570 .