![]() |
ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
![]() |
#1 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 546
|
Explorer II 40mm vs 42mm
For those of you who have had both, which do you prefer and why?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 12,421
|
I have both....I think they're different in many ways...even more so with specific color combinations. I suggest you try whatever you can and decide for yourself...no right answer...very under rated watches. My preference is 16570 in polar and 216570 in black.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
2024 ROLEX SUBMARINER 41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Real Name: shannon
Location: usa
Posts: 9,101
|
I’ve owned both and much preferred the 42mm.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Utopia
Posts: 2,101
|
The new Explorer II has an improved movement but a hideous larger case.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Portland, OR
Watch: ing the Detectives
Posts: 1,888
|
The new Explorer II has an improved movement but a well proportioned case, ( considering their other attempts at upsizing), and super legible dial.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: NYC
Posts: 952
|
My taste of preference is 216570 all the way. Doesn't matter which color. I think overall it sure is an improvement in design. The dial combo really draw my eyes better. Whenever I see a side by side image, I always like the 216570 more.
40mm is more comfort on wrist and 16570 has irresistible price BUT I can't pass on style. What a successful update. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,132
|
If Rolex would keep the orange GMT hand and go back to the 40mm case, this would be my favorite all time watch. I had the new black dial. I ended up not liking the size.
__________________
Official Member: 'Perpetual 30' Vegas International GTG 2016 Official Member "WIS-CON" Las Vegas International GTG 2017 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 546
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
2024 ROLEX SUBMARINER 41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Real Name: Alan
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,203
|
I chose the 42 mm for the legibility, the Easylink bracelet, the on-wrist comfort and balance and the 3187 movement which is VERY shock resistant. Had it for a few years and it also keeps amazingly good time so I can't recommend it highly enough.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,132
|
I did flip it. No regrets. The size just wasn't for me.
__________________
Official Member: 'Perpetual 30' Vegas International GTG 2016 Official Member "WIS-CON" Las Vegas International GTG 2017 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: London/Asia
Watch: GMT LN/SD43/D Blue
Posts: 872
|
Not really an Explorer fan, but if,,,,,,, - would choose the 42
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Real Name: Stefan
Location: Germany
Posts: 14
|
I sold my 42mm EXII and i dont miss them. The case was to large an to uncomfortable with my 17,5cm wrist.
Last week i was buy the 40mm Polar with the lug holes an the SEL Bracelett. I like this watch. Very classic. The older Cases looks pretty good as well. The thiner Clasp.... The 40mm Explorer 2 is more undersatement and looks just at the second or third look like a Rolex - i think. I think this watch will be a keeper and daily rocker - but yes i know. we share just one week togetter, maybe it would be change in a few month - but i dont think so at the moment. try both watches and i think you cant go wrong with one of both. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 252
|
I bought my 40mm in 2005. It was my first Rolex and I remember staring at it's beauty and thinking it looked quite big on my wrist. In 2015, I traded it for the 42mm because I felt it was too small. Times had moved on and I was, then, wearing the dblue Deepsea and the 45.5mm Omega Planet Ocean.
I love both of the Explorer II's. They're my go to watch for holidays, since I feel that it's "under the radar" and extremely comfortable, when traveling, swimming, etc. I think it's all down to your wrist size and any other watches that you may wear. Try them on and feel it for yourself. My answer to your question is that I, now, prefer the 42mm because of my other watches, but I will never forget my first love, ahem, I mean my first Rolex. ![]() Ps. They are/were both black dial. I'm not keen on the polar dial. ("Personal preference", before anyone wants to kill me) |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Real Name: Trevor
Location: Arizona
Posts: 5,740
|
I have owned both and prefer the new model. It is just a better watch and the size is really perfect.
You people do realize that if you lay a sub on top of the 42mm Explorer II, they are basically the same size, with the Explorer II being thinner. It just has a larger dial, which seems to mess with everyone's heads.
__________________
My grails: |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Real Name: Larry
Location: Kentucky
Watch: Yes
Posts: 34,861
|
Love the way the 42 fits and feels on the wrist...I just feel "home" when I strap that thing on.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2017
Location: UK
Posts: 500
|
It's not just because I own the newer version that I prefer it over the older model. I believe it looks much better with the orange hand and is so legible.
![]()
__________________
Rolex DSSD JC, Rolex GMT LN,Rolex DJ41 silver fluted on jubilee,Rolex Yacht-master blue dial, IWC Ingenieur 3227, Omega Speedmaster Moonwatch 3861, Tudor P01. Bremont ALT , Hamilton Khaki Below Zero |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2015
Real Name: .
Location: .
Posts: 1,343
|
I prefer 16570. I was very close to trading in the 16570 for 216570 I am glad I didn't now.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
2024 ROLEX SUBMARINER 41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 440
|
Howdy,
I don't own both so my opinion may not be helpful, however, I don't think the 42 is too big at all. Its proportions are great with the larger dial, and the orange 24 hour hand (in shape, color and size) really sets it apart from the GMT as well as being a throwback to the original 1971 version. Personally, I don't think the 40mm can compete in any way. Obviously your mileage may vary and I respect those whose opinion are to the contrary, but to me its a perfect design and size. Take care, Ruddiger |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 761
|
I think that given todays standards the 40 mm cannot be regarded as too small, as much as the 42 is not too big by same standards. Personally the 40 mm sings to me but only because it seems more comfortable to wear.
__________________
♛ Explorer 214270 ♛ Next: Day-Date 36 mm 1 Watch guy |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Real Name: Faz
Location: California
Watch: like'em all
Posts: 4,681
|
Never owned either, but the 40mm black dial is definitely on the future list for me. I find it a bit more elegant in proportions and dial (with its smaller hour markers) than the all sporty 42mm version.
__________________
-Faz Instagram @fazmoto |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21 |
2024 ROLEX SUBMARINER 41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Sep 2015
Real Name: Richard
Location: GA
Watch: YTBD
Posts: 23,153
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#22 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 546
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#23 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 546
|
Is the M serial the last one before the explorer II went to 42mm?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#24 |
2024 ROLEX SUBMARINER 41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Real Name: Ed
Location: East Hampton NY
Watch: me break clays..
Posts: 7,496
|
The 42 has a great wrist presence IMO its my favorite piece to wear
![]()
__________________
Rolex•Omega•Breitling•Grand Seiko "The only difference between crazy and eccentric is the size of ones bank account" Anonymous * Card carrying member of TRF's Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons * |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#25 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: south
Watch: Exp 2 Polar 42mm
Posts: 24
|
42MM, to me its just perfect. Easy to read dial, feels great on the wrist and that orange hand on the white dial to me is amazing. I find myself looking at it many times a day.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#26 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2017
Location: UK
Posts: 500
|
__________________
Rolex DSSD JC, Rolex GMT LN,Rolex DJ41 silver fluted on jubilee,Rolex Yacht-master blue dial, IWC Ingenieur 3227, Omega Speedmaster Moonwatch 3861, Tudor P01. Bremont ALT , Hamilton Khaki Below Zero |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#27 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Toronto
Posts: 278
|
I've got a 7" wrist and the 42 is perfect! Love the watch and I've had it on almost every day since I got it.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#28 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 546
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#29 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: KY
Watch: A few.....
Posts: 3,790
|
I owned the 42 black. Great watch, but compared to my BLNR, it just couldn’t cut it. Size wasn’t the problem either. It was the proportions of everything. Just off. Almost in a DJ2/DD2 kind of way. So I let it go.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#30 |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Gran Canaria
Posts: 3,469
|
I feel better on 16570. 40mm is more comfortable than 42mm. I did not change it for the 216570.
![]() Enviado desde mi SM-G930F mediante Tapatalk |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.