124270 vs. 14270

[Robine]

What are the real, tangible or visible "improvements" of the "new" "revolutionary" 124270 over the 14270?

[ink3027]

That's "a" great "question", I am "curious" to "hear" the answers "myself".

[Seddyspaghetti]

Originally Posted by ink3027

That's "a" great "question", I am "curious" to "hear" the answers "myself".

+1

[PJitz]

Google is your friend, my friend

[dannyp]

Well, there are "visible" differences and there are technical "improvements" but "visible improvements" is entirely subjective.

Visible differences:
Larger indices
More bracelet taper
Narrower inter-lug width
Longer clasp

Technical improvements:
New movement (70hr PR among other things)
All solid links
More solid clasp

I now own the new version. Part of me had always regretted not buying a 14270 instead of the 16570 I bought 12 years ago (and traded for my new one). However, at the time, I found that the bracelet width made it wear too bangle-like (like a Cartier Tank almost). So I bought my Exp. II instead. I don't feel that way at all about the new Exp. I, nor do I find that the taper makes the bracelet feel at all dainty.

[vh2k]

Originally Posted by dannyp

Technical improvements:
New movement (70hr PR among other things)
All solid links
More solid clasp

+ Chromalight

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by Robine

Found it - 20mm (tapering to 15.5mm) for 14270
19mm tapering down to 14mm on new one

I wonder whether these "wears like a Cartier Tank" comments also apply to period five-digit Datejusts (same case dimensions); I have never read them in that context, so maybe its a bit of HodinkeeMonochromewatches blub being reiterated.

I would imagine so, but to be honest, I don't think I ever looked at a DJ of that era (don't forget, that Explorer design continued for 5+ years after the DJ redesign). That said, it would probably only apply to stainless models with Oyster bracelets, as I think TT/Jubilee, with their different metals and visual effects, may have worn a bit differently (even if dimensions the same).

Originally Posted by vh2k

+ Chromalight

Oh yea, duh!

[Robine]

Whats the difference in bracelet taper between the two?

I thought the 14270 had a period Oyster bracelet like all the other sports models, and that bracelet was not overly chunky.

[Robine]

Found it - 20mm (tapering to 15.5mm) for 14270
19mm tapering down to 14mm on new one

I wonder whether these "wears like a Cartier Tank" comments also apply to period five-digit Datejusts (same case dimensions); I have never read them in that context, so maybe its a bit of HodinkeeMonochromewatches blub being reiterated.

[watchmavan]

Better than both. 214270


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[PJitz]

Originally Posted by watchmavan

Better than both. 214270


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Come on man. No one asked.

[watchmavan]

Originally Posted by PJitz

Come on man. No one asked.

Whoops. Sorry. Thought this was a discussion forum.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Jster]

[QUOTE=watchmavan;11480668]Better than both. 214270


I agree!

[kieselguhr]

Originally Posted by watchmavan

Better than both. 214270


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Even if “no one asked”

You are allowed to state your opinion
Not a fan of the explorers in general but I do agree and like the spacing and dimensions of 214270 as a sport watch better

Op,
The newer model will have solid end links, solid links throughout the bracelet, a superior clasp, and modern indices

[fskywalker]

Originally Posted by watchmavan

Better than both. 214270


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[QUOTE=Jster;11480705]

Originally Posted by watchmavan

Better than both. 214270





I agree!

Well, better is a subjective term. 214270 proportions were off in my mind, the hands were too short (MK1) and the bezel was too fat (both MK1 and MK2) ; glad Rolex corrected that mistake!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[NathansExplorer]

Originally Posted by watchmavan

Better than both. 214270


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Haha the proportions are all wrong on that watch. Looks like a pancake. Even worse in person, than in pictures. Looks ok in my profile pic though haha

[Brich436]

Pictures do not do it justice.... the more I wear it the more I like it. They resigned it from the ground up - it’s not a re-release of a 14270.

Mine is running at +0.5s a day.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[subtona]

Originally Posted by watchmavan

Better than both. 214270
214270 is an entirely different watch. after a while I found the proportions unappealing and sold mine.

Originally Posted by Robine

Found it - 20mm (tapering to 15.5mm) for 14270
19mm tapering down to 14mm on new one

I wonder whether these "wears like a Cartier Tank" comments also apply to period five-digit Datejusts (same case dimensions); I have never read them in that context, so maybe its a bit of HodinkeeMonochromewatches blub being reiterated.

It would be challenging to find anything that wears like a postage stamp Cartier tank. There is zero curve to the Cartier, there is no latitude for a too a big tank on one’s wrist, the lugs would float off your wrist.

As far as lug width, having the width at 20 just makes it easier to swap straps. 19 can be a pia

Originally Posted by Brich436

Pictures do not do it justice.... the more I wear it the more I like it. They resigned it from the ground up - it’s not a re-release of a 14270.

Mine is running at +0.5s a day.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The only thing that comes to mind that is as similar to the original 114270 vs 124270 would be the AP JUMBO. The explorer is extremely similar to the original. This is a good thing as the original was a proportionally perfect watch like many of the Rolex 4&5 digit references.

The larger 214270 39mm size is by comparison very different proportions and is what I would consider “redesigned from the ground up”

One of things I appreciate most about the 5 digit references are the smaller more modest fonts and indices, the modern versions have crowded dials by comparison. The only thing that would be an improvement for me are larger hands but that commonly seems to be too little or too much to be an improvement.

[Juggernaut]

I wonder if they missed the opportunity to use a new font for the numbers in this one...?

[jswing]

Two other differences not mentioned yet are the lumed 3,6,9 and AR coating for the crystal. I think the differences are enough that I'll probably upgrade from my 114270 if/when I get the call.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by jswing

Two other differences not mentioned yet are the lumed 3,6,9 and AR coating for the crystal. I think the differences are enough that I'll probably upgrade from my 114270 if/when I get the call.

Good point Jeff

I love the AR coating on my 124060. This is really long overdue IMHO.

Glad to see it making its way to other references

[jpwv]

The most recent video from Bark and Jack really highlights the visual differences between the two.

[jakjuventus]

Since I own both 114270 and 124270, guess I could share some feeling on both.

I find them to wear somewhat differently to the eye and how I feel on the wrist. Comfort and lightness you have to give it to 114270.

For 124270 I feels it is more secure and balance to the wrist. Especially for smaller wrist size (6inch below), now I can have the clasp on the center of my wrist.

After I wore 124270 for 2 weeks and getting back to 114270, first thing I find is that it really does look a bit dated. The new Explorer look more refine, the bracelet and the case connect together flawlessly. Rolex really did a great job it redesign this Explorer in 36mm again.

But I would say 114270 design does age beautifully either, it give me a softer and warmer tone every time I look at.

For the dial, it is like 4K on 124270 and 720p on 114270 but only when you put it side by side. The under glass AR coating really make it look clearer.

I won't sell either of them. Both are very similar but they cant replace each other.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Juggernaut]

Originally Posted by jakjuventus

Since I own both 114270 and 124270, guess I could share some feeling on both.

I find them to wear somewhat differently to the eye and how I feel on the wrist. Comfort and lightness you have to give it to 114270.

For 124270 I feels it is more secure and balance to the wrist. Especially for smaller wrist size (6inch below), now I can have the clasp on the center of my wrist.

After I wore 124270 for 2 weeks and getting back to 114270, first thing I find is that it really does look a bit dated. The new Explorer look more refine, the bracelet and the case connect together flawlessly. Rolex really did a great job it redesign this Explorer in 36mm again.

But I would say 114270 design does age beautifully either, it give me a softer and warmer tone every time I look at.

For the dial, it is like 4K on 124270 and 720p on 114270 but only when you put it side by side. The under glass AR coating really make it look clearer.

I won't sell either of them. Both are very similar but they cant replace each other.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Great comments from someone who has both. Can you please post a photo of them together so we can see the profile from the 6 o’clock angle....I’d like to see difference between the curvature of the case sides.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by jakjuventus

Since I own both 114270 and 124270, guess I could share some feeling on both.

I find them to wear somewhat differently to the eye and how I feel on the wrist. Comfort and lightness you have to give it to 114270.

For 124270 I feels it is more secure and balance to the wrist. Especially for smaller wrist size (6inch below), now I can have the clasp on the center of my wrist.

After I wore 124270 for 2 weeks and getting back to 114270, first thing I find is that it really does look a bit dated. The new Explorer look more refine, the bracelet and the case connect together flawlessly. Rolex really did a great job it redesign this Explorer in 36mm again.

But I would say 114270 design does age beautifully either, it give me a softer and warmer tone every time I look at.

For the dial, it is like 4K on 124270 and 720p on 114270 but only when you put it side by side. The under glass AR coating really make it look clearer.

I won't sell either of them. Both are very similar but they cant replace each other.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Excellent post Thank you

[Brich436]

When you can’t decide on which one - both is always the right answer!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jakjuventus]

Here you go

Comparison shots between Explorer 114270 (V Serial Year 2010) vs 124270 (Year 2021)










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Juggernaut]

Originally Posted by jakjuventus

Here you go

Comparison shots between Explorer 114270 (V Serial Year 2010) vs 124270 (Year 2021)










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hey, @jakjuventus...I love the sound of the old 3130 movement, is the new 3230 movement just as loud when you put your ear to the caseback?

[jakjuventus]

Originally Posted by Juggernaut

Hey, @jakjuventus...I love the sound of the old 3130 movement, is the new 3230 movement just as loud when you put your ear to the caseback?

As I remember I thinks it s very similar.
The new one might be a little quieter.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Juggernaut]

Originally Posted by jakjuventus

As I remember I thinks it s very similar.
The new one might be a little quieter.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks...that’s kind of what I expected and was a bit afraid of...but it also depends on when each was last serviced. Correct me if I’m wrong, but a movement that were just serviced (ie. those in a new watch) run quieter than a movement that is coming up on needing service since the lack of lubrication makes them a bit louder.