ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
|
28 August 2024, 04:46 AM | #1 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2024
Location: Texas
Watch: GMT II & Explorer2
Posts: 54
|
Really Like my Polar 216570 but
it feels a bit too weighty on my wrist. The bracelet fit is fine, just the weight feels a little much. My 16760 GMT Master 2 fits perfectly and never moves around when wearing it. I'm considering selling it and getting a 126610LV Submariner. It's a millimeter less in size than the Explorer and I love the look of it.
Any opinions? |
28 August 2024, 04:52 AM | #2 |
2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Real Name: JYogi/Jeremy
Location: Metro Detroit USA
Watch: It's a Rolex!
Posts: 5,787
|
You do what you want to do...
__________________
"You won't rise to the occasion - you'll default to your level of training." Barrett Tillman Kentucky Colonel, Tennessee Squire & Combat Leprechaun |
28 August 2024, 04:57 AM | #3 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Apr 2018
Real Name: Harry
Location: England
Posts: 10,639
|
If the Explorer II isn't comfortable to wear there's no point in keeping it. I find my 216570 sits really nicely on my arm and feels more like a 40mm. Best fit and comfort of all for me is the 126710 on Jubilee. My 11 series Sub fits nearly as well but the clasp is long and feels borderline awkward. The clasp on the 1266 looks too long for me but I haven't tried one.
|
28 August 2024, 04:57 AM | #4 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Planet Earth
Watch: Varies
Posts: 2,057
|
Have you tried a 16570? You might like it better, given that you like the 5 digit GMT.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
28 August 2024, 07:33 AM | #5 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2022
Location: NC
Posts: 408
|
I wanted a few old school tool watches and one of them is a 1999 16570 polar and I love it. I did put in a Steel Reef on the fly extension link due to the size of my wrist. I use that link in the half position. The 40mm is a better fit for me. YMMV. Good luck to you.
__________________
♛Explorer II 16570 | ♛Submariner 14060M | ♛SDDS 116660 | ♛GMT Master II 126710BLRO | ♛Daytona 116503 |
28 August 2024, 08:46 AM | #6 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2024
Location: Texas
Watch: GMT II & Explorer2
Posts: 54
|
I guess I'll need to go "exploring" for that 5 digit Explorer.
Thanks. This is some of the feedback I was hoping to hear. |
28 August 2024, 10:46 AM | #7 | |
2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Oct 2019
Real Name: Brian
Location: Nashville
Watch: 16750
Posts: 6,606
|
Quote:
That was one of the issues that I had with my 216570 as well. I’ve been much happier with my 16570 so far. The 22 series fixed the rest of the issues I had but the size/balance thing I don’t feel would be quite right still.
__________________
16750 | 6516(wife’s) | 126334 | 16570 | SBGA413 | SRPE33 | 126610LV |
|
28 August 2024, 05:35 AM | #8 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2019
Real Name: Mark
Location: Southern England
Watch: DJ41 SubC SMP mast
Posts: 1,678
|
Interesting because lots of threads about explorer ii/seadweller etc lately.
I find the 6 digit explorer ii ok but maybe try a 5 digit if you Like the basic watch. It’s smaller and lighter obviously. But don’t keep it if you don’t like wearing it. That’s a no - brainer Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
28 August 2024, 07:18 AM | #9 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2023
Location: New Hampshire USA
Watch: 126610LN
Posts: 139
|
A 126610LV Submariner is not going to solve that. That 1 less mm will not prevent it from rotating toward the outside of the wrist. I have a LN and it has a bit of heft to it. I would recommend a 5 series. Just my 2 cents.
|
28 August 2024, 07:25 AM | #10 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Real Name: Faz
Location: California
Watch: like'em all
Posts: 4,689
|
My 2 cents: 216570 is easier to wear than 126610 would be. If you are not happy with this, you won't be happy with that.
5 digit explorer2's are amazing. Any 5 digit case is a easy daily wearer.
__________________
-Faz Instagram @fazmoto |
28 August 2024, 11:32 AM | #11 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2022
Location: Rhode Island
Watch: Explorer
Posts: 431
|
The best advice I’ve gotten here: Add before you subtract.
|
1 September 2024, 02:07 AM | #12 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Oct 2019
Real Name: Ron
Location: Detroitish
Watch: GMT II/Sub/Exp II
Posts: 2,545
|
Agreed. Loved the 22 but just not as comfortable as the 5-digit. I now have both 16570's.
|
1 September 2024, 12:06 AM | #13 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2021
Real Name: Steve
Location: NYC
Posts: 904
|
I had the same thoughts regarding the polar exp II. Ended up parting with it. No rAgrets
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
1 September 2024, 01:51 AM | #14 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: The Ice House
Watch: Ingersoll Mickey
Posts: 3,369
|
I found my 216570 (polar) less than comfortable and traded it in on a 226570 (black) which is much improved. That extra millimeter of bracelet width makes a significant difference where it lands on my wrist and the subsequent distribution of its weight.
|
1 September 2024, 04:35 AM | #15 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Earth
Posts: 431
|
Quote:
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.