My 40mm Explorer has arrived!

[Lu..]

Congrats!!

[jrpb]

Looks really nice buddy 👌

[zi464]

Both new and old look good, can't go wrong either.
Congrats

[Rick_Nashville]

Originally Posted by R3-D9

Here is the new 40mm Explorer ref. 224270. I’m still not 100% this has actually just happened… awesome day! Feel free to ask any questions and I’ll answer them as best as I can.

Huge congrats, R3. It's an absolutely fantastic looking watch. I would love to get one of these. I, too, owned a 114270 (too small for my 7.5" wrist; had to move it); and a Mk-1 214270 (kept it for 8 yrs, but finally couldn't take the short hands & blingy 3-6-9 markers anymore, so I moved it, lol). The new Exp-40 seems to deftly address the size, visual design, and fitment issues. Hope you enjoy it thoroughly!

[WatchTimes]

Bracelet looks much beefier and more in proportion with the case!
Not a watch I personally crave but I love the history of it and it looks great.
Congrats and thanks for sharing it with us!

[thenewguy2023]

Wow! Looks great! Congratulations.
Didn’t know the new models are out. Thanks for TOFTT! ;)

[alphadweller]

Looks great, congratulations.

[Moose500]

Looks fantastic!

[Kenny G]

Congrats OP, looks great!

The new 40 definitely seems to have a nicer lug-to-bracelet taper due to the wider 21mm ends links and thinner lugs. I’m also loving the gloss black dial and AR coating.

Nothing wrong with the 39 though either imo…

[RichM]

Very Nice! Congratulations

[nicki]

Congrats...

[travisb]

Congratulations!

[1William]

Congratulations.

[Snowballs]

Congratulations. I am still waiting for the 36; there may be light at the end of the tunnel if the 40's are arriving

[R3-D9]

A quick update on the measurements of the watch, which I think some will find interesting. I decided to measure out the endlink to endlink span. It is substantial at 51mm.

Again, please take my measurements with a grain of salt... I still haven't been able to find my digital callipers and have been using a tape measure from a sewing kit.

Here are the Explorer 40 measurements that I get:

-case width of approx 39mm
-lug-to-lug of 46-ish mm
-bracelet is 21mm
-end link to end link span is 51mm
-dial width of 31mm

Taken from a Watchbox review , the OP41 measurements are:

-case width of 39.5mm,
-lug-to-lug of 47mm
-bracelet is 21mm
-endlink to endlink span is 51mm
-I can't find a dial width online

The Explorer 39's measurements (again according to a Watchbox YouTube review) are:

-case width of 39mm case
-lug-to-lug of 47.4mm
-20mm bracelet
-endlink to endlink span is 48.8mm
-dial width of 31mm

Based upon this, I think the Explorer 40 case is extremely similar to both the 39mm Explorer and the OP41.

The factors that will affect wrist presence will be the larger 21mm lug width of the Exp40 and OP41 and the shorter lug-to-lug of the Exp40 vs. the other two.

On the other hand, the endlink to endlink span of the Exp40 and OP41 might make those watches somewhat less wearable for smaller wrists than the Explorer 39.

[nickscaps]

Originally Posted by R3-D9

A quick update on the measurements of the watch, which I think some will find interesting. I decided to measure out the endlink to endlink span. It is substantial at 51mm.

Again, please take my measurements with a grain of salt... I still haven't been able to find my digital callipers and have been using a tape measure from a sewing kit.

Here are the Explorer 40 measurements that I get:

-case width of approx 39mm
-lug-to-lug of 46-ish mm
-bracelet is 21mm
-end link to end link span is 51mm
-dial width of 31mm

Taken from a Watchbox review , the OP41 measurements are:

-case width of 39.5mm,
-lug-to-lug of 47mm
-bracelet is 21mm
-endlink to endlink span is 51mm
-I can't find a dial width online

The Explorer 39's measurements (again according to a Watchbox YouTube review) are:

-case width of 39mm case
-lug-to-lug of 47.4mm
-20mm bracelet
-endlink to endlink span is 48.8mm
-dial width of 31mm

Based upon this, I think the Explorer 40 case is extremely similar to both the 39mm Explorer and the OP41.

The factors that will affect wrist presence will be the larger 21mm lug width of the Exp40 and OP41 and the shorter lug-to-lug of the Exp40 vs. the other two.

On the other hand, the endlink to endlink span of the Exp40 and OP41 might make those watches somewhat less wearable for smaller wrists than the Explorer 39.

Thank you again for the detailed information, yours is pretty much the first in-depth online. I want one even more now!

[RemoteFisherman]

Originally Posted by R3-D9

A quick update on the measurements of the watch, which I think some will find interesting. I decided to measure out the endlink to endlink span. It is substantial at 51mm.

Again, please take my measurements with a grain of salt... I still haven't been able to find my digital callipers and have been using a tape measure from a sewing kit.

Here are the Explorer 40 measurements that I get:

-case width of approx 39mm
-lug-to-lug of 46-ish mm
-bracelet is 21mm
-end link to end link span is 51mm
-dial width of 31mm

Taken from a Watchbox review , the OP41 measurements are:

-case width of 39.5mm,
-lug-to-lug of 47mm
-bracelet is 21mm
-endlink to endlink span is 51mm
-I can't find a dial width online

The Explorer 39's measurements (again according to a Watchbox YouTube review) are:

-case width of 39mm case
-lug-to-lug of 47.4mm
-20mm bracelet
-endlink to endlink span is 48.8mm
-dial width of 31mm

Based upon this, I think the Explorer 40 case is extremely similar to both the 39mm Explorer and the OP41.

The factors that will affect wrist presence will be the larger 21mm lug width of the Exp40 and OP41 and the shorter lug-to-lug of the Exp40 vs. the other two.

On the other hand, the endlink to endlink span of the Exp40 and OP41 might make those watches somewhat less wearable for smaller wrists than the Explorer 39.

I just finished watching Watch Advisor's review of the Air King, and the proportions and finish of the Air King are identical to the new Explorer:
1. Thickness: 11.59 MM
2. Lug-to-lug: 47 MM
3. Lug Width: 21 MM
4. AR Coating: Yes

Thus, if there's a need to see how the Explorer would look and feel on a wrist the closest analogy would be the Air King.

[East of Eden]

Originally Posted by RemoteFisherman

I just finished watching Watch Advisor's review of the Air King, and the proportions and finish of the Air King are identical to the new Explorer:
1. Thickness: 11.59 MM
2. Lug-to-lug: 47 MM
3. Lug Width: 21 MM
4. AR Coating: Yes

Thus, if there's a need to see how the Explorer would look and feel on a wrist the closest analogy would be the Air King.

The 39mm Exp. does not have AR coating, correct?

[RemoteFisherman]

Originally Posted by East of Eden

The 39mm Exp. does not have AR coating, correct?

Correct.

[czhao]

Amazing watch!

[ikincooper]

Thanks OP for your detailed review.

I got to try one on today at my AD and it just looked too big for my small 6.25” wrist. Happy with what I have, which makes a positive change!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[R3-D9]

Originally Posted by ikincooper

Thanks OP for your detailed review.

I got to try one on today at my AD and it just looked too big for my small 6.25” wrist. Happy with what I have, which makes a positive change!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah… I would say a 7” wrist would be the average starting point for the 40 vs the 36. If my wrist was your size, I would have stuck with the 36 and been very happy. It’s amazing!

[Smurf_75]

Cracking watch, congratulations.

[Fleetlord]

Saw a demo version in Miami a couple of days ago.

First thing I noticed was the immediacy of the its appearance compared to the 39mm.

The dial is much darker and deeper glossy black. The numbers and hands appear much sharper against this darker background.

Apparently the waitlist is long already as this is an "affordable" Rolex at retail and contrary to all the doom and gloom news out there, consumers (in that market at least) are absolutely desperate to acquire Rolex and this really fits the bill nicely...

[rolexjackson]

Congratulations!!!

[Nav01L]

Wow, that was quick, congratulations!

[vitadine]

Thamks for this post!

Can anyone tell if the 40mm has an AR coating on the underside of the saphire, like the 126 Sub and the 226 Explorer 2?

[R3-D9]

Originally Posted by vitadine

Thamks for this post!

Can anyone tell if the 40mm has an AR coating on the underside of the saphire, like the 126 Sub and the 226 Explorer 2?

After wearing it in all kinds of lighting, I’m 99% certain that it does.

[Random]

Hi. To hopefully answer Stickboy’s question (post 26). As an owner of a 39mm 214270 and a 36mm 124270 I can confirm that, although the clasps are of identical length, the clasp BLADES of the new 124270 are quite a bit shorter. So when both watches are adjusted for a given wrist size, the 124270 - with bracelet opened - will present a smaller opening to pass over the hand. Go to The Rolex web site and the difference in clasp blade difference (124270 v 224270) can be seen. Cheers.

[BlakeA]

Originally Posted by Random

Hi. To hopefully answer Stickboy’s question (post 26). As an owner of a 39mm 214270 and a 36mm 124270 I can confirm that, although the clasps are of identical length, the clasp BLADES of the new 124270 are quite a bit shorter. So when both watches are adjusted for a given wrist size, the 124270 - with bracelet opened - will present a smaller opening to pass over the hand. Go to The Rolex web site and the difference in clasp blade difference (124270 v 224270) can be seen. Cheers.

Can confirm. Just received my 124070 yesterday, and after removing two links and letting out the extension (giving me the best fit on my skinny wrist), it’s a tight fit getting my hand through the resulting opening.