39 mm Explorer Hands

[WatchTimes]

OK
The hands are too short.
I tried it on today, I loved the watch but hated the hands.
I thought it was just pics that made it look like this but it
is worse in person!

Is Rolex gonna ever change these? (perhaps the DSSD Maxi Hands?)
Is there anything we can easily have done to them to make it look better?
I like the watch but those hands stop me from getting one.
I really almost said Ill get used to it and bought it from my AD today but I thought and realized I would get frustrated with it quickly and end up getting
killed flipping it.

Exp 39 mm
Exp 39 mm hands

[Hydrographer]

I agree, I love that watch and it sits so comfortably on the wrist, but the minute hand would drive me mad. I think the 36mm is perfect as far as the watch head goes but I would struggle to go back to the old style bracelet I think.

[pyxis]

The short hands bothers me too. Does anyone know if these were really carried over exactly from the 36mm Explorer I or are they new hands but made short for some unknown reason?

[rolexertion]

I checked, and the hands used on the 39mm Explorer are the exact same length as those on the 36mm Explorer I, and also the same length as those on the Sub-c and the DS. The DS dial is the same size as the Sub-c as well. Sorry, it doesn't seem there is a viable replacement in Rolex's lineup.

[indeuce]

the "unlengthened" hands on the now larger explorer is what kept me from getting one. i like the 39mm size, i just wish they would've lengthened the hands accordingly. ah well.

[RolexguyinSF]

The hands are too short, there is no debate. People should stop making excuses, saying they look fine, etc, and Rolex should just fix the problem. BUT if you fix them, it's admitting you made a mistake, and Rolex isn't too big on doing just that. It definatelly stops people from purchasing, so just fix it already!

[Boadicea]

Originally Posted by Hydrographer

I think the 36mm is perfect as far as the watch head goes but I would struggle to go back to the old style bracelet I think.

I agree, the bracelet on my 36mm Explorer feels like a toy compared to my Daytona and even the new Jubilee on my DJ. It rattles more (Probably the hollow centre links) and generally feels like tin. Funny though, I never noticed and was quite happy until I got the others which makes me think that I would probably have remained happy in my ignorance.

Anyway, the fact remains, the bracelet is a very welcome update but the 39mm in general feels like a step backward in my books and the short haands just looks like a very bad shortcut. Lets hope they get it right when the Explorer next gets an update... probably another 10 years from now though...

Then again, everyone I speak to these days seems to be talking about it (or thinking about buying it), I guess they must have got something right then?

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by rolexertion

I checked, and the hands used on the 39mm Explorer are the exact same length as those on the 36mm Explorer I....

This is untrue.

The photo below illustrates this nicely and all it takes to prove that the hands are different is a simple ruler.



I have also checked with my AD's watchmaker and he also confirms that they are different.

I had the opportunity twice recently to check out the 214270 and I have to admit that for those of us who are obsessed with watches, the hands on the 39mm seem way to small compared to the 36mm.

However, I made an effort to put aside my preconceptions and tried to look at the watch not as I would in photographs or with a loupe, but simply looking at as I would simply wearing it day to day and checking the time.

I feel as though the watch overall is the big plus and that the hands are not important in day to day use.

I also feel that in the display case, the 214270 is going to garner much more attention when compared to other watches in the professional line.

Now mind you, I like my 114270 enough that I'm not going to rush right out and flip mine for the newer one.

I'm as pleased as punch that I have the Z model that I have, sans the engraved rehaut and the new bracelet.

I do however feel that when new Rolex buyers see the new Explorer, they will not be prejudiced as we are toward one Explorer or the other, they will look at the watches in the display case and try them on anew, as many of us did at one time.

It is in this sense that I believe that the new Explorer will gain in popularity and be a stronger competitor in the professional series.

One additional observation. The engraving on the rehaut of the 214270 is so small as to be hard to discern its presence with the naked eye. I've grown to like the engraving on my DJ which is much more noticeable, but for many I think the less noticeable the engraving the better.

[Boadicea]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

I feel as though the watch overall is the big plus and that the hands are not important in day to day use.

Um? Did I miss something? I thought the MAIN reason to have a watch is to look at the hands and see the time? How can they be "not important"?

Also, the only difference I see is in the seconds hand on the 39mm version. IMO it is the only hand that looks the correct size for the case. Ruler or not, the other hands look like they were carried over from the 36mm version.

[Minutehand]

I used a ruler the other day and it seems as if the Explorer 39 hands are the same length as the hands on the Subs? - I was hoping that the Subs hands were longer so that one could swap them onto the Explorer 39 in order to "fix the issue". Seems as if the Explorer 39 has more dial whereas the Subs have less dial and more bezel.

Pity, the Explorer 39 would have been top of list for me.

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by Boadicea

Um? Did I miss something? I thought the MAIN reason to have a watch is to look at the hands and see the time? How can they be "not important"?

Elementary, my dear Boadicea. When checking the time, one is concerned only with where the hands point and not with their relative distance to the chapter ring or the aesthetic balance.

One may notice the length of the hands when setting the watch, but not so much when checking the time.

And as I noted above, the difference is only in comparison to the older model. Soon the older models will not be around so much as they were and newer buyers won't give a flying patootie about the comparison, only the overall impression of the watch, which I believe will improve over time, like so many of the other changes to other models that many of us decried in the early days.

I used to not like the domed bezels on the new DJ. Guess what. I'm wearing a domed bezel 116200 now and I love it.

Comprendo?

Originally Posted by Boadicea

Ruler or not, the other hands look like they were carried over from the 36mm version.

But, they weren't.

[synth19]

I think the complaints of the hands being "too short" are ridiculous. I think they look great and I'm 100% happy with my explorer. I always thought the hands on the 36mm were "too long." (jk).

[zeuloa]

Funny... If Rolex did "fix" the hands, I would bet everyone here would then want a "small hands" Explorer as the value would presumably go up!

[steubi1]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

This is untrue.

The photo below illustrates this nicely and all it takes to prove that the hands are different is a simple ruler.



I have also checked with my AD's watchmaker and he also confirms that they are different.

I had the opportunity twice recently to check out the 214270 and I have to admit that for those of us who are obsessed with watches, the hands on the 39mm seem way to small compared to the 36mm.

However, I made an effort to put aside my preconceptions and tried to look at the watch not as I would in photographs or with a loupe, but simply looking at as I would simply wearing it day to day and checking the time.

I feel as though the watch overall is the big plus and that the hands are not important in day to day use.

I also feel that in the display case, the 214270 is going to garner much more attention when compared to other watches in the professional line.

Now mind you, I like my 114270 enough that I'm not going to rush right out and flip mine for the newer one.

I'm as pleased as punch that I have the Z model that I have, sans the engraved rehaut and the new bracelet.

I do however feel that when new Rolex buyers see the new Explorer, they will not be prejudiced as we are toward one Explorer or the other, they will look at the watches in the display case and try them on anew, as many of us did at one time.

It is in this sense that I believe that the new Explorer will gain in popularity and be a stronger competitor in the professional series.

One additional observation. The engraving on the rehaut of the 214270 is so small as to be hard to discern its presence with the naked eye. I've grown to like the engraving on my DJ which is much more noticeable, but for many I think the less noticeable the engraving the better.

Hi Grady,

thanks for your contribution.

But why the hell did you take a photo where we actually CANNOT see the length of the hands, because they are hidden by the 9????

Please provide another photo, thanks so much!

Tom

[RRGHOST1]

Well i like the new 39mm Explorer better.Its a very nice looking watch.

[DG123]

Hands on the 36mm Explorer are slender to match the size of the watch.
Hands on the 39mm Explorer are thick to match the size of that watch.
Rolex knows what they are doing.

[Kanger]

I like the 39mm Explorer, the second hand is good, even the hour hand, but the minute hand seems a little small. Not a deal breaker for me though.

[boa2]

I tried on the watch and thought it was perfect, hands and all. I like how the angle of the tip of the hand parallels the triangular marker edge at 12 o'clock. Beautiful watch!

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by steubi1

Hi Grady,
But why the hell did you take a photo where we actually CANNOT see the length of the hands, because they are hidden by the 9????

Please provide another photo, thanks so much!

Tom

Zounds, my good and faithful friend!

I was not the one who took the photograph. I should have made that clear, but alas, I was remiss.

Should you care to peruse the photograph more closely, you are welcome to utilize any of the free programs available on the web to lighten the photo a bit.

I'm certain that that will yield a photo to your liking.

Godspeed!

[The GMT Master]

There are watches with proportionally far smaller hands out there than the new Explorer. I think it's a non-issue that's been blown out of proportion, I would very happily wear a new Explorer every day

[Otto]

Originally Posted by RolexguyinSF

The hands are too short, there is no debate. People should stop making excuses, saying they look fine, etc, and Rolex should just fix the problem. BUT if you fix them, it's admitting you made a mistake, and Rolex isn't too big on doing just that. It definatelly stops people from purchasing, so just fix it already!

Huh? That's a matter of your opinion; not fact. I like the hands on the Explorer. It's a great retro look and fits the watch ... to my eyes ...in my opinion. No excuses offered or required.

[Saxon007]

As soon as they make the hands longer everyone will want the now discontinued and newly-collectable "short hand Explorer".

[Balded]

I am in the camp that the hands are too short. After comparing the two side by side I bought the 36mm just before Christmas. While I liked everything else about the 39mm the hands bothered me too much for me to want to buy it. Given bigger hands and I would have bought it.

[drtooth73]

I agree with JYogi.
plus, for the same amount of money for a new watch, I'd rather have a Sub

[Andad]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

Zounds, my good and faithful friend!

I was not the one who took the photograph. I should have made that clear, but alas, I was remiss.

Should you care to peruse the photograph more closely, you are welcome to utilize any of the free programs available on the web to lighten the photo a bit.

I'm certain that that will yield a photo to your liking.

Godspeed!

Geez Mr. P (patronising) Philpot,

You had me believing that you had actually seen these two watches.

[Speed]

[Speed]

[esm]

I tried but do not own one. It's not because of the length of the minute hand. I actually think it is quite a decent size.
I have read many threads about the "short hand" and it can be quite "obvious" when you see a pic of it. But it is a non issue once it is on your wrist...IMO.

Here is a wrist pic if it when I tried it on. I can not see "anything wrong" with the minute hand.

[dalip]

Originally Posted by boa2

I tried on the watch and thought it was perfect, hands and all. I like how the angle of the tip of the hand parallels the triangular marker edge at 12 o'clock. Beautiful watch!

Originally Posted by The GMT Master

There are watches with proportionally far smaller hands out there than the new Explorer. I think it's a non-issue that's been blown out of proportion, I would very happily wear a new Explorer every day

100% agree

I tried on the new exp recently and it's a great watch...I had read complaints on here concerning the length of the hands and even though I was more aware and had a closer look..I could see no problem whatsoever. Perfectly designed and a very well conceived upgrade.

[RolexguyinSF]

If Rolex knew what they were doing, we wouldn't be having this conversation.