ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

jdc · 17 March 2010, 11:42 PM

blackout numbers not sure about I like the matt dial, size increase unsure about, seems to sit close to the black milgauss

OTE200 · 18 March 2010, 12:06 AM

I'm thinking that perhaps the lighting does not do the 3,6,9 markers justice. They look very dark so they're not really popping out at us like they should maybe?

I agree with others that the hands look small. However the crown also looks smaller now too b'c of the larger case.

mdtddd2007 · 18 March 2010, 12:26 AM

like it.

jlopicco · 18 March 2010, 12:33 AM

I'm not a big fan of the matt dial. I agree that hands should be bigger, but over all I think I like this over the new sub. Especially the "incredible hulk" sub..

sea-dweller · 18 March 2010, 12:43 AM

Wow, very nice !!!

TheDude · 18 March 2010, 12:53 AM

I am really glad to see a return to a matte dial. The more I see the watch the more I like it.

As others have said, Rolex is very careful. I doubt those hands made it on there by accident. I think we're going to end up appreciating this one more than we might initially expect.

DRAWTOOL · 18 March 2010, 12:54 AM

I for one am relieved, I like the looks of my MK-II Vantage better. Now I won't be lusting for the new Explorer.

andy102 · 18 March 2010, 12:54 AM

I was expecting more, I think the outgoing model looks better.

ral · 18 March 2010, 01:06 AM

The 39mm size is a big plus. I am glad it is bigger but not to big. Love the matte dial. I like the case, thankfully not super cased. Illuminated markers at 3-6-9 would have been better, and yes the hands are small.

I was hoping for something more, but maybe best they did not mess with it too much. It is a classic after all. Never considered buying the older Exp. I... this one, I definitely want to take a look at it when it gets here.

STEELINOX · 18 March 2010, 01:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by delldeaton

Anything on the clasp? Changes?

Summer extension, sorry no glidelock !

STEELINOX · 18 March 2010, 01:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nicko

Why ask why with Rolex....They have been doing some strange things, and this isn't any different. I'll keep buying preowned, that is if I can afford them now that everyone will one one of the old ones since the new line looks like CRAPOLA!

Its those damned kids at ROLEX, they've lost their [removed] minds i tellyas !

snow_rocks · 18 March 2010, 01:23 AM

Well, I think it looks damn spanky!

ral · 18 March 2010, 01:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ral

The 39mm size is a big plus. I am glad it is bigger but not to big. Love the matte dial. I like the case, thankfully not super cased. Illuminated markers at 3-6-9 would have been better, and yes the hands are small.

I was hoping for something more, but maybe best they did not mess with it too much. It is a classic after all. Never considered buying the older Exp. I... this one, I definitely want to take a look at it when it gets here.

Hhhhmmmm... but those WG 3-6-9 markers might look really nice in the sunlight.

Fearsome Puppy · 18 March 2010, 01:32 AM

For me the increased size means the EXP is back on my radar...

Tools · 18 March 2010, 01:36 AM

I like it..

It's still a good looking watch.. I woujld like to have seen the 3-6-9 in llume too, but if they are WG, it will look very good in person............

dotcomakazee · 18 March 2010, 01:38 AM

Just one man's opinon...this watch does NOTHING for me. It's like a dumbed-down DJII.

gone-rolex-mad · 18 March 2010, 01:44 AM

39 mm Nice!

Deyn Man · 18 March 2010, 01:47 AM

any chance what they show on basel can still be changed (ala carshow)?

hands really look small as most have commented!

The GMT Master · 18 March 2010, 01:51 AM

All I can say is that I've never been interested in the Explorer until now

axjimenez · 18 March 2010, 02:03 AM

I have been coming back to these pics. I could see this one growing on me.

ral · 18 March 2010, 02:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by axjimenez

I have been coming back to these pics. I could see this one growing on me.

I know what you mean...

First time I saw it, all I saw was the small hands...

Than I looked at it again... and figured they were not that bad...

I was disappointed at first for the fact that it did not change much... the longer I look at it, the happier I am it did not change to much.

Are the markers on the outer time illuminated like the TOG?

Could be the newness... but right now, this is looking like a winner to me.

Noonan · 18 March 2010, 02:18 AM

I wonder why this has a new movement. Would the Millie movement work fine for this model?

phiengin · 18 March 2010, 02:34 AM

I like it! But would like to see the real thing before I comment further.

Dr. Robert · 18 March 2010, 02:41 AM

I like it.....the hands though????? IMHO, they should be a bit longer??? But Rolex is losing their "pioneer" status....they knocked off my watch.....

(39mm diameter, 47.9mm case length,12.3mm height, 20mm lug width.

marie · 18 March 2010, 02:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jets

This is what we've been waiting for? Holy crap batman...

Sigh..agreed

SDDS · 18 March 2010, 02:44 AM

slight changes thats it?

wgs · 18 March 2010, 02:45 AM

The size increase has to be a plus for most people, as the 36mm Datejust appears larger on the wrist than the 36mm Explorer. Just not sure about the thinner hour markers. Will have to see it in person...

kcmo · 18 March 2010, 02:48 AM

Not too crazy about it....but I've never been into the 'old' version either.....

JJ Irani · 18 March 2010, 02:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The GMT Master

The new Explorer is ref. 214270, sits in a 39mm case, and uses a unique movement - the cal. 3132. Still retains the twinlock crown, and will be using a new Oysterlock clasp. Chromalight luminesence on the batons and hands. This comes direct from the official Rolex press kit

So what? Not impressed at all!!

TheDude · 18 March 2010, 02:57 AM

I will likely add this to go alongside my Vantage. :)

Want to try one on first though.

18 March 2010, 12:43 AM	#35
sea-dweller "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Real Name: Dennis Location: Bay Area - 925 Posts: 40,018	Wow, very nice !!! __________________ TRF Member #6699 (since September 2007)

18 March 2010, 01:32 AM	#44
Fearsome Puppy "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Real Name: Kevin Location: Kuala Lumpur Watch: SD4K Posts: 880	For me the increased size means the EXP is back on my radar... __________________ Lange 1815 Chrono, AP ROO 26470ST, RO 26230ST, Rolex 216570 (w), 116600, 116520 (w), IWC XV, PAM 366, 420, Omega 311.30.42.30.01.005, Seiko SKX007J, Apple Watch, a bunch of G-Shocks -------------------------------------------------------------

18 March 2010, 01:36 AM	#45
Tools TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron Join Date: May 2007 Real Name: Larry Location: Mojave Desert Watch: GMT's Posts: 43,490	I like it.. It's still a good looking watch.. I woujld like to have seen the 3-6-9 in llume too, but if they are WG, it will look very good in person............ __________________ (Chill ... It's just a watch Forum.....) NAWCC Member

18 March 2010, 01:38 AM	#46
dotcomakazee "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Real Name: Ty Location: Irving, TX Watch: Exp II 42mm Posts: 919	Just one man's opinon...this watch does NOTHING for me. It's like a dumbed-down DJII. __________________ Rolex Explorer II 42mm • Panerai 389 47mm

18 March 2010, 01:44 AM	#47
gone-rolex-mad "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Andalucia Spain Watch: WG daydate-Daytona Posts: 1,338	39 mm Nice! __________________ Choose to allocate your time to imbeciles at your peril!

17 March 2010, 11:42 PM	#31
jdc "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Real Name: Martin Location: UK Posts: 7,023	blackout numbers not sure about I like the matt dial, size increase unsure about, seems to sit close to the black milgauss

18 March 2010, 12:06 AM	#32
OTE200 "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Australia Watch: 14270 Explorer Posts: 108	I'm thinking that perhaps the lighting does not do the 3,6,9 markers justice. They look very dark so they're not really popping out at us like they should maybe? I agree with others that the hands look small. However the crown also looks smaller now too b'c of the larger case.

18 March 2010, 12:26 AM	#33
mdtddd2007 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: U.S Watch: Rolex, PP, AP, GS Posts: 5,785	like it.

18 March 2010, 12:33 AM	#34
jlopicco "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Real Name: Joe Location: New Jersey Watch: 16610LV Posts: 147	I'm not a big fan of the matt dial. I agree that hands should be bigger, but over all I think I like this over the new sub. Especially the "incredible hulk" sub..

18 March 2010, 12:53 AM	#36
TheDude "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: DC Area, USA Watch: IIc,1680 Red,16660 Posts: 4,492	I am really glad to see a return to a matte dial. The more I see the watch the more I like it. As others have said, Rolex is very careful. I doubt those hands made it on there by accident. I think we're going to end up appreciating this one more than we might initially expect.

18 March 2010, 12:54 AM	#38
andy102 Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Sussex, UK Posts: 43	I was expecting more, I think the outgoing model looks better.

18 March 2010, 01:06 AM	#39
ral Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Philippines Posts: 650	The 39mm size is a big plus. I am glad it is bigger but not to big. Love the matte dial. I like the case, thankfully not super cased. Illuminated markers at 3-6-9 would have been better, and yes the hands are small. I was hoping for something more, but maybe best they did not mess with it too much. It is a classic after all. Never considered buying the older Exp. I... this one, I definitely want to take a look at it when it gets here.

18 March 2010, 01:23 AM	#42
snow_rocks Banned Join Date: Feb 2009 Real Name: Rick Location: At what TIME?!!! Watch: the SKY tonite! Posts: 3,225	Well, I think it looks damn spanky!

18 March 2010, 01:47 AM	#48
Deyn Man "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Real Name: Dean Location: Philippines Posts: 1,037	any chance what they show on basel can still be changed (ala carshow)? hands really look small as most have commented!

18 March 2010, 01:51 AM	#49
The GMT Master "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Real Name: Chris Location: England Posts: 8,150	All I can say is that I've never been interested in the Explorer until now

18 March 2010, 02:03 AM	#50
axjimenez "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Real Name: Alex Location: Arlington, Va Watch: ALL OF THEM Posts: 1,705	I have been coming back to these pics. I could see this one growing on me. __________________ “It is better to lead from behind and to put others in front, especially when you celebrate victory when nice things occur. You take the front line when there is danger. Then people will appreciate your leadership.” Rolex 114060 Omega SMP 2531.80 Vintage Omega - no idea but dad's watch

18 March 2010, 02:18 AM	#52
Noonan Banned Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: US Watch: 3570.50 Posts: 2,156	I wonder why this has a new movement. Would the Millie movement work fine for this model?

18 March 2010, 02:34 AM	#53
phiengin "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: California Watch: 1680, 1675 Posts: 343	I like it! But would like to see the real thing before I comment further.

18 March 2010, 02:41 AM	#54
Dr. Robert 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Real Name: Bob Location: U.S.A. Watch: 1655 Posts: 63,955	I like it.....the hands though????? IMHO, they should be a bit longer??? But Rolex is losing their "pioneer" status....they knocked off my watch..... (39mm diameter, 47.9mm case length,12.3mm height, 20mm lug width.

18 March 2010, 02:44 AM	#56
SDDS "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Real Name: Yazan Location: Canada Posts: 4,782	slight changes thats it? __________________ Patek Philippe 5167 Patek Philippe 5905P black dial Rolex Deepsea 116660 M series Rolex Oysterquartz 17000 N series Rolex OP 41MM 124300 Green Dial

18 March 2010, 02:45 AM	#57
wgs "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: USA Watch: Panerai 000 Posts: 394	The size increase has to be a plus for most people, as the 36mm Datejust appears larger on the wrist than the 36mm Explorer. Just not sure about the thinner hour markers. Will have to see it in person...

18 March 2010, 02:48 AM	#58
kcmo "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Real Name: Karis Location: USA Posts: 19,377	Not too crazy about it....but I've never been into the 'old' version either.....

18 March 2010, 02:57 AM	#60
TheDude "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: DC Area, USA Watch: IIc,1680 Red,16660 Posts: 4,492	I will likely add this to go alongside my Vantage. :) Want to try one on first though.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)