Anyone replaced their Explorer with a Sub?

[HVACPRO]

I did. Sold my 214270 for a 114060. No regrets.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GradyPhilpott]

I bought a 114270 and later a 14060M.

There's plenty of room for both.

[RtTime]

It is an individual decision. I love having both the Submariner and the Explorer. If it is possible for you, it would be the best of both worlds to have both watches. IMHO the Explorer is one of the most comfortable watches I've worn. When wearing my Explorer, I frequently have to check my wrist in order to confirm that it is still with me. Additionally, I do love the Explorer's simple and elegant style. I also prefer the look of the Explorer dial at night over the Submariner's dial which seems too busy in the dark. But during the daylight hours, I equally enjoy looking at both dials. Nevertheless, if you are only going to have one Rolex and the Submariner is your first choice then by all means go for it.

[mg Barcelona]

Originally Posted by hdms

Not to hijack but has someone gone from subc to an explorer?

I have gone from Sub C to Explorer Mk 2. I still own the Sub C but it gets no wrist time. The Sub C design is not a good one, the dial and bezel are great but the case is and abortion of good balanced design. In addition the bracelet is too thin for the head of the watch or vice versa. The pre-ceramic is perfect. The waitlist for ceramics are long but the majority of people will not appreciate a good balanced design. I work in car design and the Sub C is the Porsche 996 and not the 993 of the pre ceramic sub.

[illiguy]

Originally Posted by mg Barcelona

I have gone from Sub C to Explorer Mk 2. I still own the Sub C but it gets no wrist time. The Sub C design is not a good one, the dial and bezel are great but the case is and abortion of good balanced design. In addition the bracelet is too thin for the head of the watch or vice versa. The pre-ceramic is perfect. The waitlist for ceramics are long but the majority of people will not appreciate a good balanced design. I work in car design and the Sub C is the Porsche 996 and not the 993 of the pre ceramic sub.

I feel like this is filled with hyperbole. The SubC is a great watch in its own right, so too is the pre-ceramic 14060M and all Sub generations before that.

I think a Sub and Explorer can live in harmony, as evidenced by the great collection posted in this thread.

I’d advise OP to go with what “sings” to you after sleeping on it for a night or two.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Harry-57]

You can't go wrong with either. Or both, if you can manage it.

[carfanatic991]

I did. Went from 36mm exp, then to the 39mm and eventually flipped it for ceramic sub.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[uscmatt99]

When I purchased my Explorer I already had an Omega Planet Ocean. If a Rolex would have been my first mechanical watch, I'd have gone with the Submariner. As time has passed, I've grown to love the Explorer more and more and would not part with it.

[ThatExplorer]

Don’t do it!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Cymruwal]

Started off with the Explorer, but after 1 year became very bored with it.
Traded it in for a Submariner , and 5 years later have not regretted that move for one second

[Gold Crown]

Originally Posted by westsiderkg

Don't join the masses!!! Keep the Exp II.

I wouldn’t give up my Explorer 2 for anything!

[michaeli3]

good thread. I actually traded my Sub for and explorer 1. The explorer was easier for me to wear with long sleeve shirts and it kind of edged more towards the dressy area for me if i needed it to as compared to the Sub

[iliketime]

my 14060M set went with a reduced and cash for a gmt master 2 set, still regretting it

[Verdi]

I had the Explorer 2, sold it and got a Sub no date. The explorer I liked very much but wore very big. Sub was a lot more comfy and better on the wrist.

After, I sold the Sub and settled for E1 as my sports model.

[rspeabody]

Originally Posted by westsiderkg

Don't join the masses!!! Keep the Exp II.

I traded my 214270 when I got my sub. I loved my explorer, but the feeling I get when I see the sub on my wrist is incomparable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Inthesticks]

Originally Posted by Rolexatlast

No, can't agree with that.

Porsche 911 - yes. But not 3 series

This.

[locutus49]

Perhaps where you are from this passes for an incisive comment but where I live it is full of hot air. The past is not always better, in cars or in watches, and progress is a good thing. The modern Sub is a perfectly designed watch and to compare it to a 996 - which I owned - is to malign both objects of desire.

Originally Posted by mg Barcelona

I have gone from Sub C to Explorer Mk 2. I still own the Sub C but it gets no wrist time. The Sub C design is not a good one, the dial and bezel are great but the case is and abortion of good balanced design. In addition the bracelet is too thin for the head of the watch or vice versa. The pre-ceramic is perfect. The waitlist for ceramics are long but the majority of people will not appreciate a good balanced design. I work in car design and the Sub C is the Porsche 996 and not the 993 of the pre ceramic sub.

[Stonecutter6]

I've got a SubC and my next desire is a Explorer II Polar. I think it would be a great combination of the Sport line. I tried on the ExpII and found it fit perfect; it was the Black dial so I passed and am waiting for a White Polar. I really dig the SubC but wouldn't be upset if my only was an Explorer II (esp the White Dial).

[Ny325]

Save for the Sub, and keep the Explorer.

[MHB]

My first Rolex was a Sub 114060. While I enjoyed it I found it too big, too heavy, and somewhat ostentatious. I was never comfortable wearing it.

I sold the sub and bought a 214270 Explorer MK2, and with each passing day I find myself loving it more and more.

It’s a watch that slowly becomes a part of you.

[mailman]

I wouldn't replace a 214270 with any 6 digit SS Submariner. 5 digit is another story

[AlexFrank]

The Sub is a strong contender here. hold on to the sub its a great watch or just get them both.

[Finslayer83]

Originally Posted by burnthesehills

Exactly what kind of attention was the watch getting? I wear a Sub ND daily and haven’t gotten one comment.

The 114060 was like a disco ball of light, even if no one says anything everyone notices.

I paired it down to a 5 digit sub and 6 digit explorer.

OP - Don't sell the Explorer for a Sub, once the honeymoon on the Sub wears off you will want an Explorer again.

Just save and buy one, the Explorer is the true Rolex fan's timepiece in my opinion.

ETA: if you like how the Explorer wears I'd suggest trying on a late model 5 digit.

[rolexgrail]

When I was in the market to buy my first Rolex, it was between the 14060M, 114060 and Exp2 white dial.

I went with the 14060M.

Why?

114060 - the maxi case just didn't speak to me. When I tried it on, it felt uncomfortable.

Exp2 white dial - loved the white dial and the fit. But the cyclops eye bugged me.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[BigBoy17]

Keep exp and get a sub next

[nigelk]

I would like my polar exp 2 any day over a sub that's everywhere! Way more of a conversation starter.

[akordz]

Haven't really gotten an explorer, though I have been considering that for a while now. But if I did have one I think I'd be hesitant trading it for a sub

[Bluside]

I just recently sold my SubC date but kept my Explorer to help fund my new BLRO.

That being said, I would like to pick up a Sub no date now. Will still keep the Explorer.

[Rolex-istanbul]

for my point of view, I need tool watch. Explorer is not a tool watch, it looks like normal oyster perpetual.

But submariner, I can turn the bezel time things or use as a second time zone. Plus it has great water resistance.

I won't trade it for explorer. However For Explorer 2 espacilly the Polar I might change my mind. IT looks from the pictures very useful watch.

[rcclarkie]

Great thread. I'm truly torn between the 214270 and 114060

Went into my AD yesterday and tried on a PM Sub (for a feel of the case size... weight was obviously considerably more!) and compared it side-by-side against my SA's 214270. Agreed with many comments above that the Exp1 wears more comfortably, especially coming from my daily wearer BB Blue ETA which wears quite chunky. The Exp1 dial is a handsome inky matte black, but it's incongruence with the shiny polished bezel seems a bit off, almost like they missed a step.

Despite that, the modern Sub's proportions and fit are surprisingly good on wrist (regardless of how "maxi" it looks in photos) - trying one on in person is really the only way to understand this. The dial & bezel combo in this case were so well balanced and compliment each other far more than the Exp1. It's clear to see how the finished product reflects its status as a design icon.

I really want to prefer the 214270 (comfort, uniqueness, availability, price) but the heart seems to be pushing me towards the Sub. We'll see what future incomings hold!