Explorer 36 vs 40 PHOTO comparison

[garyk]

I like both but the OP looks like his hand is gigantic?!

[EEpro]

Originally Posted by omar-rye

Here’s the 36 next to the 39




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So cute

The most important thing is to wear watches (and clothes) that fit IMO. We are lucky the crown has given us these options.

[watchwatcher]

Originally Posted by omar-rye

Man, the Explorer crowd is a tough crowd to please

Now there is a true statement.

[logo]

Originally Posted by Devildog

I did. Perhaps reread mine?

I was addressing your "insecurity" comment - which you specifically left out of your comment above.

Who said that 36mm was standard for men for 75 years in the same paragraph as saying its a ladies size?

I must have missed that example of poor critical reasoning?

Certainly not me (and certainly not Rolex)

Allow me to facilitate your analysis: you are misinterpreting my comments as being directed at you.

[tifosi]

This thread is hilarious.

[Kevin of Larchmont]

Originally Posted by Devildog

Hold on a minte with that thought.

Is it so hard to believe that for many its just an aesthetic preference? Nothing to do with what constitutes a "man's watch". Yes there are a few who correlate size with "manliness", but there are many more who don't.

My ideal size is probably 39mm. Which is why I my BB38, 16600 and Daytona feel perfect, to me, on my wrist. Nothing to do with insecurity

I wouldn't wear the current 36mm Explorer because it looks small on me.

You also realise that "many great men have worn a 36 over the past 75+ years" becase 36 was the only or largest size available at that time?

Not becase they had a choice of sizes and thought that 40mm was too big

You conveniently ignore the many ongoing strident posts over many threads relating 36mm case size to questionable manhood. In fact there is one between our posts. If the long established standard of 36mm was indeed an objective measure of manhood as these posts imply then by that logic millions and millions of men once considered admirable were indeed pussies.

“Fashion changes, style never changes.” —Coco Chanel

Larger watches have been the fashion of recent decades. Like all fashion trends the size of watch cases will cycle back to the established standard and in fact it has already started. Like all fashion trends some people will carry on with the style that links them to a point in time through their preference. Like exaggerated shoulder pads or men in capri pants or harness boots these sartorial choices will forever link a person to a brief window in time while time marches forward and leaves them behind.

[HERITAGE82]

39mm is perfection

[emersm]

Originally Posted by SparklesMcgraw

Anyone got a caliper reading with the new 40mm yet? Really curious how different it is to the 39.

I’m also curious to see a side by side shot.

[nickscaps]

Originally Posted by emersm

I’m also curious to see a side by side shot.

I'm willing to bet that the new 40 isn't actually a 40 and pretty close to the of the old 39s measurements - if the DJ/OP 41's actual measurements have anything to say about it!

[RyanJ]

Man people love to argue this. Amazing people make it about manhood based on the size of a watch...

Wear what you like. I don't give a damn what famous people have worn. If on my wrist the watch looks like I am wearing a quarter on a strap then it is too small for me. For me, maybe not you or your friend or your second cousin but for me.

Does that make the 36 a bad watch, nope. Is the 40 superior because it is larger, nope.

People here love to say that Rolex knows exactly what they are doing. Well, they must have data on the 40 being necessary in their lineup just like they have with the 36.

[the dark knight]

Originally Posted by natosteve

The Explorer is an incredible watch. Whatever size you choose, 36mm, 39mm or 40mm, you're getting a fabulous storied timepiece. If I could, I’d own all three. But I own the 36mm because I like the size of this watch; IMO, it's the perfect size for this type of watch. But as the saying goes opinions are like arseholes, everyone has them and most stink :)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Man, you have to be a major Explorer connoisseur to want all 3. I could definitely see someone wanting the 214270 and the newer 36mm. But the 39 and 40 seem way too similar.

[the dark knight]

Originally Posted by nickscaps

I'm willing to bet that the new 40 isn't actually a 40 and pretty close to the of the old 39s measurements - if the DJ/OP 41's actual measurements have anything to say about it!

+1. I bet it's 39.5mm

[the dark knight]

I'm quite size agnostic. Own a Cartier Santos Medium, BB36, and just picked up a BB54, I like the way they all look on my wrist. I also wear and love my Explorer II. I just go by how I like it on wrist, and I've been a fan of everything from 34 to 45mm depending on the watch.

Having said that, I think I solidly prefer the look of the 40mm. Don't know why, I just do.

[Ruvv]

40mm looks a good fit

[Guppydriver]

40 looks better proportioned than I thought it would to be honest. I had tossed around a pre owned 39 for a bit, but I think I would prefer this instead. I'd be over the moon with either this or an AK.

I've never tried on a 36 explorer before, but every other 36mm I've tried on wears too small for me. My wife even tells me that my 39mm SBGM221 is too small for me, but I think it may be because she wants to wear it.

[emersm]

Originally Posted by nickscaps

I'm willing to bet that the new 40 isn't actually a 40 and pretty close to the of the old 39s measurements - if the DJ/OP 41's actual measurements have anything to say about it!

Maybe a slight variation in the lug to lug, but I have a feeling that you are right.

[nickscaps]

Originally Posted by emersm

Maybe a slight variation in the lug to lug, but I have a feeling that you are right.

I agree that it'll definitely vary in some dimensions vs the 39 but it looks better proportioned, to my eyes.
I longed for the return of the 36 and was disappointed when it really measured ~35 with such an aggressive bracelet taper. By no means am I adverse to smaller watches, in the end I chose a DJ 126200. I'm actually excited that the Explorer is now bigger again, I respect the historic 36mm size but for my collection I personally want a sporty field watch to be bigger than my 36mm dressier watch!

[Kenny G]

Arguing about watch size is like arguing about shoe sizes…

Both are great…if you have under a 6.75” wrist I’d definitely suggest trying the 36 though.

[samuel019]

Originally Posted by logo

I prefer the 36. Photo from Worn and Wound.

Thanks for the pic!! I’ve had the 214270 I think 3 times. 2 for sure. Absolutely love love love the dial and flat bezel. Awesome watch. But as time passed I couldn’t get over the size. So if the 39 is to small for “me” the 36 IS definitely out. I’m just hoping the new 40 is enough to make a difference. I doubt it. 39 vs 40?

But I did text my S A day one. We shall see.

[samuel019]

Originally Posted by natosteve

The Explorer is an incredible watch. Whatever size you choose, 36mm, 39mm or 40mm, you're getting a fabulous storied timepiece. If I could, I’d own all three. But I own the 36mm because I like the size of this watch; IMO, it's the perfect size for this type of watch. But as the saying goes opinions are like arseholes, everyone has them and most stink :)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Huge Explorer fan myself. But not 3 though I’ve considered it. Love my black 216570. It was my first new A D purchase over 11 years ago.

[squall1]

The femininity of the 36 has nothing to do with the size in and of itself, there's something about the proportions to me that make it read this way. I think the same thing happens in all design. Some things look more masculine, feminine, androgynous, etc., and often its intentional and not meant to convey "only a female can buy/enjoy this" or "you are not a man's man if you buy/enjoy this".

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by gaheris

Here is some guy named Ernest Hemingway looking plenty manly with his dainty 31mm bubbleback. I have always thought it is the way people carry themselves that make them look masculine or feminine amongst many other things, more so than the size of their watch.

True. Though in situations like these I prefer to reference Eisenhower, as he demonstrated his masculinity by defeating the Nazis instead of hitting women.

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by Nepats81

Anything to avoid picking up a barbell I guess

On the contrary, this is why it's hard to find jeans that aren't overly tight and legging-like . And I'll go as low as 34mm for watches...

[Guppydriver]

Originally Posted by omar-rye

Man, the Explorer crowd is a tough crowd to please

Not for the men in the crowd. 40 all the way.






I keed, I keed..
(just wanted to see DannyP's head explode like in Scanners)

[mykii]

Originally Posted by logo

I prefer the 36. Photo from Worn and Wound.

It's just wrong in 40mm. At 39mm it already wore like a plate. It's simply a 36mm watch.

[LA_LEC]

I think it's time for another view of the perfection of the 39mm version!

[PenDelicate]

Wish Rolex made all their watches in multiple sizes.

[cerendigit]

Originally Posted by PenDelicate

Wish Rolex made all their watches in multiple sizes.

Yeah so we can have a thread like this about every model.

[Michael N Q8]

The 36 (new model) is tiny, and the 36 and 40 both have the 32XX movement.

Based on this, I vote for the 39mm Mk II. In addition, the position of the "EXPLORER" looks more balanced and more importantly, the 39 also has a 31XX movement.

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by logo

Allow me to facilitate your analysis: you are misinterpreting my comments as being directed at you.

Not at all.

Its clear your comments were directed at the forum generally. But it is, by its very nature a discussion forum which facilitates a response by any member.

I'd ask again, who said that 36mm was standard for men for 75 years in the same paragraph as saying its a ladies size?