39 mm Explorer Hands

[RoliSubMan]

Originally Posted by zeuloa

Agree with both! Someone mentioned this was a design flaw - I don't consider something to be a design flaw if it does not defeat its purpose. The shorter hands allow you to tell time just fine - if this was not the case than it would be a design flaw.

As for aesthetics it is much more a personal like then a fact. I don't like the flashy colors that Lamborghini uses (and I would not buy one in what I consider a flashy color), but it is not a design flaw. A lime green Lambo will go just as fast as a black Lambo!

A lambo will still drive on a set of smallish 15 inch wheels right? However it just doesn't look good without 20 plus inch wheels that fit the proportion of the car.

[Offline99]

What this laborious thread teaches me is that resale value for this Explorer will be dampened.

[Flyjet601]

.....no wonder the worlds in so much trouble....people argue over the most irrelevant things that mean nothing

[TheDude]

Bill Yao did the 39mm right. This is his 39mm homage to the 1016. Many members here also own this watch.

3, 6, 9 are lumed!


Off exploring...

[Otto]

Originally Posted by TheDude

Bill Yao did the 39mm right. This is his 39mm homage to the 1016. Many members here also own this watch.

3, 6, 9 are lumed!


Off exploring...

I'm sorry. Your hand is too big for that watch!



Nice photo!

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by offline69

What this laborious thread teaches me is that resale value for this Explorer will be dampened.

I don't think that this thread "teaches" that, but it will be interesting to see how the new Explorer fairs in the market place after a couple of years.

I suspect that it will do well, but if it does not, that might very well mean that we who own the 39mm varieties might very well see the resale value of our watches hold quite well.

[SCD]

I think this horse is still breathing, which is good because I've thought of a new way we can beat on it?

Question: Is there anyone who thinks the 39mm hands should be *shorter* than they are? If so, why?

:)

[Boadicea]

Originally Posted by SCD

Question: Is there anyone who thinks the 39mm hands should be *shorter* than they are? If so, why?

[GradyPhilpott]

Certainly, this thread has attracted its share of the __________, ____________ and the _____________.

Any __________ discussion was drowned out long ago.

[zeuloa]

Originally Posted by RoliSubMan

A lambo will still drive on a set of smallish 15 inch wheels right? However it just doesn't look good without 20 plus inch wheels that fit the proportion of the car.

Yes, but it won't drive at 180 miles per hour - therefore the design would defeat the purpose making it a flaw in design. The hands in the 39 Explorer allow most people to tell time just fine - therefore not a flaw.

[StarSovereign]

ANYWAY... I'll admit that the hands, in pictures, do look a little small. When I was at my AD, however, I didn't even notice their length. I was too blown away by the watch! If only it had a date function...

[zeuloa]

Originally Posted by StarSovereign

ANYWAY... I'll admit that the hands, in pictures, do look a little small. When I was at my AD, however, I didn't even notice their length. I was too blown away by the watch! If only it had a date function...

Agree - It would be my favorite if it had a date!

[GradyPhilpott]

I have to say that the Explorer would not be an Explorer if it had a date. But then, the Sub Date now outsells the Sub by the millions, I guess, and nobody seems to blink knowing that the original did not sport a date.

The Explorer II is somewhat different in that it was designed for those who are in environments where it is difficult to follow the passage of time and knowing night from day and the days of the week are not perceptually evident.

[SCD]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

The Explorer II is somewhat different in that it was designed for those who are in environments where it is difficult to follow the passage of time and knowing night from day and the days of the week are not perceptually evident.

Given how many people are actually in such environments, it's safe to say that all that hubbub is just a pretense. Rolex designed the Explorer II as an aspirational luxury purchase for people driving overpowered cars from the office to the tennis club.

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by SCD

Rolex designed the Explorer II as an aspirational luxury purchase for people driving overpowered cars from the office to the tennis club.

No, Rolex designed the Explorer II exactly for the reasons I described, knowing full well that the vast majority of those Explorer II watches would be bought by those whose activities have nothing to do with its design imperatives.

[Foiel]

I loooove short hands !

[Boadicea]

I have just had another good look at the 39mm explorer and I think I know what went wrong now. If you take a 36mm DJ or a 36mm Explorer and check crystal sizes, they are the same width as the 40mm Daytona and the Submariner. That means that the dial surface area on these watches are near identical! Now check the crystal width of the 39mm explorer, you'll see that the dial surface area is bigger than all of the others meaning that the face itself is larger than even the 40mm Sub. Even if they used the Sub hands in there, they would still be too small!! The only hands big enough to fit would be the DJII and they are not the correct hands. Looking at it this way, it almost feels like Rolex couldnt be bothered to design and manufacture new hands for a new watch.

I do find this hard to believe given that Rolex don't really cut corners, but it certainly does look like they simply did not have the correct size hands in the current production line to fit. Perhaps they rushed it for the release last year?

[MonBK]

You have to know something about Rolex.....They don't rush anything.

[RoliSubMan]

Originally Posted by MonBK

You have to know something about Rolex.....They don't rush anything.

How would you know

[Sixxgrand1]

Originally Posted by Boadicea

I have just had another good look at the 39mm explorer and I think I know what went wrong now. If you take a 36mm DJ or a 36mm Explorer and check crystal sizes, they are the same width as the 40mm Daytona and the Submariner. That means that the dial surface area on these watches are near identical! Now check the crystal width of the 39mm explorer, you'll see that the dial surface area is bigger than all of the others meaning that the face itself is larger than even the 40mm Sub. Even if they used the Sub hands in there, they would still be too small!! The only hands big enough to fit would be the DJII and they are not the correct hands. Looking at it this way, it almost feels like Rolex couldnt be bothered to design and manufacture new hands for a new watch.

I do find this hard to believe given that Rolex don't really cut corners, but it certainly does look like they simply did not have the correct size hands in the current production line to fit. Perhaps they rushed it for the release last year?

Thanks for the factual comparison. They are too small and not in proportion.

[Badandy]

Originally Posted by Sixxgrand1

Thanks for the factual comparison. They are too small and not in proportion.

Not factual; incorrect. The hands are not the same as the previous version. That's a fact. My opinion is that the only reason people are saying they're not proportional is because it is just proportioned differently than other models. I think they look fine.

[rolexsweep]

Originally Posted by RoliSubMan

A lambo will still drive on a set of smallish 15 inch wheels right? However it just doesn't look good without 20 plus inch wheels that fit the proportion of the car.

i understand where you are coming from with this, but a Lamborghini Gallardo was engineered with 19" wheels... yes its looks better than 15" wheels but 15" would never work on a lamboghini because on 19" they run low profile perilli p-zero with asymmetric unidirectional tread... this is so they can do 300km/h and be stable. it is engineered to have 19" wheels, look at a rolls royce it has 21" rims standard but then look at how large the profile is... this is to create a comfortable less bumpy ride.

[MonBK]

Originally Posted by RoliSubMan

How would you know

My Uncle worked at the factory for 25 years.

[Boadicea]

Originally Posted by Badandy

Not factual; incorrect. The hands are not the same as the previous version. That's a fact. My opinion is that the only reason people are saying they're not proportional is because it is just proportioned differently than other models. I think they look fine.

He is stating the fact that they are not in "proportion" with the face of the watch. That is a fact. The hands are obviously a bit small or we wouldnt be talking about it, but if you like it or not, now that is an "opinion".

All other models in the current lineup are in correct proportion and fill the dial nicely. Like I said earlier, when/if Rolex starts doing this to all models, I'll retract my comments and apologise!

[MonBK]

Originally Posted by Boadicea

He is stating the fact that they are not in "proportion" with the face of the watch. That is a fact. The hands are obviously a bit small or we wouldnt be talking about it, but if you like it or not, now that is an "opinion".

All other models in the current lineup are in correct proportion and fill the dial nicely. Like I said earlier, when/if Rolex starts doing this to all models, I'll retract my comments and apologise!

And so is your fact.

[Dan2010]

Originally Posted by SCD

I think this horse is still breathing, which is good because I've thought of a new way we can beat on it?

Question: Is there anyone who thinks the 39mm hands should be *shorter* than they are? If so, why?

:)

Not only do I think the hands should be shorter but I think there should just be ONE hand! If you know the HOUR, thats close enough for government work!

[subtona]

exactly 3mm too short according to recent scientific studies.

methodology was a careful examination of every other watch made in comparison, the minute hand has a definite destination closer to the periphery, the new explorer I hands have not yet arrived.

stay tuned for needed correction of shorting problem as the old stock hands run out of rolex parts bin.

my question is will the short hands be the collectors item or on fire sale when proper balance is introduced to the otherwise groundbreaking watch.

[Route 66]

I really didn't think the new Explorer looked bad when I saw one in person.

I was surprised to read in the new April issue of Watchtime that they also thought that the hands were too short. They did a nice cover story on the watch.

[subtona]

watchtime has confirmed explorer shortcomings????

[NightOwl]

I'm glad that quite a few people have voiced their negative opinions about the short hands if only because it gives me hope that Rolex will address the issue and make it right. I've come to the conclusion that the short hands are just bad design -- plain and simple. This is based on bad experiences with two other watches I've owned that were also horizontally challenged in this way (one was the Citizen BM8180-03E).

The main irritation with this design is not so much telling the time but rather setting the time. You've probably heard people complain about how a second hand that doesn't align well with the index markers really bothers them... well it really bugs me to not be able to get the minute hand well aligned with the index marker without taking extra effort. This seems to be a common design "attribute" of a lot of less expensive watches these days although it's not clear to me why that should be so. Anyway not trying to step on any toes; it's a very nice watch in most respects.