ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

cosmo809 · 15 April 2011, 03:20 AM

So I started a new thread as I think I may have violated a rule when I posted against Ceramic's thread.

42mm v40 side by side.

I am going to have to pass as the difference is obvious to me, even though I have been enamoured by the images.

RIMG0328-500x375.jpg

RIMG0331-500x375.jpg

esm · 15 April 2011, 03:21 AM

thanks.

thats quite a "big-ish" difference.
wondering what's the difference next to say a GMTIIC or a Sub-C?

Dr. Robert · 15 April 2011, 03:21 AM

Is that a $7400. price on the tag???????

& I wonder how it'll look on the wrist??????

Caraptor · 15 April 2011, 03:28 AM

Well I dislike the size increase, but I do think it looks better than the supercase.

MortgageGuy · 15 April 2011, 03:33 AM

WOW, is it me or does the case look terrible

I dont know but it looks completely our of proportion with the rest of the watch

Are you seeing this? The bexel looks too thin and the lugs too small (did I just say the lugs look too small

but they do)

Chipmunk · 15 April 2011, 03:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr. Robert

Is that a $7400. price on the tag???????:thinkin

It could be in Pesos, Bob.

ArcticMoose · 15 April 2011, 03:34 AM

Can't wait to try one on, the Explorer II is the one sports Rolex I feel looks a bit small on me.

Rolexsub16610 · 15 April 2011, 03:36 AM

U violated the rules? Such as? I posted a classic sub vs ceramic sub comparo not long ago but the thread was killed off...I don't think these kind of comparos just aren't popular here...will cause too much debates and rude posts.

Anyway, is it just me or what? The glasses seem to be domed on the 42mm exp2?

Dr. Robert · 15 April 2011, 03:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chipmunk

It could be in Pesos, Bob.

pesos????? Philippines or Mexico??????

SaddleSC · 15 April 2011, 03:37 AM

I will stick with my classic 16570. Something about the proportions of the new style don't look right to me.

Abid · 15 April 2011, 03:37 AM

I wouldn't right it off completely, you have to see it in the "steel" first.

Rolexsub16610 · 15 April 2011, 03:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caraptor

Well I dislike the size increase, but I do think it looks better than the supercase.

Agreed

Danand · 15 April 2011, 03:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rolexsub16610

U violated the rules? Such as? I posted a classic sub vs ceramic sub comparo not long ago but the thread was killed off...I don't think these kind of comparos just aren't popular here...will cause too much debates and rude posts.

Anyway, is it just me or what? The glasses seem to be domed on the 42mm exp2?

Oh and if you think the posts are rude watch out
for the PM's!
Actually MOST of the forum participants are pretty civil even when they disagree with you.

esm · 15 April 2011, 03:42 AM

after a second look-see.... i must say i cant wait for the arrival of my white EXPII. i think the new size will wear quite nicely.

def. like the maxi dial.

(okay, must go now.... i need to stop teasing myself

)

Danand · 15 April 2011, 03:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abid

I wouldn't right it off completely, you have to see it in the "steel" first.

Totally agree, but my impression from pics is too big. (wrist clock).

Rolexsub16610 · 15 April 2011, 03:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danand

Oh and if you think the posts are rude watch out
for the PM's!
Actually MOST of the forum participants are pretty civil even when they disagree with you.

What pms? Excuse me?

Chipmunk · 15 April 2011, 03:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr. Robert

pesos????? Philippines or Mexico??????

I thought they use the same money......no?

mjm800 · 15 April 2011, 03:56 AM

I love it!

(213)GMT · 15 April 2011, 04:03 AM

Love the Maxi Dial

Ebruner · 15 April 2011, 04:42 AM

Yuck! I don't like it at all.

-Eddie

mjm800 · 15 April 2011, 05:08 AM

One thing I don't like. Is that a 20mm bracelet on the new Exp II?

I don't like that it looks too small.

Kolkek · 15 April 2011, 05:32 AM

Wow, the new one looks gigantic in comparison to the old.
Not sure if I'm a fan of the size increase..

Grissom · 15 April 2011, 06:44 AM

Are they out in ADs now?

spuds · 15 April 2011, 06:48 AM

I'm sooooooooo gonna get into trouble with the wife when this hits the shops!!

rfknauss · 15 April 2011, 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grissom

Are they out in ADs now?

I was wondering the same thing ...... how can there be Rolex price tags on them if they are not at the Rolex ADs yet?

George Ab · 15 April 2011, 08:03 AM

Good question on if they are at AD's.
Thanks for posting..... sure would like to know how you were able to get your hands on an new Exp II.

The good news is that the cases look similar. Meaning the proportions of the thick 216570 lugs now look proportioned to the watch. Something I can't say about the other supercases in 40mm diameter.

The bad news is it looks like Rolex needs to go to a 21mm or 22mm bracelet. Wow..... I really want to love this watch. It will look different on the wrist then when the band is laid out.... so this may be a non-issue.

mtrunner · 15 April 2011, 08:04 AM

I loved the new Explorer II when then the Basel pictures were released but now I am not so sure. I really need to see it in person to make a sound decision. It looks huge compared to the old Explorer II. The bezel looks too small and the bracelet doesn't look like it is in proportion. Wow I just scrolled up and looked at the pictures again. It is huge! I have to say I am really glad I have the current Explorer II.

paddy_crow · 15 April 2011, 08:04 AM

That thing is ginormous. I would have to put on 75 pounds for that to look OK on my wrist.

I wonder how much thicker and heavier it is.

mjm800 · 15 April 2011, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by George Ab

The bad news is it looks like Rolex needs to go to a 21mm or 22mm bracelet. Wow..... I really want to love this watch. It will look different on the wrist then when the band is laid out.... so this may be a non-issue.

This my only concern, I don't want a beefy watch on a tiny bracelet.

Like you say on the wrist it may look and feel different.

Dan2010 · 15 April 2011, 09:07 AM

I like the fact it flows with the increased size unlike my beloved Sub C which looks stupid with the Silly Case................

15 April 2011, 03:20 AM	#1
cosmo809 "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: USA Posts: 9	I'm still learning the rules..... So I started a new thread as I think I may have violated a rule when I posted against Ceramic's thread. 42mm v40 side by side. I am going to have to pass as the difference is obvious to me, even though I have been enamoured by the images. RIMG0328-500x375.jpg RIMG0331-500x375.jpg

15 April 2011, 03:21 AM	#3
Dr. Robert 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Real Name: Bob Location: U.S.A. Watch: 1655 Posts: 63,946	Is that a $7400. price on the tag??????? & I wonder how it'll look on the wrist?????? __________________ Founder & Card Carrying Member of the Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons

15 April 2011, 03:33 AM	#5
MortgageGuy "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Real Name: Adam Location: Orlando, Florida Watch: Me Posts: 9,935	WOW, is it me or does the case look terrible I dont know but it looks completely our of proportion with the rest of the watch Are you seeing this? The bexel looks too thin and the lugs too small (did I just say the lugs look too small but they do) __________________ The richest people in the world look for and build NETWORKS, Everyone else looks for work... Robert Kiyosaki

15 April 2011, 03:37 AM	#10
SaddleSC "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Real Name: Charles B Location: GMT -7 Watch: Hulk 116610LV Posts: 6,131	I will stick with my classic 16570. Something about the proportions of the new style don't look right to me. __________________ Hulk 116610LV + GMT II 126710 BLNR + Explorer 124270 + Air King 126900 + Submariner 16613LB

15 April 2011, 03:56 AM	#18
mjm800 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: USA Posts: 1,950	I love it! __________________

15 April 2011, 03:21 AM	#2
esm "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Real Name: Eric Location: Location,Location Watch: this, bro... Posts: 15,340	thanks. thats quite a "big-ish" difference. wondering what's the difference next to say a GMTIIC or a Sub-C?

15 April 2011, 03:28 AM	#4
Caraptor Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: North Carolina Watch: me save for it. Posts: 444	Well I dislike the size increase, but I do think it looks better than the supercase.

15 April 2011, 03:34 AM	#7
ArcticMoose "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: The Sea Posts: 1,894	Can't wait to try one on, the Explorer II is the one sports Rolex I feel looks a bit small on me.

15 April 2011, 03:36 AM	#8
Rolexsub16610 Banned Join Date: Apr 2011 Real Name: Dr. Chang Location: Sydney Watch: 16610, 16622 Posts: 34	U violated the rules? Such as? I posted a classic sub vs ceramic sub comparo not long ago but the thread was killed off...I don't think these kind of comparos just aren't popular here...will cause too much debates and rude posts. Anyway, is it just me or what? The glasses seem to be domed on the 42mm exp2?

15 April 2011, 03:37 AM	#11
Abid "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Las Vegas, NV Watch: 16610LV Posts: 466	I wouldn't right it off completely, you have to see it in the "steel" first.

15 April 2011, 03:42 AM	#14
esm "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Real Name: Eric Location: Location,Location Watch: this, bro... Posts: 15,340	after a second look-see.... i must say i cant wait for the arrival of my white EXPII. i think the new size will wear quite nicely. def. like the maxi dial. (okay, must go now.... i need to stop teasing myself )

15 April 2011, 04:03 AM	#19
(213)GMT Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Real Name: Vince Location: Los Angeles Watch: GMT 116710 Posts: 215	Love the Maxi Dial

15 April 2011, 04:42 AM	#20
Ebruner "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Real Name: Eddie Location: Kentucky Watch: 118208 Posts: 2,510	Yuck! I don't like it at all. -Eddie __________________

15 April 2011, 05:08 AM	#21
mjm800 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: USA Posts: 1,950	One thing I don't like. Is that a 20mm bracelet on the new Exp II? I don't like that it looks too small. __________________

15 April 2011, 05:32 AM	#22
Kolkek "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Norway Posts: 37	Wow, the new one looks gigantic in comparison to the old. Not sure if I'm a fan of the size increase..

15 April 2011, 06:44 AM	#23
Grissom "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Real Name: Nathan Location: US, Latin America Watch: GMT IIc 18K/SS Posts: 3,349	Are they out in ADs now? __________________ *(Member NAWCC since 1976)* 116713LN GMT-IIc 18k/SS (Z) + 116520 SS Daytona (M) + 16700 GMT Master (A) + 16610LV Submariner (V) + 16600 Sea Dweller (Z) + 116400 Milgauss White Dial (V) + 70330N Tudor Heritage Chronograph Grey w/Black Sub Dials (J) + 5513 Submariner Serif Dial (5.2 Mil) Who else needs an Intervention? (109 297) (137 237) (73 115) (221) (23) (56) (229) P-Club Member #5 RIP JJ Irani - TRF Legend

15 April 2011, 06:48 AM	#24
spuds "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Real Name: Dan Location: Essex, UK Watch: West Ham! COYI!! Posts: 7,941	I'm sooooooooo gonna get into trouble with the wife when this hits the shops!! __________________ Onwards & Upwards Rodders...... Onwards & Upwards. Life is not about how fast you can run or how high you can climb........... It's about how well you can bounce!! TRF HALL OF FAME JANUARY 2010

15 April 2011, 08:03 AM	#26
George Ab "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Real Name: George Location: Seattle Watch: One of Them Posts: 6,924	Good question on if they are at AD's. Thanks for posting..... sure would like to know how you were able to get your hands on an new Exp II. The good news is that the cases look similar. Meaning the proportions of the thick 216570 lugs now look proportioned to the watch. Something I can't say about the other supercases in 40mm diameter. The bad news is it looks like Rolex needs to go to a 21mm or 22mm bracelet. Wow..... I really want to love this watch. It will look different on the wrist then when the band is laid out.... so this may be a non-issue. __________________

15 April 2011, 08:04 AM	#27
mtrunner 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Real Name: Gary Location: Bozeman, MT Watch: 126508 Paul Newman Posts: 7,835	I loved the new Explorer II when then the Basel pictures were released but now I am not so sure. I really need to see it in person to make a sound decision. It looks huge compared to the old Explorer II. The bezel looks too small and the bracelet doesn't look like it is in proportion. Wow I just scrolled up and looked at the pictures again. It is huge! I have to say I am really glad I have the current Explorer II.

15 April 2011, 08:04 AM	#28
paddy_crow Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Michigan Posts: 592	That thing is ginormous. I would have to put on 75 pounds for that to look OK on my wrist. I wonder how much thicker and heavier it is.

15 April 2011, 09:07 AM	#30
Dan2010 "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: South Carolina Watch: Panerai 914 Posts: 6,540	I like the fact it flows with the increased size unlike my beloved Sub C which looks stupid with the Silly Case................

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