HODINKEE - A Week On The Wrist - The Rolex Explorer Reference 214270

[ranxoren]

Great review by James Stacey of my favorite Rolex model:

https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/ro...-214270-review

It will be interesting to see the impact of this review on grey market pricing as the 214270 is one of the few models that has been sticking at or slightly below retail despite all the other sports model skyrocketing.

[smym18]

Explorers listed at $15k in 3, 2, 1...

[ranxoren]

Originally Posted by smym18

Explorers listed at $15k in 3, 2, 1...

haha funny enough one 2016 one did get listed very shortly after the article for the same as 2018 models were being listed for yesterday.

[threeputtbogey]

The explorer has never gotten my heart going. Just too bland for my taste.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[JParm]

Originally Posted by threeputtbogey

The explorer has never gotten my heart going. Just too bland for my taste.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Agree, and wears small for my liking, even at 39 mm.

[Maxy]

Regarding older reference - The markers are not metallic but white gold. Secondly, not sure if MK1 will be valuable in the future. Most of them seems to prefer the MK2 version.

[threeputtbogey]

Originally Posted by jpeezy14@hotmail.com

Agree, and wears small for my liking, even at 39 mm.

The smaller dial with the polished bezel contributes to that, I think.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Sublovin]

Originally Posted by threeputtbogey

The explorer has never gotten my heart going. Just too bland for my taste.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

I hear ya .
I actually like the watch, but admittedly it has to be the most vanilla/bland Rolex. If you want a Rolex but want others to think you are wearing a Timex, this watch is for you.

[trfChris]

Originally Posted by Maxy

Regarding older reference - The markers are not metallic but white gold.

Pretty sure white gold is a metal?

[Jster]

Thanks for the post. That is a really cool review. Very good info and it's beautifully filmed. You can tell James actually wore it for a while because you can see some swirls on the bezel and crown. I love the Explorer. I agree with him when he says some of the newer sports models look like they are trying a little too hard.

[stateman]

Originally Posted by Sublovin

I hear ya .
I actually like the watch, but admittedly it has to be the most vanilla/bland Rolex. If you want a Rolex but want others to think you are wearing a Timex, this watch is for you.

Obviously this is entirely subjective and my opinion doesn't reflect at all upon your own opinions...but I used to lean towards the Explorer being a bit plain when I first saw one too. But over time and esp. after borrowing for a trial run a friend's over a long weekend, I've grown to love how simple and 'pure' the design is. Only 3 hands, black and white, moderately sized for a modern sports watch, nearly all brushed. Tells time, and that's it, no nonsense but with class and high quality. Goes with any outfit and can get banged around and wet.

I used to wear a Sub daily for years (sold) and still own the BLNR and other non-Rolex, but the 214270 Explorer is easily my most worn and versatile. And as I get older, I just don't care if anyone notices what I'm wearing for a timepiece.

[mgsooner]

Oh man. Can't click the link fast enough

[Gunnersaurus]

Originally Posted by threeputtbogey

The explorer has never gotten my heart going. Just too bland for my taste.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

I agree. There just doesn’t seem anything special about it to me.

[faz]

Originally Posted by threeputtbogey

The smaller dial with the polished bezel contributes to that, I think.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Actually the dial itself is larger than SubC and GMT's dial.


I never bonded as much as I wanted with the MK1 dial, and my wife was wearing it all the time. But she too stopped wearing it once her 116520 became her daily. While owning the MK1, (and being in love with the white gold 3/6/9 markers and admitting it here), I found myself more attracted to the newer lum dial and sold it to move to a lum dial. Unfortunately, interest in other watches (other than Rolex) started to kick in and the purchase of the lum dial has been delayed indefinitely.

[nicon]

Originally Posted by Gunnersaurus

I agree. There just doesn’t seem anything special about it to me.

I've liked it on the photos, but in the metal it's disappointing. Also 39mm version has too big poor proportions dial, 36mm is better, but still very small and bland watch. For me the ultimate simplicity and comfort but with character and proportions is the 14060M.

BTW I don't get the point of this video, it's like specs reading mixed with the most obvious and run-of-the-mill opinions (classic, timeless, simple), dull as the watch itself.

[jb335]

Originally Posted by Maxy

Regarding older reference - The markers are not metallic but white gold. Secondly, not sure if MK1 will be valuable in the future. Most of them seems to prefer the MK2 version.

I think that is exactly why MK1 may be more valuable in the future. Because it's less desirable now.

[1911 Man]

Quick question for the experts out there. I was under the impression that when they updated to the 114270 reference, that update included solid end links. This article indicates that was not so, that SEL's didn't come along until 2010's 214270 reference. Is that correct?

[GarbanzoNegro]

Originally Posted by 1911 Man

Quick question for the experts out there. I was under the impression that when they updated to the 114270 reference, that update included solid end links. This article indicates that was not so, that SEL's didn't come along until 2010's 214270 reference. Is that correct?

114270 has SELs

[mgsooner]

Really, really enjoyed that. One of the most comprehensive histories of the reference I've found on the net that is all compiled into one place. A number of the points he made were the exact conclusions I came to when I decided upon the 214270 as my first (and thus far only) Rolex.

[ecmgbob]

I've only had my 214270 MKII for a relatively short period of time; but I do love it just the way it is. This is what I love about this forum and the WIS community, the knowledge available with just a click!

[mgsooner]

I’d love to try a 36mm Exp in person some day. When shopping I tried a 36mm OP and to me it appeared small on my 6.75” wrist.

[Amazing]

It's a great watch but I agree with some posters here that the 214270 proportions aren't as pleasing as the 36mm models. I had the chance to buy one from an AD with no tax and couldn't do it at the time. I would definitely consider the 114270 at some point though.

[coaxial]

When the 214270(MkI) was first released I was not a fan of the enlarged proportions; However it has grown on me.

[AdamW]

Good review. I just still find it difficult to believe someone would name their company Hodinkee. I'm not sure why it grates on me so much but it does. I know, I know it's the Czech thing but seriously, so horrid. Flame away if you like but it's dumb.

[2nastie]

Not sure why everyone says the 36mm version is better proportioned than the 39mm.

With updated MK2 dial and hands, it's just as proportional as the 36mm. The only change is the physical size. I get the nostalgia of the 36mm case, but in today's standard the 39mm wears 100% better. The black dial makes the 36mm appear even smaller than it really is as well.

No one seems to get hungover with the 36 OP vs the 39 OP. Most choose the larger case.

I currently own the MK2 39mm Explorer and considered heavy the 36mm before purchasing it. Zero regrets. Unless it is the 1016, I'll go with the modern case.

[BillA]

A year ago, I bought the MK1, got sick of it and sold it.
Bought the MK2 earlier this year, liked it, but sold it.
Got sellers remorse, and bought another one. Don't you just love the FS forum to make this happen!
I used to find the bezel kind of bland, still do to some extent, but what I like about the watch is that the dial really does "pop" at you. It is the most comfy Rolex I have ever owned.
Hodinkee called this a "sport watch" I am not sure I ever called it that but if it is a sport watch then all the better.
The watch still sells at a discount on the forum for a pre-owned piece. Will be interesting if this remains. I just saw one FS thread that the bump increased the price by $100. At first I thought a typo, not sure now.

[poidog81]

Originally Posted by 2nastie

Not sure why everyone says the 36mm version is better proportioned than the 39mm.

With updated MK2 dial and hands, it's just as proportional as the 36mm. The only change is the physical size. I get the nostalgia of the 36mm case, but in today's standard the 39mm wears 100% better. The black dial makes the 36mm appear even smaller than it really is as well.

No one seems to get hungover with the 36 OP vs the 39 OP. Most choose the larger case.

I currently own the MK2 39mm Explorer and considered heavy the 36mm before purchasing it. Zero regrets. Unless it is the 1016, I'll go with the modern case.

Agree 100%. I have 6” wrists and tried on both the 36mm and the 39mm and the 39 was much better proportioned and better dial.

Great article and beautiful video, may favorite watch! It’s simple, beautifully balanced, elegant, sporty, and flys under the radar. All those that say it’s boring and need a big bling watch will never understand this classic.

[matthundreds]

Big fan of this - grew on me a lot. I have seen a couple of photos (albeit on instagram) of the new explorer with a rubber strap - pretty slick summer piece for all those adventures :)

[poidog81]

Originally Posted by faz

Actually the dial itself is larger than SubC and GMT's dial.

Not true it’s actually smaller and in line with the 34 and 36mm OP

[Moggo]

Great watch, bought it and was a bit underwhelmed but it really does grow on you.

My most comfortable watch by a mile, love it for the fact it is plain and discreet.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk