Which Explorer?

[iberjan]

I've been meaning to add an Explorer (I) to my collection for a while now and am about ready to pull the trigger on a new one from my AD.

However, I am having doubts as to whether to get the current 40mm version or the previous 39mm (Mk 2).

For a 5'10" guy with a 7" wrist, which one would you all recommend? The 214270 Mk2 or the 224270?

[~Ocho1~]

dude, to be honest, I really like my 36mm 124270

I am a 6'4' guy with an almost 8" wrist. I was worried that it would be too small, but it really wears great. So much so that it made me turn down a DJ41 I had been after because now I prefer the 36mm

[brandrea]

Personally I’d go with the 40.

[WatchTimes]

I wear 40 mm watches mostly with a 6.8 in wrist
I ended up picking up a 36 mm Exp on a late night impulse buy.
Despite preferring 40 mm watches the Exp I is just perfect in 36 mm

[herts9]

I think the 39 is just classic. That would work with a 7" wrist. I have a 7.5 and had a 39 for a while, and it was just fine, and I'm 6'2"/225

[travisb]

40 would be the one.

[KatGirl]

You really have to try them all on and see how they feel on your wrist, and decide which one looks best. For me, it was a no brainer. The 36 is an awesome watch. For you, probably the 40 is a better choice, over the 39. The improvements in the bracelet alone are enough reason to choose the newest version. You will also love the glossy black dial.

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[KatGirl]

Originally Posted by ~Ocho1~

dude, to be honest, I really like my 36mm 124270

I am a 6'4' guy with an almost 8" wrist. I was worried that it would be too small, but it really wears great. So much so that it made me turn down a DJ41 I had been after because now I prefer the 36mm

Attachment 1481634

That’s the best one, IMO!

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[spellmanski]

36MM hands down

[goldboy]

Originally Posted by KatGirl

You really have to try them all on and see how they feel on your wrist, and decide which one looks best. For me, it was a no brainer. The 36 is an awesome watch. For you, probably the 40 is a better choice, over the 39. The improvements in the bracelet alone are enough reason to choose the newest version. You will also love the glossy black dial.

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Except that the new Explorer has a visible ridge on the inside of the case between the lugs when you remove the bracelet, so it looks pretty terrible on an aftermarket strap. This is a first for the Explorer, with all other variants being smooth and taking to aftermarket straps beautifully.

If taking the bracelet off is something you're never going to do then this is obsolete.

The older 39mm explorer MK II could be a sweet spot for many people since it sits between the new 36mm and 40mm size wise. Shorter lugs, upgraded fully lumed dial etc... and no case ridging with bracelet removed.

[Kevin of Larchmont]

OG 36mm all day long, the 39 and 40 are pretenders.

[Cru Jones]

The only way to know is to try them on. No one here can convince you otherwise.

[Law52]

I have both the 40mm and the 39mm MK II. I’ve found the 39 more to my liking.
I never wear the 40. Note that mine is my everyday beater watch. When I feel the need I go with either a DD or BLNR GMT.

[Aman08]

I was in the same situation and just picked up the 40mm a few weeks ago. I tried the 36mm and the 40mm. I was not a fan of the bracelet size and taper on the 36mm so went with the 40mm.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dr. T]

I own a 39mm Mk 1 and really want the 36mm. I think the proportions of the 39mm is the least nice of all my watches (also DJ36, Explorer 2 42mm, BB54, panerai 112, longines spirit, seiko turtle).

I want to sell the 39mm to trade it but I can't find the box and papers

[Al Roy]

What’s your gut telling you..that’s the one

[espanol]

Originally Posted by KatGirl

The improvements in the bracelet alone are enough reason to choose the newest version.
Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

What are the “improvements?” To the best of my knowledge it’s a size change to bracelet and clasp. That’s all. I wouldn’t see that as an improvement in any way personally. But maybe I’m missing what Rolex improved.

OP, if you’re not wed to the newest model I’d go for the 39mm Explorer. Matte dial, more balanced dial text as “Explorer” is written on bottom half. Just a perfect watch overall.

[cdmorenot]

I've had 39 short, 39 lume, 40 and wife has the 36 ...

The 40mm is by far my favorite. It was IMPOSSIBLE to get it to fit right out of the box so I had to go out and buy a half link from a Submariner. I almost gave up on it but now it doesn't leave my wrist.

[KatGirl]

Originally Posted by goldboy

Except that the new Explorer has a visible ridge on the inside of the case between the lugs when you remove the bracelet, so it looks pretty terrible on an aftermarket strap. This is a first for the Explorer, with all other variants being smooth and taking to aftermarket straps beautifully.

If taking the bracelet off is something you're never going to do then this is obsolete.

The older 39mm explorer MK II could be a sweet spot for many people since it sits between the new 36mm and 40mm size wise. Shorter lugs, upgraded fully lumed dial etc... and no case ridging with bracelet removed.

I’ve heard that, but I have no interest in wearing mine on a strap. A NATO should work, though.

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[KatGirl]

Originally Posted by espanol

What are the “improvements?” To the best of my knowledge it’s a size change to bracelet and clasp. That’s all. I wouldn’t see that as an improvement in any way personally. But maybe I’m missing what Rolex improved.

OP, if you’re not wed to the newest model I’d go for the 39mm Explorer. Matte dial, more balanced dial text as “Explorer” is written on bottom half. Just a perfect watch overall.

Milled clasp, instead of folded stamped metal, plus the easy link. Also, the more exaggerated taper of the bracelet makes the watch look awesome on the wrist.

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[RichM]

I had the 39MM and if I had to do it again it would be the 40mm. A 7.5 inch wrist here.

[mini sub]

The '36' would be my choice, I was in my local the other week and they had a 40 available and to be honest it just looked too big, not on the wrist but in general proportions. Its not what the Explorer was intended to be but just Rolex trying to please those who are fat in the wrist and small in the groin ��

[espanol]

Originally Posted by KatGirl

Milled clasp, instead of folded stamped metal, plus the easy link. Also, the more exaggerated taper of the bracelet makes the watch look awesome on the wrist.

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Both the MK1 and MK2 39mm Explorers had milled clasps and easy link extensions… It’s not new to the 40mm

[iberjan]

Wow, I was not expecting this kind of response in such a long time! Thank you all for your feedback.

I have tried on the 36mm in the past, solicited feedback and been told that it looks "dainty" on me. Maybe it's that although I'm of average size, I'm kinda serious and the smaller watch doesn't match my personality. Or maybe it's that I tend to wear watches that are around the 38 - 42mm mark, typically. Not sure. This is why I discounted the 36mm as an option.

It's kinda difficult to try on the 39 and 40mm side by side since ADs typically haven't had both in stock at the same time. Both look great and in some respects the 40mm actually appears to measure smaller than the 39mm.

I think I might just bite the bullet, pick up the 40mm, wear it for a while and see how I feel about it. Then it'll be easier to compare it to the other two sizes as well since I can always walk into a store with it on...
This is probably the first time I'm this split about a Rolex, which is heavily favored in my collection.

[KatGirl]

Originally Posted by espanol

Both the MK1 and MK2 39mm Explorers had milled clasps and easy link extensions… It’s not new to the 40mm

Was thinking of 124270 vs.114270. Sorry for the confusion. I don’t care for the 39 much. Odd proportions, in my view. I’d rather see OP get the new 40.

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[iberjan]

Originally Posted by cdmorenot

I've had 39 short, 39 lume, 40 and wife has the 36 ...

The 40mm is by far my favorite. It was IMPOSSIBLE to get it to fit right out of the box so I had to go out and buy a half link from a Submariner. I almost gave up on it but now it doesn't leave my wrist.

How tall are you and what's your wrist size?

[iberjan]

Originally Posted by espanol

What are the “improvements?” To the best of my knowledge it’s a size change to bracelet and clasp. That’s all. I wouldn’t see that as an improvement in any way personally. But maybe I’m missing what Rolex improved.

OP, if you’re not wed to the newest model I’d go for the 39mm Explorer. Matte dial, more balanced dial text as “Explorer” is written on bottom half. Just a perfect watch overall.

The matte dial is one of the bigger things drawing me to the 39. It's just more low key and fitting for a watch of that caliber. Sorry, had to...

[iberjan]

Originally Posted by Aman08

I was in the same situation and just picked up the 40mm a few weeks ago. I tried the 36mm and the 40mm. I was not a fan of the bracelet size and taper on the 36mm so went with the 40mm.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Looks fantastic! Congrats!

[iberjan]

Originally Posted by ~Ocho1~

dude, to be honest, I really like my 36mm 124270

I am a 6'4' guy with an almost 8" wrist. I was worried that it would be too small, but it really wears great. So much so that it made me turn down a DJ41 I had been after because now I prefer the 36mm

Attachment 1481634

No denying that it looks great. Kinda the same way the OP, DJ and DD look great in 36mm, no matter your size.

[Jkbenn02]

That's a tough decision, but both the 39mm and 40mm Explorers are classics!