A Rolex Explorer is on my list, but I wonder, given second hand prices, whether I might not just stick my name on a list for a new one, because I don't perceive that it has the same waiting time as a Submariner or Daytona. I was wondering what people's views were on the various references from 14270 onwards? And what people's experience of the wait time has been?

 

The 36mm 14270 and 114270 are discontinued long ago, the only new model you can get from an AD is the 39mm 214270. I agree they don’t have the long waiting list as other steel models. I saw one in stock last year at the Rolex boutique at the Hong Kong airport, tried it on, too big for my 6.25’ wrist... the sales lady said it’ll be sold really fast, but I didn’t pull the trigger. Eventually got a used 114270.

Here’s the 214270 at HK airport:

 

I don't see Explorers in ADs like I do ExpIIs (black dial) or Airkings but word is they are not hard to come by so letting your AD know should do the trick. All the shenanigans are mostly related to Daytonas, GMTs, and the Hulk.

 

Do you want a 36mm or 39mm version? You should try a 36 on.

 

Last visit to my AD (2 weeks ago) there was an Explorer sitting on the case. Mind, I'm from a city where there is a congestion of watch collectors and enthusiasts. I prefer the older Explorer, the 36mm case size. A used 14270 is definitely more affordable, and if you're lucky or if you prefer it, the older ones are starting to take on an eggshell patina.

 

Agreed. Some other food for thoughts:
1. Patina only exists on 14270 as it used tritium, not 114270 which uses luminova.
2. The advantage of 114270 over 14270 is the bracelet with solid endlinks, and an updated movement.
3. If you like putting them on a strap, 114270 would be a struggle as the springbar hole is very close to the case, and the edge of the case is sharp, resulting scratching/damaging the straps in just a few turns. You'll need a thin leather strap with curved springbar to make it work. I hear 14270 is a bit better but I don't own it and have no practical experience.

 

OP, the 214270 is pretty large. The squared off case and the additional 3mm makes it seem huge over a 36mm version. Try it on at the local AD prior to plunking down your money.

You can always try on a 39mm Oyster Perpetual (same case) if they're not in stock.

 

Explorers har getting harder to get. I just bought one (was a gift so didn’t get to keep it ) after having been 4 months on a waiting list with my local AD. AD had expected a waiting time around 2 months but Rolex is notoriously unpredictable in their deliveres to their AD’s.

As for size here it is on my 7.25-7.3ish inch wrist. Managed to get a wrist shot before I wrapped it



It wears large and also larger than 40mm Sub/GMT because of the thin bezel and beefed up case even though it is 39mm.


The lug to lug of about 47mm is comfortable on my wrist and slightly smaller than my Speedy at 48mm (I seem to remember) which is the max size for me I guess.

Now if this hadn’t been a gift I would have kept it and I could easily see myself wearing it. I am also seriously considering a 114300 as the next purchase, which is the same dimensions, but given a choice between this and a 14270 or 114270, where I could only pick one, I would pick one of the 36mm. Rolex 36mm is ideal for my wrist.

 

I totally agree. I think it is not just the size of the watch in proportion to the wrist size, it is also the proportion of the watch itself as many have said the same. The design is simple and the dial is clean, with this design at 39mm it just lost the elegant feeling of the 36mm version. The case is too beefy, bezel is too wide, indices and 3 6 9 are too chunky... Unless for a unusually large wrist, I think the 36mm would wear better for most of us.

The speedy, although larger than the 214270 on paper, feels smaller than that. And with all the complication of a chrono the dimension is very much needed to fit everything in. From the bezel to the dial everything still feel delicate, it doesn't feel chunky at all.

 

This is really helpful, thank you everyone. Just one further question - I think they changed from tritium to Luminova at some point during the run of the 14270, not at the point of the change to 114270?

I have a reasonably small wrist, so the advice to try on the 39 and the 36 is well made. I find the steel Speedy feels quite chunky on me, whereas my Apollo 8 and any DSOTM (probably a combination of black ceramic and textile bracelet) look perfect. I'm kind of leaning towards finding a good 14270 or 114270.

If I push the button, I will of course, report back!

 

+1 for 36mm

 

Yes there are 14270’s out there with luminova but far fewer than with tritium would be my guess due to the shorter run from 1998 to 2001. I would go after a minty 114270.

 

That's interesting that there's a lot of consideration towards a 39mm vs. 36mm Exp when a DSOTM suits your tastes too. As others have said, you should try one on. The 214270 wears bigger than the 5-digit 40mm models - I recently had my 16570 side by side with a 214270.

 

I have a larger wrist, ~7.5in, and I prefer the fully lumed 39mm new version of the Explorer being sold now. The size and design are about as perfect an every day wearer - for my tastes - as I can imagine, if not a little small for my tastes. It fits (me) great, and is incredibly versatile with clothes depending on strap or bracelet choice.

All that said, I was on the waiting list for a 214270 and the Tudor GMT at a nearby AD for both brands, and much to my chagrin I was called for both on the same day. I'd have to sell something else in my collection to afford the Explorer, so I went with the GMT. My gut feeling was that I will have another shot at the Explorer in the next 18 months, while the GMT, due to price and a few other factors, will be harder to find. I was also smitten with the Tudor from the first time I saw photos of it at Basel last year, which played a factor in my decision.

I included some bad photos I took at the AD too for reference. The bracelet and strap in each shot is on the tight side.

 

I like that Tudor very much, actually! I can see how you were smitten.

 

Thanks again to everyone who has generously given their view.

 

By virtue of removing the optics of the big bracelet end links that give it big shoulders, the Exp 39mm looks vastly different (better IMO) and wears much smaller on leather. I have approx 6.25" wrists and it works fine for me (and I don't like the oversize look). That said I do like it, and wear it often, with the bracelet as well.

 

That looks gorgeous

 

Thanks, I'd prefer it a bit darker but I'll beat on this a bit so it should start showing some character marks! It's just a cheap Barton strap but good quality anyway, fits perfectly, got it just to test the concept.

 

Update on my leather strap version (prev post in this same thread): I discovered my GMT's Everest strap fits the Explorer perfectly, allowing for full waterproof use. Kind of like 2 watches for the price of one...or 4 for the price of 2!