Forums Latest Members
  1. RonJ Jul 9, 2020

    Posts
    491
    Likes
    1,758
    Yes, there is no telling how we'll look back at today's watch prices.
    The world economy could go either way over the next 5 years.

    A $6k watch could become a $12k watch given how much money is being printed these days.
    Or, God forbid, we spiral into a major recession, it could become a $3k watch when people are desperate for cash.

    I've lived through both scenarios in my lifetime.
     
    Benbradstock likes this.
  2. killer67 Jul 9, 2020

    Posts
    1,435
    Likes
    2,416
    gotcha - interesting how were living in the worst crisis in a century and a wristwatch is now €1000 more than last year. Fortune tellers could not have seen this
     
    tumbler, DSotW and Eve like this.
  3. Eve Jul 9, 2020

    Posts
    1,198
    Likes
    3,548
    Exactly, i was also was thinking i will wait it out, the prices can not be only climbing, especially in the times like this..
    I hesitated laying out 4,5k last year, now i hesitate even more while the prices reach the price of a new one ::screwloose::
     
    DSotW likes this.
  4. DSotW Jul 9, 2020

    Posts
    124
    Likes
    131
    Seems you have your heart set on the 39mm, so go for that.

    The 36, which is nice, may be a bit "small" by today's standards? That too can change with time. My father's 36mm Two Tone looks quite "small" these days, and I wear a 39mm Omega.
     
  5. tumbler Jul 9, 2020

    Posts
    16
    Likes
    10
    You should go back when they only have a 36mm in stock. Without blinking, they will extoll the virtues of smaller and lighter, and make sure you know that the current trend is away from bigger case sizes.

    Both are nice, but the 36mm is the better proportioned and classier choice.
     
    Stripey, Dsloan and Eve like this.
  6. mz_cle Jul 9, 2020

    Posts
    297
    Likes
    2,702
    I am partial to the 39 mm, 214270 mk2. I wear mine all the time in a variety of situations. It’s also the smallest watch I own, after my wife laid claim to my Seiko Alpinist. It’s also the only 3-hander I own; everything else has at least a date.

    I can see based on the lugs and relative thinness of the Explorer for it to be pretty versatile given the wearer’s preference.

    Gratuitous pic included.
     
    57FAED50-F2D1-4FAA-9606-4C636AD33403.jpeg
  7. airansun Seasons will pass you by Jul 12, 2020

    Posts
    2,467
    Likes
    17,314
    Fascinating debate, although I’m a traditionalist who has hated the ‘new’ dial since it first came out, and only has love for the old face. I love the size of it.

    E0E30E5D-436D-41E7-A5FF-E2236E49CE6A.jpeg

    @Eve : Sounds like you’re not quite ready to commit. I think you should wait. I’ve always regretted the pieces I didn’t really fall in love with, but instead settled for a compromise. I think, as Heinlein put it, you ought to “wait for fullness”. The right watch is worth waiting for.

    Besides, I think it’s clear things are going to get much worse before they get better. On that basis, I suspect that the recent price inflation will prove to be a short-lived anomaly.
     
    blufinz52, Benbradstock and Eve like this.
  8. Stripey Jul 12, 2020

    Posts
    555
    Likes
    678
    There are 14270s with non tritium lume at the end of the production - Rolex stopping using tritium doesn't coincide with the move from 14270 to 114270 - it happened several years before the change.
     
    Eve likes this.
  9. Eve Jul 12, 2020

    Posts
    1,198
    Likes
    3,548
    I am too actually not a fan of modern oversized watches. But there is something about the whole case proportions of the 39mm Explorer that i like more than 36mm case, nevertheless the watch does wear bigger than it is.

    Maybe Rolex will anounce a 37,5mm Explorer in September, so it would be worth to wait :whistling: probably not happening but, i am not in a hurry :)

    Who knows maybe i will go for something completely different after all.. I also like the IWC 3706 or Speedmaster FOIS very much, which are ironically also 39mm. :coffee:
     
    blufinz52 likes this.
  10. Evitzee Jul 12, 2020

    Posts
    4,380
    Likes
    7,579
    You must live in a unique area where you can just stroll into a Rolex AD or boutique and have these sitting in the case ready for you to try on and purchase. Are they well stocked with steel Sub's and Daytona's too?
     
  11. Eve Jul 12, 2020

    Posts
    1,198
    Likes
    3,548
    True, not sure if there is difderence in Luminova and Superluminova that was used later. But the newer movement would be also my preference.
     
    Stripey likes this.
  12. Eve Jul 12, 2020

    Posts
    1,198
    Likes
    3,548
    Maybe i was lucky, i dont know. But both times i visited the OB they had Explorer 1 ready to go.

    Honestly, i didnt ask for Sub or Daytona, as i was not interested in those ::shy::
     
  13. Benbradstock Jul 13, 2020

    Posts
    327
    Likes
    434
    Nice 1016: those are the best of the bunch IMO and my grail piece at the moment.
     
    airansun likes this.
  14. killer67 Jul 13, 2020

    Posts
    1,435
    Likes
    2,416
    Frog foot dial with a jubilee ::love::
     
    airansun likes this.
  15. septentrio Jul 13, 2020

    Posts
    1,426
    Likes
    19,497
    214270 all the way!

    [​IMG]
     
    rcm711, MtnMarine, Eve and 1 other person like this.
  16. RonJ Jul 13, 2020

    Posts
    491
    Likes
    1,758
    Thank you for posting about the "Frog Foot" on the dial.
    I am learning stuff all the time on this forum.

    I went and did some google searching to compare the Rolex Coronet on two different Explorer watches.
    Here is the regular one next to the frog foot one. Interesting detail.

    Frog-Foot-Rolex-Explorer-compare.jpg
     
    Eve, TJH and Stripey like this.
  17. killer67 Jul 13, 2020

    Posts
    1,435
    Likes
    2,416
    I’ve seen 3 different MK 1 dials; yours pictured looks like a later one 70-74
     
  18. imagwai Jul 13, 2020

    Posts
    4,639
    Likes
    5,201
    I have the 114270. Tried both that and the 214270 before I bought. I could have worn either comfortably, despite my 6.75" wrist, but the 39mm proportions felt a little oversized and not as perfect as the 36mm.

    Funnily enough, it was seeing a 114270 on a girl's wrist that made me determined to get an Explorer, but it's definitely for (real) men as well :)
     
    Benbradstock, Eve and TJH like this.
  19. ajn3323 Jul 13, 2020

    Posts
    239
    Likes
    1,324
    I owned a 114270 and “upgraded” it to a 214270 MK2 when it came out in 2016. I also have a 7-inch wrist. It’s the only modern Rolex in my collection (I have a few vintage). Anyway I find the 39 proportions to work better for me and it came with a 10-year warranty. As I look back on the decision, I guess part of my thinking was if I was gonna wear a 36-mm Explorer, let it be a 1016. I never did get a 1016. The only drawback to the 39-mm
    is that it’s one of the few modern Rolex that sells for less than MSRP on the secondary market. But resale value is not why I bought it in the first place! Good luck
     
    rcm711 and Eve like this.
  20. Sanremo Jul 17, 2020

    Posts
    222
    Likes
    3,536
    My 1016 frog foot says Hi!
    8656866A-0EBC-419C-8CA2-1B81F7092770.jpeg
    I use to have a 14270 but could not resist the 1016 when the opportunity came up.
     
    Benbradstock, Stripey, TJH and 3 others like this.