Polar Explorer II (16570). A review (and maybe a question or two).

Posts
404
Likes
330
Some of you may be aware of the thread I created a while ago, looking for suggestions for a GMT watch. The Rolex (polar) Explorer II, 16570 reference was always a front runner, but I didn't want to be 'snow-blind' to it, and diligently looked for credible alternatives.

Well, I received a great response, with lots of thoughtful suggestions, but the Exp.II Kept coming back. A few months back (when I started really looking) I got the chance to properly handle one in an AD in the U.K. (Pre-owned). All the pictures I had seen (there were a lot!) came to life. It was the Omega Great White that took me down the path of white-dialled GMT watches, and remained a close second throughout, but there was something special about the Rolex. I did, incidentally, recently get the chance to see the black and white versions side by side. No contest for me. White.

So, I trawled Watchrecon, various online dealers, a couple of shops and eventually found one that seemed to fit.

The Watch

It's an early Z serial, making it 2006 but with the 3185 (and no Rehaut engraving). I'd seen a few later ones but they seemed to be commanding a premium I didn't think was worth it. It has SEL and the non-lugholes case, both features I wanted. The watch itself has recently had a full service by a Rolex-trained 3rd party watchmaker. For a ten year old watch, it arrived in immaculate condition. The case and bracelet sides are perfectly mirror like, the lugs and case are sharp and look brand new. The bezel is virtually flawless, so is the bracelet. It's running at about +1spd. Very impressed. It does not look like a ten year old watch. This is good as it has had a very competent refurbishment, but of course I don't know the full history or what it looked like before. It can't have been in too bad a condition as like I say, it looks great, and all surfaces, chamfers, edges etc are sharp.

Also, it means any marks/scratches I put on it are mine. This is good and bad. If it had been a little bit beat, I'd cope with any extra. As it arrived in pristine condition, the pain of the first scratches is quite prominent. I've already scratched the case side and caseback and it's incredibly annoying!

Dial

What really drew me in. Icy white with those glossy black white gold painted markers, it offers great contrast and is very different. The red GMT hand is a great contrast, although the red paint doesn't extend all the way to the base of the arrow.

I find it very legible so far, even in low light conditions. The Luke isn't great, but so far I have found it adequate, and quite long-lasting. It's crisp, different, and wears well, although different to how I imagined (difficult to explain).

I'm not a particular fan of the cyclops, but it's fine, and the date feature is useful (something my Speedy Pro doesn't have!).

Bezel

Another strong point. The lettering is sharp, with no black enamel missing. I like the font and the spacing is perfect. A lot has been said about the 'sunburst' brushing and it catches the light brilliantly. Keeping track of 'Zulu' time is going to be easy (handy!)

Case

Perfect size for me at 39mm (+3 for the crown and guards). I have small wrist at about 6.5in and it fits well. The shape is classic and the difference between polish and brushing is stark. I kinda wish the case sides were brushed as well, however, as in the week I've had it I've already put some scratches on the sides. I don't take scratches on watches very well. A neuroticism I'm slowly learning to live with. The caseback is plain with the standard brush finish in the middle. Boring compared to many other Watch brands but it's functional. I have somehow put small marks on the back as well, and I have no idea how. This thing seems to be a scratch magnet!

Bracelet

The only real negative for me. It has a little bit of stretch but not too bad. It feels cheap (the clasp especially so) and I can't get a comfortable fit due to the odd number of links on each side. Much prefer my Speedy's bracelet. The only positive I have is that its much lighter.

Timekeeping/Movement

The tried and true 3185. Keeping time at +1spd at the moment. Excellent. Too much play in the hands for my liking but it's ok. I'm having difficulty screws in the crown back in, however. It kind of 'locks' after about a quarter of a turn. I definitely haven't crossed the threads, it's as if something inside isn't disengaging properly to allow it to screw in. A bit of a downer, I hope it isn't an issue.

Overall

Very pleased with my purchase. It's a ten year old watch that looks brand new. It's different, classy, sharp, functional and should last a lifetime. The bracelet is a negative but I can live with it for now. I may put it on a NATO or leather after a while anyway.

If anyone has any advice/opinions on the crown issue, I'd love to hear them. Also, is it really that much of a scratch magnet? I haven't really worn it that much but it seems to scratch by looking at it! Trying to get over that at the moment!

Anyway, probably the longest post I've ever written. If you found it useful, entertaining, or thought provoking, then it wa worth my time! Thank you!
Edited:
 
Posts
8,184
Likes
19,227
Excellent review! We'll now grade your work..

Written Content A+
Image Content F- (redo required)

It's a cool watch to wear! Enjoy!!

馃榾
 
Posts
404
Likes
330
Excellent review! We'll now grade your work..

Written Content A+
Image Content F- (redo required)

It's a cool watch to wear! Enjoy!!

馃榾
Bugger! Knew I'd forgotten something!


I'll take some more tomorrow when I get the chance!
 
Posts
17,658
Likes
26,760
I'm pretty sure the bracelet is not stretched they are all like that Rolex. I tried a platinum Daytona on, the sharp edges and play made it feel cheap to me. Pretty sure it's the same style.

Pics or your lying馃槈
 
Posts
8,184
Likes
19,227
....... I'm having difficulty screws in the crown back in, however. It kind of 'locks' after about a quarter of a turn.... I definitely haven't crossed the threads, it's as if something inside isn't disengaging properly to allow it to screw in.
...If anyone has any advice/opinions on the crown issue, I'd love to hear them....

If you are saying that you can only get a 1/4 of a turn while attempting to lock the crown down, then that's not right and you should have a Rolex-smart mechanic checked it out. 馃榾 The crown is designed to turn ~four full turns before it locks all the way down.

...The bracelet is a negative but I can live with it for now. I may put it on a NATO or leather after a while anyway..

Check out these options https://www.everestbands.com/collections/rolex-explorer-ii-pre-2011

...Also, is it really that much of a scratch magnet? I haven't really worn it that much but it seems to scratch by looking at it!

Hell yeah! 馃 it seems the polished side (s) of the case and the bezel have some type of gravitational force that is constantly pulling every single scratch that orbits around your wrist! 馃槣
Edited:
 
Posts
404
Likes
330
If you are saying that you can only get a 1/4 of a turn while attempting to lock the crown down, then that's not right and you should have a Rolex-smart mechanic checked it out. 馃榾 The crown is designed to turn ~four full turns before it locks all the way down.



Check out these options https://www.everestbands.com/collections/rolex-explorer-ii-pre-2011



Hell yeah! 馃 it seems the polished side (s) of the case and the bezel have some type of gravitational force that is constantly pulling every single scratch that orbits around your wrist! 馃槣
[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the responses. Yeah it seems to just stop, but if I pull then pop back in, then push and screw, it seems to work ok. Seems odd though.

I've had a look at those Everest straps. They look very nice and a good compliment to the watch.

Hmm, I'm going to be using this watch mainly for work (military aircrew, largely at night) so it's probably going to accrue quite a few marks and scratches! As long as they're not deep and/or irreparable, I'll (eventually!) learn to live with them!
 
Posts
1,199
Likes
9,752
40 mm explorer ii is true Rolex these new bigger models 馃檨
 
Posts
9,726
Likes
15,318
Nicely done, don't lose too much sleep over the 3185 vs 3186 issue since the differences are so minimal as to be mostly marketing smoke and mirrors. I think the main change was a reduction is slack when jumping the hour hand so no biggie. There is an in-house balance spring on the 3186 but I have seen no real evidence it improves the timekeeping quantifiably and indeed my 3186 is slightly worse in that regard to your 3185. Your crown issue worries me slightly and I would personally want that looked at since it may lead ultimately to cross threading.

I know what you mean about the bracelet. You may notice that when I posted pics of my black dial it was on a leather strap, that's the reason. The Rolex bracelets up until about 2010 just aren't all that great compared with the contemporary Omega equivalent. That said all watch bracelets were superficial and tinny until the 90s and Omegas were no exception: back then Rolex were better than most and just lagged a bit in improvement. I am glad the lume has proven adequate. I did raise that as an issue but hopefully you can live with it and the other strengths make up for the persistence weakness.

Mil aircrew eh? I should think the watch will be perfect and is a much nicer choice IMO than the Bremonts or Breitlings the flyboys over here prefer. Everyone knows any patina gained on military service automatically adds value to a watch so you are fine on that score! FJ or multi engine?
Edited:
 
Posts
404
Likes
330
Nicely done, don't lose too much sleep over the 3185 vs 3186 issue since the differences are so minimal as to be mostly marketing smoke and mirrors. I think the main change was a reduction is slack when jumping the hour hand so no biggie. There is an in-house balance spring on the 3186 but I have seen no real evidence it improves the timekeeping quantifiably and indeed my 3186 is slightly worse in that regard to your 3185. Your crown issue worries me slightly and I would personally want that looked at since it may lead ultimately to cross threading.

I know what you mean about the bracelet. You may notice that when I posted pics of my black dial it was on a leather strap, that's the reason. The Rolex bracelets up until about 2010 just aren't all that great compared with the contemporary Omega equivalent. That said all watch bracelets were superficial and tinny until the 90s and Omegas were no exception: back then Rolex were better than most and just lagged a bit in improvement. I am glad the lume has proven adequate. I did raise that as an issue but hopefully you can live with it and the other strengths make up for the persistence weakness.

Mil aircrew eh? I should think the watch will be perfect and is a much nicer choice IMO than the Bremonts or Breitlings the flyboys over here prefer. Everyone knows any patina gained on military service automatically adds value to a watch so you are fine on that score! FJ or multi engine?

Nah, I'm not too fussed about the 3186 to be honest. Mine may be one of the last 3185's - you never know, it might mean something some day! Perfectly happy with the timekeeping so far, and I can live without the rehaut engraving.

It's a shame the bracelet is the way it is - if I could size it better to make it more comfortable that would help but hey ho. I found the lume to stay readable for a good 6 hours in darkness, after a sufficient charge. That will do for me, although the hands themselves are a little weak.

I know A LOT of colleagues with Breitlings, mostly Quartz Aerospace versions they bought when they graduated or whatever. For a couple of years I've been showing them up with my 'Moonwatch', time to give the Rollie a go!

Seriously, I think this is going to be a great tool, and I hope that it does acquire a patina, instead of just getting trashed! I have a background in multi's but have diversified a little in recent years.
 
Posts
9,726
Likes
15,318
Very good! My good pal who is ex RN FAA has a lovely Sea Harrier Aerospace with squadron markings which I covet but it needs a new module at great expense so he is a bit disillusioned with it.
 
Posts
3,901
Likes
44,913
The headline has the wrong reference number... 16570 it is (as you have written in the post). Not 16750...

These fly somewhat under the radar and I like them a lot. Something that I would like to add as an important part (for me) of its tool intention - is visible lugholes. Up to around 2003 they had them. For me it is a dealbreaker if not having them.

To make a 16570 even better and yet more discrete - it is not difficult to remove the wart from the crystal... I have not done it yet but it is just a matter of time.

26971102670_9b1940b476_b.jpg
26639510204_15fc52ab08_b.jpg
27212210466_f3408e0f98_b.jpg

I also like the black variety and could not resist one of those too... (with visible lugholes of course)

6291271356_ce2dc0f57d_b.jpg
6290751397_e4baab7fb1_b.jpg
 
Posts
3,102
Likes
8,116
Great review Max. I have a D series ExpII, which I think puts it in the 2005-06 time period.
 
Posts
404
Likes
330
The headline has the wrong reference number... 16570 it is (as you have written in the post). Not 16750...

Good catch, thanks! Edited!
 
Posts
707
Likes
3,722
Nice. Perhaps the most undervalued sports Rolex today.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Posts
8,184
Likes
19,227
...To make a 16570 even better and yet more discrete - it is not difficult to remove the wart from the crystal... I have not done it yet but it is just a matter of time...

This is something I have also considered doing, but I rather source a new crystal without the cyclops. Here's the look of the E1 with a wart-less crystal (pic borrowed from the Web)

馃榾
 
Posts
17,658
Likes
26,760
I think the bubble is inherently part of the Rolex design language, like the kidneys on a BMW.
 
Posts
8,184
Likes
19,227
I think the bubble is inherently part of the Rolex design language, like the kidneys on a BMW.

it's deeper than that...is in their DNA/genes.. 馃槣
 
Posts
9,726
Likes
15,318
Ewwwww. The one on the right looks like the Seadweller with its puny tiny date i.e. all wrong. Cyclops all the way. It does serve a useful purpose.

Bonus marks if anyone can name a Seamaster model which used a Cyclops. There is at least one...