What is better about the size in the 60th anni version? The AT RM was available in 36, 39, 41 and the frankly ridiculous 49mm so I can't see how you can hold size against it when there is so much choice.
I had both watches and they are great. I don't like the proportions of the 214270, so among those two would recommend the Railmaster. If you would had asked about 114270 would had said Explorer hands down as its proportions are perfect
Okay I think it's time to spend a bit more time with the 114270...a recurring theme on this thread is how ideal that piece is (as a runner up to the 1016). Thanks for the thoughts!
I had it twice (had the 214270 once, replaced by first 114270), beautiful piece. The only reason sold the second one was to fund the purchase of my Day Date 18239
I've only owned the (36mm) 114270 explorer, never the 39mm. I currently have the 39mm Railmaster but no Explorer anymore for direct comparison.
I have to say I love the Railmaster - very understated, gorgeous case design and so versatile. I would definitely recommend it.
Hi Colin. I thought we agreed that you were going to post a pic of a random knackered Franken, say your Uncle left it to you and ask what it was worth? Play the game mate.
ps get an Avatar pic at some point, that also winds them up round here 😉
I had it twice (had the 214270 once, replaced by first 114270), beautiful piece. The only reason sold the second one was to fund the purchase of my Day Date 18239
I've just gone through this exact exercise and went the Railmaster 39 route. Without being able to go the 1016 route, the newer Explorers just couldn't quite stack up for me, and the Heritage Ranger is just too large. The plan all along was to get it on a canvas or leather strap, which is what I'm working on now!
