@@chrisyoung506 I don’t remember, did it years ago. I think I got a 16mm or something and had to shave it down. Look it up in the forums you can probably get the exact size needed. Worked like a charm though and It’s still in there til this day though! Haven’t worn the watch in about a year It needs to go to RSC. Have an explorer 1 now that gets most of my time.
I paid an extra thousand for the 16610 with engraved Rehaut.Nobody see’s it but I do and I love it being a bit of new on a older watch. I also love the aluminum insert verse the shiny ceramic. Just my likes and I understand everyone is different but I feel like it sits perfectly on the wrist. Edit: I wish I bought five when they were under 5k and GMT’s were 5k Nice 👍
I just got this watch. It was never on my radar...Until I saw it in person and my jaw dropped. The camera does not pickup the copper/red tones like the eye does. It looks way better in person than on camera. I now have this to go along with my Sead Dweller 43 and DJ41 Blue Motif.
I think they simply kept them about the same while blowing up the hour markers. I’d prefer bolder hands but I might regret how such a finished producer ends up looking.
@Jamal you are correct. Initially, I was looking at the portion that has the lume, but that model goes all the way to the indices. I think it's the glare / reflection that doesn't allow to see the tip of the minutes hand. Beautiful piece, I'm saving for the 40mm version.
No sure why they got rid of the 39mm only to come out with a 40mm. The core of the Explorer’s charm is being a 1960s sized sports watch. This is just a big blah.
I’ve owned both the 39mm (MK2) and new 36mm Explorer. Bought the 39 while I was waiting for the AD to get the 36 in and I can see the benefits of both. I have a smaller wrist and love the 36mm but for some people that is clearly a turn off. It’s just Rolex trying to capture both consumers segments. I think they killed off 39mm since there was the issue with the “T-Rex hands” and even “fixing” it with the MKII there was controversy over whole thing. Easier to just kill it off, make news with the new 36mm not to mention the 2 tone, then release a 40mm that’s properly proportioned without the baggage of the 214270. A lot of people think 36 is just too dainty in the world of dinner plate watches. I think it’s just Rolex trying to make as much money as possible and both options are there.
These are the two MUST haves imho. The two tone rootbeer is just insanely amazing in person. I saw Dwayne Johnson The Rock wearing it and heard its his favorite. Google it.
i have a 2022 batman, the cyclops are sooooo ugly, i also have a 2001 14060M 2 line sub and love the fact it has no date so much cleaner, i dont miss no date on it. i got it as 2001 is when my daughter was born, and i will give to her as her 30th. she has tried on already and looks awesome on her.
I must admit i tried the 36mm on and for me personally it was too dainty and feminine for me. Always wanted the 39mm and will just have to wait for that to come back one day. Wear it in good health.
Thanks for your service (even though I'm Canadian!) Have owned all manner of Sub -- vintage, date, SD version (which is pretty much a Sub on steroids), modern ceramic, etc. I've bonded by far most with my current 14060M 2-liner -- a 2002 Y-serial, on original DT4-stamped bracelet blade. That's partly because I'm old-fashioned and lean heavily toward early timepieces as I feel they have much greater "character", though I'm not bashing modern and have owned plenty. What I like most is that these neo-vintage, non-ceramic, non-maxi-case models have less heft, less bling, more 'tool-iness' as Hans Wilsdorf likely originally intended, and dials that patina -- even if only slightly, if they have luminova rather than tritium; and, the original bezel's show their age because they're metalic, not space-age ceramics. My expectation is that the generation of 14060 Subs (pre-"M" and "M"), and of course its predecessor generation of 5512's and 5513's, will signficantly appreciate in value over time as compared with their more modern, ageless counterparts. Anyone agree with any of the above?!
Congrats but I prefer the 114270. The 124270 is too dainty n wears much smaller. The lug width is narrower and bracelet taper is too aggressive. The proportions n symmetry wears too small on a male wrist
Congrats. Its a great and beautiful watch. I was very lucky and got a call after 8 weeks to get my 124270. Absolutely love it. So easy on the wrist and easy to read day or night. Actually I gotta say the lume is beautiful and so bright in darkness, especially after getting a 10 second zap from a UV light. I can testify that the lume is readable from 11pm - 5 30am 😀
