Huge errors in this video: in the parts when you list the specs, you show your old 36mm rather than the new 40mm... Also when you say "this is the 40mm on my wrist, this is the 36mm on my wrist" you are wearing the same 36mm watch.
@@samlee3056 Nope, it's 38.5mm. What two points on the case do you feel could be 38.5mm on a 40mm watch? Everyone seems in denial of this! Watch the short I did of it and the OP41 (which measures 39.5mm).
@@samlee3056 The explorer 40 has a shorter lug to lug than the 39 and measures 38.6 mm across. It''s not a larger explorer than the 39, they just tinkered with the proportions a little bit and gave it a wider bracelet.
The Explorer 39 (MK2) will be a future classic! It wears lovely on the wrist and the matte dial and the Explorer font at the bottom make ist very unique. The new Explorer 40 looks great though!
I’m still delighted with my 124270 on my 17cm wrist. I love the way it flies under the radar. It’s worn regularly, and carries the scratches with style.
Hey Adrian great vid as always! One idea to make reviews like this even better would be to indicate during the b-roll showing two very similar watches which is what. Hard to tell in this video every time you show side by side if we are looking at the 36, 39, or 40mm version of the Explorer. A simple subtle legend next to each would greatly help. Thank you!
I’m very happy with my discontinued 39 mk2, FOR ME it is the perfect watch, the sweet spot for my 16,5 wrist, FOR ME nothing wrong with it dimensions, how it tapers oooh 😍 and i absolutely prefer the “ Explorer “ text at the bottom and the matte dial. If i could only have one watch that would be my choice , it is by far the watch that i wear the most , I love the 40 mm? Yes of course , it looks great! But i wouldnt change my 39 for it
Hate to say it Adrian, but something's off about your channel, in recent months I've hardly felt like watching your recent content, and you was my favourite watch content creator by far! Think things have felt different on your channel since you started doing that podcast thing on the other channel. Take this video for example, it's so odd that you used so many clips and photos of your old 36mm explorer rather than "hands on" with the new 40mm, like you showed the specs over a clip of your 36mm, just bizarre! I have to say I was underwhelmed by this video pal, I thought you actually were "hands on" with the 40mm, as in worn it for a few days and were able to give a solid review. Rather you wore it for a very brief moment at watches and wonders and then gave a "review" based those photos and videos at watches and wonders. Hope you don't take my criticisms to harshly. You were one of my favourite watch content creators, and guess I'm just hoping for the old vibe. Been a subscriber since your very first video's (pre the skx bleaching days).
Thanks a lot for the detailed thoughts. Always happy to listen when people like you take the time to share their criticisms in such detail. I can see how the title can be a little misleading. There seems to be an unwritten rule for titles: - Introducing: read the press release and saw the press shots. - Hands-on: actually got to experience the watch and put it on the wrist. - Week on the wrists: detailed review having spent significant time with the watch I had to hustle to get this Rolex appointment at W&W after being told I wasn't allowed to record, so I couldn't capture good shots. So typically this video would sit between introducing and hands-on, however, because I'm so experienced with the Explorer range, I'm confident in my analysis, despite the short time spent with the watch. It's always odd around W&W because the channel focuses on new watches, rather than "stories", experiences, or thoughts. I hope that adds more context.
@@BarkandJack I think you inserted pics of your 36mm at times when you were describing the 40mm bay accident… even the spec rundown text for the 40mm is overlayed on top of an image of your 36mm watch. I think you may have inserted the wrong footage at certain spots.
I agree, the 39mm is my favorite one. 39mm is perfect, except not having the 70 hrs, I’m good with my 39mm. Adrian never liked it, but he also said the explorer II 42mm was too big…now owns one.
@@mg8571 .. something that he didn’t mention either was that the 39 mm Explorer has a flat black, almost dark brown dial, which I hope will fade more with time. This new Explorer seems to have a dark glossy black dial
Yeah i held up my 214270 to the screen of my computer while watching this and I have to bring up the point that the Explorer text at 6 o'clock just makes that watch so much more better balanced ( for me) I don't know why more people aren't talking about this feature. Too much negative space on the bottom of this dial ( IMO )
Oh good… I’m glad I caught you before you made the mistake of a lifetime… Whatever you do, don’t trade that 214270 for a 1016… The 1016 has the Explorer text at the top side of the dial… what a piece of 💩… what were the designers thinking? 🤣 how on earth did it ever become an icon with such an “imbalanced” dial 🙄🙄🙄
Yeabut, didn't you wax lyrical about the 39mm Explorer? Yes, I'm sure you did. Your comments at 4:14 in your review states that it is" your favourite watch in (your collection and unbeatable". ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-eGaRvSoDmb8.html And now you don't like it so much? Hmmm! For what it's worth, I have the 39mm version (since 2019) and I love it. I have no intention of letting it go.
I just love my 39mm grail version, its perfect size, matt dial and the fact that it is discontinued ;-) Although classic but not necessarily boring in its aesthetics, the Explorer 1 is directly recognizable for collectors and simply perfect in its execution. Whatever the diameter of this timepiece, 36, 39 or 40mm, the Explorer 1 is a cult watch 🙂
I'm sure the 40mm variation is great. I love my 39mm 214270. I have well over a dozen Rolexes and often default to the 214270. I also have OP 114300's because they pretty much share the case size. Never could bond w the 36mm version but that's not unusual if you've never bonded w that size.
@@vianouche1 It's been called "The Collection Killer' for good reason! Everything about the 214270 is right for me. On some of my other Rolexes I put on Rubber B bands but the bracelet and clasp especially is just perfection on the 214270. Great on the wrist.
Love the 39mm and like the Explorer text at the bottom, feels more consistent with the sport watch series and fills the lower dial better. Not sure how the 1 mm bracelet width difference makes the 40 mm perfect and the 39 crap 😅.
Sorry Adrian but this video is a misleading. The only footage of the 40mm is the repeated under-the-cuff shot from W&W. The rest of the clips are the two 36mm models you’ve shown in the past, overlayed with specs for the 40mm. Don’t mean to hate, virtually no-one has the new releases yet so you had to work with the footage you already had. But this might mislead prospective buyers of the 40mm.
Great video. However, I find it rather confusing when you talk about the 39mm and then show the 40mm (or the 36mm). In fact I haven’t seen the 39mm anywhere in the video. Did I miss it? This may seem a bit odd in a comparison video (based on your Insta post). In fact, the 21mm bracelet to me looks too wide for the case, there’s not enough tapering. Anyway, you need to see them in real life in order to judge.
I have the 39mm version and disagree completely. To me, the proportions are perfect. I've never noticed any "bulbousness" of the case. And sorry, but I'll take a 20mm lug width over 21mm any day. I feel that the 40mm Explorer is like a 41mm OP, the size of the face becomes too big and makes it look more bare and spartan than the 39mm. My 39mm is one of the only two watches that I will never sell (Other is Pelagos 39... also perfect in its dimensions IMO). I also love the matte black 39mm dial over a glossy black.
Great video, as always. Definitely disagree on the 39mm Explorer though! The proportions on the 39 were spot on. Also the “Explorer” text at the bottom of the dial on the 39 balanced nicely with the Rolex OP text up top.
.. something that he didn’t mention either was that the 39 mm Explorer has a flat black dial, which I hope will fade more with time. This new Explorer seems to have a dark glossy black dial.
There's such a huge variety of watches, it must be true that people like different takes on the art. It's good that you've found something that speaks to you.
The images in this video are all over the place, they don't match the watch version Adrian talks about, even the part when the text summary of the 40mm specifications come up the image is of the old 36mm
Been wearing the 40mm for one month now and I thought you were exaggerating a bit, turned out you were not: it is a amazzzzzing watch - so elegant yet simple and under the radar!
Rolex - adds 1mm to a watch bracelet and case Adrian - They have just done it right, I absolutely love this watch, I feel like they have captured the essence that is the explorer
I still prefer the 39 which is almost perfect in my opinion. I especially prefer its dial with the 'Explorer' at the bottom over the 36 and the 40 with the 'Explorer' at the top.
Good to hear your take on it but it was quite annoying/confusing when you’re talking about the 39mm or 40mm Explorer and at the same time you’re constantly showing shots of your 114270. I even believe both shots are of your 114270 at 8:10-8:15 when you’re supposed to be comparing both of them.
Should be noted for viewers the watch shown @2:49 & @3:52 when the specifications come up do not match. The watch shown is Adrian's 36mm 14270, so keep that in mind as you read the specs for the new 40mm 224270.
If you think a 20mm bracelet looks odd on a 39mm watch head you won’t like it on the 40mm Submariners maxi case..or indeed the GMT’s. 21mm on the 44 Deepsea and 44 yachtmaster. Not forgetting Omegas entire catalogue. 2Omm on 42-43 cases a-plenty. How about Grand Seiko’s 19mm lug widths on 40 heads.. the list goes on. I agree, my new Sub 41’s 21 mm bracelet looks far more balanced than the previous reference and so does any wider bracelet on any watch..but to dismiss the Ex 39 because it looks unbalanced doesn’t make sense. Great vid btw
Is the new 40mm Explorer even in this video? When you say this is a 40mm watch and this is a 36mm watch, you show the same watch? There’s no coronet at 6 when you say it’s a 40.
I believe the 39mm is the best overall model as it is the one that has the best balanced text on the dial. All the others appear to be too top heavy. Just my opinion.
I apologize, but I must respectfully disagree with the sentiments expressed in this video. As an owner of the 214270, I find its 39mm size to be perfect. There was a time when the 36mm size was widely regarded as ideal, regardless of wrist size, but I believe that the 39mm size has surpassed it in terms of suitability. With the recent release of the 40mm Explorer, which does not boast any major innovations, it seems arbitrary to declare it the nearly perfect size. I do not believe that you are expressing your genuine opinion and suspect that you may be receiving compensation for promoting this view in the video. Nevertheless, I appreciate your content and your contributions to the watch community.
Nah, still love my 39 over this 40. The 21mm bracelet/lug width looks visually oversized to me. I would love to see the new 40mm Explorer on one of your nato straps to see the contrast of stainless steel case and a fabric strap to see if I still think so.
I believe that 39mm is the perfect size. The 36 is a bit too small and the 40mm a tiny fraction too big. Which ever size you choose you can’t really go wrong - it’s an explorer.
Good take on both sizes. re: 3:34 I do think that your watch does say something about you though. I love asking people “Tell me about your watch”… cause there’s almost always a story behind it (except 🍎 watches 😳)
Seriously overpriced and overrated as are Rolex in general. There's far better brands for far more realistic prices. Imagine paying that much just for the name!? Crazy. A fool and his money are soon parted.
Reminds me of my Aqua Terra. In my collection (Speedmaster in Hesalite, pre-wave dial Seamaster) it gets noticed the least. But with a 72 hour power reserve, display caseback, METAS certified, twin barrel, silicon balance spring, etc it has the far superior motor under the hood. I would love to add this Explorer to my collection (or an Air King) but the nonsense you have to go through to even get on a list with an AD has put me off the brand. They are great watches for sure, but I'm weary of having to prove I'm worthy enough to own one. I sell a luxury product (wine) and some limited editions sell for several hundred dollars a bottle. I have never once treated a customer like they were doing me a favor buying our wines.
I'm very confused about what I am seeing in this video. You put up graphics for the 40mm Explorer on video that shows the 14270. Was any of your b roll footage of the new 40mm (besides the marketing clips?) or was it the 124270 that we are seeing? When you say "This a 40mm watch is on your wrist..." again that's an older Explorer 5:09. Something is off here.
I bought your vid about the Sub being overpriced, although I don't agree (but I did get my 124060 from the AD) and I'm a one watch collector. I can't fathom how you don't apply that logic to this extremely basic black dialed watch. There's 20 watches better and cheaper. Ah logic, it only appears when we want it to.
Absolutely agree with your analysis on this, Adrian. Understated elegance, a true sense of purpose, and a lack of flashiness for the sake of it makes this a lovely watch. I own a Rolex Datejust 41mm black dial smooth bezel, oyster bracelet, and a Tudor BB58 in Navy and I like to feel like both achieve their original intentions extremely well. Nothing is added that doesn’t need to be there.
Explorer - indeed for the person who likes watches, versus just wants luxury stuff. The Explorer is the perfect go anywhere, stand up to anything, watch. I just got the Explorer40, and it is just right.
I'm in the same boat, 7.5" wrist but it's relatively flat and wide. I've got a couple of vintage Seiko's that are 37mm but my usual rotation is currently between 40mm and 43mm.
@@khaaaaaaaaaannn Big wrists unite! I also have that flat/wide thing going on. While some struggle with lugs hanging off their wrists we can cover the whole lug to lug length with room to spare. Some channels bash larger watches and I agree that you shouldn’t wear a hub cap if you have more svelte wrists, but those of us with gorilla wrists need bigger sizes.
Adrian, thank you for the review. One comparison you didn’t mention is the lug to lug width comparison between the 39 and 40mm watches - surely that is a better indicator of how large it will wear (rather than the bracelet to case size ratio). Perhaps it could also be confirmed that the 40 is in fact thicker than the 39mm - 11.6 vs 11.2mm (depending on source)
@@mdns-1017 ANYBODY!!!! even the "wrist guys" always talk about the thickness and extend of the wrist but not the width :D I always have to laugh when I hear them talk about the extend.
Another important indicator of the wearing experience is dial size. For instance the dial on the Explorer 39 is larger than the Sea Dwellers. I can wear an SD42 but an Explorer 2 (42mm) wears too large for my taste. It's dial is huge.
I have a mk1 39mm, I have to say the new 40mm looks great. I do however prefer the Explorer text location on the 39mm. Looks like the crown on the 40mm might be bigger than then the 39mm? I won't be changing my watch but hopefully rolex will keep the 36mm and 40mm in the range for many years.
I came here and watched your videos on the 36mm and the 40mm and now I’m even more clueless about which to buy. Stop loving the explorer so I can form an opinion, please.
Boring watch doesn’t mean bad watch, it’s a matter of opinion and perspective. For me it just means under the radar and one that I can wear without being afraid of being mugged, or cataloged as rich or pouch. I owned the Tudor Ranger and I absolutely love it, when I tried it on, I fell in love, its wearability, the T-Fit clasp, the MT5402 COSC movement, the perfect watch for me. Despite that many people and RU-vidrs called it boring. Even on an episode of AET Andrew said it was overhyped and George wanted it out. I don’t get it. And I paid €2930 in November 2022 so just before the price increase, I don’t call that boring I call that a bargain (and I’m not being condescendant, I just mean compared to the watches market). Even more when the Rolex Explorer 40mm is priced at €7750. If the watch is not the one for you because you don’t like the dial, the size, the bracelet, the colour, then just move on. Don’t waste your energy on hating on a watch that you won’t buy and won’t change anyone else’s mind if they like it. I’m totally with you Adrian or should I say Captain Boring (I’m still shocked Andrew came up with that tee-shirt at W&W and you were not aware of it, it should’ve been yours), but I’m on your team 😊 One’s boring watch is to the other one the perfect watch. Do you and don’t listen to others’ opinion.
Great comment! I got my Ranger in February this year and absolutely love it. It has all the things that I like in watches. I don't care about others calling it boring. For me, it's perfect!
I've got a 39 and there's so much toing and froing about sizing, personally I think they're all cool by definition of the watch itself for all the reasons stated in your video 🤷🏼♂️
I like it. I definitely prefer the matt dial of the 39 and the much hated wider spacing but its nice to be able to get a medium size option. The 36 is a totally different but equally valid experience. Great watches
They should just have kept the 39 mm. version and could have made a "face lift" now if they wanted. I have a 214270 MK2 and don't think the 36 mm. was big enough
Doesn't even come close to the 39mm.. Rolex maxicase style is incredible imo. This 40mm and the new 36mm dont have it.. that define line between the larger case/lugs and the slimmer abrupt bracelet lug is one of the things i love about Rolex whatches. Rhe problem you have with the 39mm version, is what makes me love it.
Had the 124270 for about a year and I did love the watch but, from time to time, I felt it just didn't look right on my 7.25 inch wrist. So I'm very interested in seeing the 40mm in the metal.
I don't think you can generalise that a 20mm lug width is wrong for a 40mm watch. Rolex sports watches have been 40mm with 20mm bracelet for eons and the 5 digit refs in particular have always looked perfectly balanced. I admit a rotating bezel is thicker, making the dial and crystal smaller, and thus the watch wears smaller. But in the case of the new explorer, I still think a 20mm bracelet would have been the right size. I certainly never felt the 39mm explorer was visually unbalanced on a 20mm bracelet. I do agree that overall the 40mm explorer is a marginally better design than the 39 - the subtle tweaks to the hand sizes and shaping of the lugs, the larger crown etc, but it's certainly not a chalk and cheese comparison. But to be fair you have handled both, and the digital experience will never compare with getting metal on the wrist.
Hi Adrian I'm one of the converted, totally agree with you I ,fell in love with the explorer in 2010 and saved and saved and in 2018 I pulled the trigger on a new 2018 version 214270 when they were available in the window , remember those days ?? I have never really taken it of and I won't wear anything else
The 39mm was my grail watch. Was very disappointed when they discontinued it. I tried (really tried) to like the 36. Even went to the AD and tried it on multiple times. Even my SA suggested I try on a different watch. He commented "You seem to like a lot of other watches ( Even the E2) far more than the 36". He was right. Now I want that 40.
Sorry this video is absolutely misleading , at 2:52 it was your 14270 Explorer in the picture however the stats beside it was the new Explorer 40mm, and also a number of times you were talking about yhe 39mm versions but in the video it was either the new 36mm or your old 36mm Explorer. There are many potential Explorer buyers are watching this video and it is just misleading. I understand you have to upload videos constantly to gain viewership but you can wait until you have the full hands on experience to talk about the new 40mm Explorer
The 39mm case with a 20mm bracelet is actually equally proportional to a 40mm case with a 21mm bracelet. The 20mm bracelet on the 36mm is what looks off. For me, the 39mm hits the sweet spot.
@@edrader which makes it aesthetically pleasing. I’m talking about older references with a 36mm case and 20mm bracelets. The 39mm one looks aesthetically proportional too but not sure what Adrian is talking about here, he doesn’t make any sense.
But they are different 20/39 does is not the same as 21/40. And the lugs on the 40 blend into the case farther up/down the sides so the 39 does look more bulbous - by a little bit. I like certain things about the 39mm better for sure (Explorer at 6 o'clock), 20mm spacing, etc but the case shape of the 40mm is slightly "better" IMO.
I still think the 39mm mk2 is the better version….40mm is too much like everything else they do and now too chunky. You do a comparison video but don’t even show the 39mm version your comparing it too??
This is my favorite release of W&W, I can't wait to see it in the metal. Any lug to lug measurements? - I don't mind how big it is, I always thought the new 36 (35mm) was a bit too diminutive compared to the true 36s of DJ and OP varieties.
Love my 39mm It’s the ultimate explorer . Love it’s aesthetics and size . The 36 looks extremely odd on my 6:75 wrist . The 36 looks great on some ladies
It would be handy if you clipped to the actual watch version you are talking about so we can visually see what you mean instead of talking and showing us the model that doesn't associate
You show many different shots and are talking about varying explorer references during each frame that's it's impossible to tell which reference is being referenced within frame throughout the video.
Modern 39 Explorer 1 is a keeper for me, needless to say that it is well known for being a strap monster, love that i could wear the watch with any strap that pleases me. It is such a shame that the current 36 and 40 aren't strap friendly anymore with Rolex turning them into a strap chewing monster. i love how 39 explorer 1 being a reiteration of classic explorer with a touch of vintage by having a matte dial, the lumed 369 for MKII perfected it knowing that 369 in vintage explorer are lumed too. My OCD also could not overlook the concave on the center of the dial for the current explorer 1, just seem like a flaw in production method to me.
Love the explorer in 36 and 40 absolutely timeless stunning. I declared an interest about a year ago for the 36mm but sadly no watch. I would like to say I have now bought a Tudor Ranger and am more than happy with my perches and less than half the price
hmm. generally i really like your reviews adrian, but i was confused during this video which watches we were looking at, whether the 36, 39 or the 40. subtitles might have helped! also it's nice to know the lug to lug, the dial diameter, and the bezel diameter. these matter so much but are never published by the brands. it's nice to get actual calipers on a watch.
I have the 36mm Explorer followed by getting a 40mm Air King, and discovered I did like the 40mm size better on my wrist (my wrist is small to average), but preferred the face of the Explorer. I think the 40mm Explorer will hit the sweet spot. I agree size does not matter, but I find I do prefer a slightly larger watch than the 36mm. Finally, I know there has been a lot of hate on the 39mm Explorer, but I rather like that "Explorer" is moved to the bottom half of the face on the 39mm, and I prefer the matte black over the gloss. The awkwardness of the bracelet is solved with a leather strap instead.
It seems to me that the proportions of the new 40mm (with 21mm lug width)are similar to the ones of the older 36mm models whereas the 39mm has similar proportions to the new 36mm in terms of the relation of case size to lug width and tapering. So if you say it doesn‘t work for the 214270, how can it then work for the 124270?
That's one huge Explorer I 😅. Like the DateJust and the OP, the Explorer I should always be a 36mm watch (IMO). Some Rolex models work well in the larger sizes, but the classics just look better in the small 36mm size
@@conradcoolerfiend I have a 7.5" wrist, not small, not massive and I prefer a 36mm Explorer I and DateJust. A Rolex 36mm wears like a 38-39mm, because of the male end-link. A 40mm wears like a 42-43mm for the same reason. All that aside, wrist size really has nothing to do with it, that's just personal taste and style IMO. The Explorer I 40mm just still looks strange to me. I think it has something to do with the thickness of the bezel, that looks chunky and oversize...a little off, just as it did on the 39mm. I respect Adrian's opinion, God knows he loves an Explorer 😂. I just see it slightly differently
Adrian, the “40mm” on your 6 1/2” wrist was actually your 14260 36mm.🤦♂️ The 40mm isn’t a bad looking watch. But, like you I prefer the 36mm. I have the 114260.
