Видео

I wonder what I got wrong here. Was I treated right? Maybe some people like to be treated this way, but I don't. I don't like bullies.

Thanks. I had to learn how this type of watch worked and wanted to share it, so people would have it easier to understand them. The brand is great, and so are their watches. You'd be really happy with any of them. The Mako 3 seems like a great option if you only need to check two or three timezones while traveling. It's a really compelling option if you find one.

It's a mustard ridge. You can find one at Watchgecko. Here's a version: www.watchgecko.com/products/watchgecko-ridge-military-nylon-watch-watch-strap-yellow

@@TheWatchFrame Thank you sir

Thanks a lot @sebstall for your words. As a matter of fact, I've pretty much decided to keep it unless I need the money should things not straighten up soon. As you suggest, I've been wearing through the summer to many places, including mountains, exploring and travelling. It's really a greater watch than I expected, despite its shortcomings. There's kind of a magic in this watch that I can't really point the finger on. This said, I will make a video about it.

Yes, the CW is superior and if you like that one, it will not disappoint, but yes, it's more expensive. I think the black version would be the one to go too. I also think the CW is more versatile and wearable given the slimness of the watch. On the other hand I don't really miss the date on the Aviera, but that might just be me :)

Thanks for commenting, but let me unpack a bit, so I can explain my perspective and intention here. Actually, I'm not comparing as "field" watches per se, but as adventure, exploring watches. I mean, civil made watches to alleged exploration and adventures in the mountain, travelling, caves, crossing rivers, glaciers and the like. On the other hand, I think the Explorer is not a "great" GADA, as it's not really designed to go to any place. For exploration and true adventure, it's a bit out of place. While it can do it, for certain, it's not the intention of the watch. It's more of an EDC watch instead. The Summiteer is more of a GADA watch, or even the Alpinist. The third thing is that I'm comparing watches that I owned at the moment of comparison. While it's true I had a Hamilton Khaki Field automatic, I sold it long ago. I have recently bought a Benrus 3061. This one is a great "field" watch but in my humble opinion it's not the best for exploration, as it has important shortcomings, specially water resistance. Still one of my favorite watches and worth talking about it in a future video. I short, I tried to compare four watches that I currently own that somehow resemble or are linked to the Explorer and or the "exploring" lore. Of course, there are a lot of watches that could also be compared here, but the video would surely be way too long :)

@@TheWatchFrame Now I see that our definition of GADA differs. I also did not understand that it was based on your current watches. My interruption of GADA, adds the ability to wear it in a dressed up situation as well. The Explorer add some polish, along with brushed finish. It has the ability to go to the field ,as well as, fit under a dress shirt, with a sports jacket. For my personal travels, that include, hunting, fishing, diving and places I sometimes don’t want to drawn attention to myself, I tend to choose a less expensive watch, brushed finish, easy to read dials and with a date (personal preference), or a G-Shock. For general travel and light field use, I like the new black lacquer Aqua Terra. Another, is the very inexpensive, great field watch, the Bodrrey Voyager. Thankfully there are choices that fit everyone’s needs and wrist size.

@@uncles2000 sure, the Explorer is a great watch, and as a watch by itself, it will reveal itself in the video I'm preparing. There are, as you say, a lot of options fit for many purposes. Thanks for the recommendations.

Frank Bullitt sure does!

Thanks a lot!

I feel honored. Thanks a lot!

Thanks. I've decided to keep the watch for the moment being. The last months have proven how good this watch is in all environments.

Gracias. No recuerdo el envío, pero no suele ser mucho. Sobre los veinte y pico euros (si es que lo cobraban, que me quiere sonar que sí) y de aduanas la cosa anduvo en torno a los 130 euros. Creo que no llegaba a esa cifra.

@@TheWatchFrame sí, para un alpinist de Japón me cobraron 100€, gracias

Thanks!

Have to second this. Was curious on how it works and tou described it perfectly.

@@DonJuanMair thanks!

Thanks a lot. Yes, I forgot to record that. I'm measuring it, and it is 49.5mm, falling almost vertical.

That's thats really helpful. It sounds long but for this style of watch probably okay. Thanks again

@@colintalbot7492 it's not too long, and bear in mind that it contours the wrist nicely. Not much of an issue with smaller wrists.

Well, good question. I guess it all depends. My first thought is towards the Summiteer. It is a worryless watch with a reliable movement, easy to adjust on the fly with the bracelet, and not out of place in any situation. Very light, on par with the Explorer. The Explorer is more comfortable, though. The other option would be the Ranger on a single pass strap, maybe with just another one to change every once and then, an elegant looking one, but not with the bracelet. Although you can easily adjust the bracelet, it might be just a bit too much of a weight for such long periods wearing it. It would withstand anything, but I'd try to make it as light as possible with, as mentioned, using a single pass strap.

@@TheWatchFramethe budget friendly approach has great merit. I think I’d be interested in the idea of a more iconic watch being along for the adventure of a lifetime would be cool to say that it was your “***** watch” Maybe the Ranger cause the Explorer might be too risky.

@@F15ACC2001 sure. That's a very good point, and I've been considering it since my first answer. Either the Explorer or the Ranger would surely work. The idea to attach memories to the pieces. Right now, I'm going to the mountain and the Ranger will be the one I'm carrying.

Well, it's not larger. It looks larger, maybe because of the bezel of the Thresher. What I mean is that being 41 doesn't really appear to wear too large or anything.

Not sure, but most probably yes.

Sure. You can add three or four points to the scratch resistance, but the fact is that it's not really scratch resistant at all. It is the opposite. And the opposite of what you would expect from this type of watch. I even managed to scratch it with my plastic calipers. Maybe the steel of my unit is even softer. I don't know :D. About legibility, I stand by it. If you have good sight, it's ok to average. But with certain light conditions and will all the shininess inside, including the dial, and the bold branding, can be really difficult. That is not the case with the other three watches. It could be a two or three. Maybe, but this is an adventure watch, and being the way it is, maybe as you say about the diminishing returns, seems like a sin to me. The strap-ability is very bad. Very, very bad, and the 19mm, something that really bothers me a lot. And all of that seems weird in an "exploring" watch, unless it's not really conceived to be us such. But I love this watch. And as a watch, is way better than I expected. Even as an adventure watch even. So good is it in general.

Most of my mountaineering years have been while wearing a Casio DW310 from my childhood that I still have. And it's still working. I also got a couple of Casio G5600 one with battery, the NASA approved and the one I use when I really need a beater, and a solar one that now belongs to one of my kids. The problem with these watches is that I can read them easily because of my poor eyesight. I need hour and minute hands. Other than that, these are the true best exploring watches.

Thanks for commenting. It is true that the Explorer is overpriced but mainly because of the brand Rolex. Taking the brand aside, the watch is worth well around 4.000-5.000 euros easily. The movement is simply awesome and the finishing unbelievable. But that's price, not value. We give value to our watches. I'm very happy with the Explorer despite its flaws, but also I really enjoy the Addiedive Rolex 1016 direct design copy, that, on the other hand, allows me to have a glimpse of what the true Explorer, the 1016, could feel like. We find nice watches in all price points and of all natures.

Thanks a lot. Glad you like the video. I've gotten used to smaller watches, maybe because I'm a bit vintage and I look the classic look of this size of watches back in the day when 36 was kind of a jumbo size. So much so, it's really hard to go back to normal 40mm and bigger sizes, except for divers. No I have a 39,5mm Benrus that I really like although the larger size, and the Tudor Ranger, also 39, but I wish it was 36 or 37 the most. The Explorer looks good on my wife, but her size is more around 30 to 34 in the most. Now she's wearing a Swiss Army our brother-in-law gave us, which is quartz. It's a diver style watch and that size really does look spot on her. But she's been wearing 36mm for some time. Hope your wife enjoys the Explorer. It is so comfortable, and for you, give it a try once in a while. It takes a few days to really understand the appeal of this size.

As a tough adventure watch, the Ranger is awesome. It also works as a one watch to own, but there I will make a comparison too and things change a bit. The Explorer is a great watch, only not that well adapted to adventure as one would have thought. Enjoy your Ranger!

Thanks so much!!! Really happy to read something like this.

Yeah, that's probably so. Funny you mention the Addiesdive. I recently got one, but mechanical, and is looking and performing great.

Actually, I try to take the aesthetic away from the considerations, because the Explorer is the most beautiful watch of the bunch, for me at least. I will tackle the capacity to endure in the other comparison I'm working on, where I compare the watch not as an exploring tool, but as a watch by itself.

@@TheWatchFrame but wouldn’t the capacity to endure be central to the capacity for exploration and adventure? Scratches don’t affect performance

@@tab3Gator that is a good point. To be fair, this is going to be central when talking of the watch by itself, in the other video I'm working on. I have the feeling, totally unscientific of course, and probably flawed, that the difference of endurance is marginally better with the Explorer but that other modern movements are very resistant too. Couldn't quantify as I have had no issues with either and have used and abused some movements of some of my watches, being humble, vintage or modern. From the perspective of pure adventure, which can take somewhere from a few days to a couple of months at the most, any movement with a good case I think is going to endure. That is the reason, too, I wanted to highlight some aspects of the Explorer, like the power reserve and the resistance against magnetism. But to be honest, you have a very good point there. I hope to give more weight to the next video's conclusion, taking all your great feedback!

Yes, a Citizen like that does really make sense.

Yes, hope to try one in the future.

The Ranger really looks cheap in person. I ended up buying the black BB58.

Its the weird yellow-green colour for me. Got offered one few years ago- nice watch, really liked the boxy crystal and how the hands caught light, but i would go for the first gen, if only they made that in 37mm with the master chronometer movement..

The price as new is too high. I agree. I don't mind the printed indices, actually I like them like that as a tool watch. As a forma everyday watch maybe not that much.

I guess the QC is not as consistent with these watches. I have two Traskas and the bracelets are good in both, but there are, for instance, more lume in the Sandstone hour hand than in the Black version.

I guess not. That said, I reached out to Traska with pics and they said they believed the bracelet was not a QC issue. Having had a number of Traska watches, I think it was QC. I’ll be checking out their updated Summiteer though😊

@@anthonyjack1859 I had this issue with one of the on the fly adjustment clasps I got for my Traskas. One of them worked flawlessly, while the other was a bit hard to close. It has solved itself after some time, but nothing changes the fact that one of them was a bit stiff at the beginning. I guess this can happen with other things. Having had a lot of bracelets from Traska and all very comfortable, it stands within possible that one of them is too sharp, but well. These things happen in the best of families.

I had that with the clasps too. Like you said…. Things happen

Thanks a lot. To take the Khaki field really makes sense. It's not like you don't have to be careful, but it hits the right balance of taking care of oneself and the watch.

I'd make a few more changes. I'd use white color for the numerals, polished bezel and drilled lugs. With 36 or 37, it would be awesome and probably perfect.

@@TheWatchFrame yes you are correct. Perfect.

@@TheWatchFrame yes You are 100% correct those are features that would make a good improvement in addition to the reduction to 36-37mm.

Thanks a lot!

I love vintage Omegas but don't own one. My brother in law, who is a watchmaker, does have some, so maybe someday I will be able to borrow one.

I've had experience with CW, and they are really good watches and contenders.

Thanks a lot. The Summiteer is an excellent overal tough watch with its very own design. A true tool watch that is somehow elegant too.

Sure is a great watch that feels so comfortable in the wild and when things get tough!

Thanks. Both are excellent watches worth using and keeping. I might sell the Alpinist as I'm not using it, but it's absolutely great.

The alpinist is such a beauty, i ignored it to my peril lol but the sarb017 has shot up in price as they are getting harder to get. I would keep it forever.

@@CTizerthat's the main reason I'm having my doubts to sell. If I ever regret selling, prices are so high that it would be hard to get it back.

Thanks for the feedback. That might be something to reconsider with the scoring, but it's really really soft, to the extreme. I guess there could be other solutions in this case. On the other hand I have had a lot of vintage 316L steel watches with no issues whatsoever. I think it's more important to take care and washing them after contact with salty water. And I do that with the Explorer too.

@@TheWatchFrame Grade 904L stainless steel and Grade 316L stainless steel score 130 and 150 on the Vickers hardness scale respectively so Grade 316 is 15.38% harder. I’m an engineer sorry 😅 so you should have scored the Rolex 8.5 if you are scoring the other watches 10, there is no logic in what you’ve done, I mean that with respect. The Vickers scale is a linear scale so that would be the correct scoring.

@@Anonymouslyme1 you are probably right. However I address the durability of the watch in the other video I'm preparing comparing the Explorer to the others as pure watches to own :) Thanks for your input. I really appreciate and have learned a lot.

If he scored the watches for corrosion resistance, then yeah, maybe. Could also score it a 10/10 for attention seeking, but that wasn’t a category so keep it moving…I own an explorer and a ranger, and I will agree with this review, especially on the Scratch Resistance aspect. Polished 904L gets scratched reaching into my soft sweatpants pockets, my ranger purchased 7/19/22 looks better than my explorer I got back from rsc for a full service including polishing ($1100…) in October of 2023. Ranger is a daily wear and the explorer is basically a drawer dweller now because I legit like the ranger so much more…and I LOVE my explorer. I just feel like I’m always watching out for the explorer to not get scratched (I also chipped my sapphire crystal in three places prior to servicing) but with my ranger, I need to watch out for whatever could get damaged when my wrist smacks into it.

I love the Ranger, I own one. I agree it's too big. I got a San Martin "homage" to wear daily and they nailed the proportions. Available in 38mm and 36mm.

Excellent video as always. Love your channel. We have similar tastes in watches. I have two that I would love to get your opinion on. The Wolbrook Outrider no date and the Nezumi Terrain. I have the Wolbrook amd really like it, the Nezumi is in my short list.

I'm going to try to keep the Explorer and this will be more clear with the video comparing it as a watch by itself. The Ranger is awesome, but, besides true true hard exploration, the Explorer hits the mark. Even if the Ranger was smaller, I think in some regards it's more toolish than elegant.

@@DennisBible 36 would be great. Even 37 would really work.

@@DennisBible I don't have direct experience with the Wolbrook but generaly I'm attracted to them. In this case, however, I personally don't like the hour hand and having a date, while the Nezumi looks more vintage and classic. I have the Nezumi Aviera and it's really well design. But the specs of the Wolbrook are impresive. I got two straps from the brand, and the quality is superb.

Yes, the size is great and once you get used to that, anything else just seems to be too big.

Thanks. Well, of course, the Summiteer is not as accurate, but keep in mind that the Explorer is "Superlative chronometer" which means it can range from -2 to +2 seconds a day, currently running around +0,5 - 1 seconds a day if not right without any gain or loss many days (combining wearing it during the day and face up during the night). My Traskas can run from anywhere from +1 to +8 a day, depending on, but I have had a lot of experience with this 9xxx series movement and they are pretty reliable solid movements. The Summiteer is somewhat regulated by Traska, but, at the same time, they are pretty simple to adjust, so I usually don't worry too much as I don't really expect the level of accuracy in these watches that I do expect from something costing 12 times more. As a matter of fact, this gives me some peace of mind I don't get from the Explorer or the Ranger. The more you pay, the more you expect from them, but +1 to +8 from a 600 Euros watch, is quite good. Actually pretty good.

@@TheWatchFrameThat accuracy in a Traska is actually pretty good. They are beautiful watches too. I would feel terrible banging up an Explorer (and would naturally be more careful with it) but I wouldn’t feel I’d need to watch myself carefully wearing the Traska. Maybe a good reason to get the Traska then

@@Newsthink of course. I have been using the Traska in the mountain, no worries at all. If I take something more expensive, like the Ranger, then I'm usually more careful. The problem with the Explorer is that I worry more for the watch than of myself, thus not a good policy... :D

@@TheWatchFrame I'm actually shocked that you're sometimes getting only +1 on the Traska. Had no idea it was that good.

@@Newsthink well, sometimes, only sometimes :)

Now it seems his son is in charge of the store, as it seems Eddie is having some health issues. I really hope the customer support has improved, but I have no clue about it. And while I will not buy from this shop again, I also hope Eddie gets better.

After more time considering, I no longer have things as clear as I thought. As an adventure watch, the most logical option is the Ranger. As a watch by itself, able to take something else to the mountain, I'd say the Explorer.

@@TheWatchFrame I've sold my exp 36 and kept my ranger :)

@@relosapulso again, I actually don't know what will do if I have to sell one. I hope to keep both, but at the same time there's a chance I have to sell both, so you never know. Lately I'm moving towards the Explorer 36 because of the size and how comfortable it is. But as a watch for everyday use, in rough situations too, the Ranger is the wise decission.

Lorenzo argues that the function of this type of watch was to be elegant to be worn in more dressy situations, and that's a fair point, but I don't agree. I think this type of watch was elegant enough, having the clear readability at it's core design and passing as a watch for everything besides the main diving function. Thus, a readable hour hand is key, and even a slimmer metal contour would make the hour elegant and closer to the proportions of the minute hand.

Thanks for your words and good question. Do we really need a Rolex? Well, in short, no. And even one could say that even any watch is not much of a need, although I strongly disagree. I'd say that, at least, a general purpose water-resistant and elegant enough watch should be a must for any lady or gentleman, as owning a watch speaks volumes about a person's culture and elegance. Or at least it seems it should be. At the end of the day people are the way they behave, but well, that's another discussion. But back to your question. I'd say the Traska should be a watch good enough for any circumstance and to be your companion for life. Do you need a Rolex? Again. No. But it also depends. It's not about the need. It's more about the "want". The Rolex is, from an objective point of view, a great watch. During the last months I have come to appreciate it more and more, to the extent that now I feel I really want to keep it despite its flaws. Is the Rolex Explorer the greatest watch ever? No. But is closer that I even thought it was. As a watch alone, not considering the brand and the stigma the "Rolex" logo brings, it's an outstanding piece of engineering designed to last a few human lives and to be comfortable as it can get. But it's an expensive item. The price really has to come into the equation because as most luxury brands, the watches are overpriced. The movement inside is awesome; there's no denying it. But you can achieve close enough experiences with more humble movements and watches. So, in short, if you want the watch, because really you don't need it, and you can afford it, go for it. But if not able to afford, then I really think it's, at the end, a better experience to have another more affordable watch you will be more likely to enjoy on an everyday basis. A Rolex is only an everyday watch, provided you would be able to immediately replace it should you lose it somehow.

It is true that I maybe should have not bought this watch in the first place, but when it comes to watch collecting, reason often goes out of the window first. It is also true that you should "never meet your heroes". I should have known better, I guess. Again, this is also part of the learning process we all go through this amazing trip. I do enjoy more affordable watches, and that is what I do know. But I wanted to have something special, the closest thing to the grail I dream of. However, my point is that I had the funds and if things don't turn the wrong way, I could keep it, but the Explorer is not designed to be an exploring watch at all. I'm working on a video that will prove this point, but at the same time, and to my own surprise, it totally can be used as such, even considering the price. And I agree that for hard jobs, a Casio can do it. Most of my mountaineering has been with a Casio on. Now I can't use digital display watches anymore, but I use the Traska or other watches instead. Pretty good solution. But never a smartwatch, which I don't consider as a real watch but an anti-watch. These things are just mobile device based gadgets that resemble a watch, but can't really function as one. But to each their own!

@TheWatchFrame Watch collecting is a very nice hobby. Whether affordable or expensive, it does not matter. It is okay that you get out of love of any of the watches you own, but your video was mostly about how expensive and fragile this watch is because you encountered some sort of a problem. I have been collecting and owning Rolex watches (among others) for 20 years. They are robust and solid, keeping excellent time, and I have not serviced any since I bought them. Again, I do not subject them to hard conditions like some might do as these have become luxury items that can be used as tool watches. And in case they need to be serviced, I'm aware of the costs, and I'm fine to pay. Enjoy your watches and this hobby.

@@majedalessa8376 you are right, and I might have not explained myself clear or got things confused somehow. This video was made some time ago, and now I have to admit that I'm very happy with the Explorer after being serviced. I feel that, as you say, these watches are more luxury items than tool watches for the supposed use. Hardly a surprise here, but I thought this was worth mentioning. I will publish a video soon with more on this, and another one of the Explorer as a watch itself. This all said, this watch is very solid. I have been privileged enough to see some Rolex being serviced, and the movements are, simply put, impressive. But this situation was mostly my fault, except the shady behavior of the AD. If I keep the watch, and most probably will, I will have it serviced in the future by my brother-in-law, the watchmaker, for a more reasonable price but, here, I agree, while you don't use the watches are tool watches, they will last a long time without needing a service, and after that, given 10 or 20 years, it's not that much of a stretch. But at the end of the day, the truth stays. The Explorer is not an exploring watch. It's an homage to exploring watches, and a very solid capable watch that, against my own prejudices, can really be used to explore. But there are better options, to be honest. Thanks for the debate. Very enriching.

@TheWatchFrame Thank you, and I wish you all the best