To me (even if I own the GMT Master ii and Submariner) the Explorer ii is the perfect utilitarian model in the Rolex catalog… it has very nice functionality and it doesn’t bling or it’s loud like that ceramic models
@@sotirisvramis3108 how is a Yachtmaster 40 a posers watch? It is beautiful imo especially with the sunburst blue dial, If anything it’s one of the more understated watch in the Rolex line up. If you want to talk about “posers” watches I would consider the yachtmaster 2 in any configuration but mainly in any gold line ups. However, for full disclaimer purposes, I own a ss one lol. I have a love hate relationship with it. Sometimes I can see people looking at it which makes me feel uncomfortable. It’s a funny one too as I can see them holding their value but it’s a bit like some of the AP Offshores, which I own two and I love them but both are actually losing value based on what I see in the second hand market. I don’t reallly care actually I just love the time pieces. Remember the Daytona…, that thing was controversial when first model introduced now the ss models are next to impossible to get and their value now has sky rocketed. I own two models. One with black dial and one with white dial. Both ceramics btw!
The newest version has a gloss black dial as opposed to previous reference #216570, which has a matte black dial. Matte black dial and ghost hands is my preference. The more understated Explorer II model.
@@YippeeKiYayMrFalcon Yes you are correct. As a collector I just don’t see the reason to purchase a “new” model Explorer 2. I didn’t want a drastic change otherwise it would have rendered it as not an Explorer. I think a ceramic bezel such as that found on a Yachtmaster 40 would have been a buy for me. The reality is that you really can’t tell the difference between the new model and the 216570. It’s almost like Rolex are trying to tell us that this is a new watch but really it isn’t.
@@anonymoushuman8962 you don’t buy Rolex to change it when a new model is released .. that’s why you buy Rolex. They’re timeless. If you feel a need to change, you’re buying for the wrong reasons
I had the 216570 and it's the nicest of of all the Rolexes. Larger dial.and more legible. The stainless bezel helps it pop more than the black. Good that the bracelwt and clasps wider. You wonder why they just don't throw a sub bracelet on it and be done with it. These swiss companies just make everything difficult. Only shame is that bezel is a scratch magnet and you do need to tread carefully with it. That aside this is the best
I personally would not. The old version (ref #216570) has a matte black dial as opposed to the new versions gloss black dial. I also prefer the old versions ghost hands, a throwback to reference 1655 (aka Steve McQueen Explorer II). The old version is a bit more understated, which is the very thing that has always drawn me to the Explorer II. The most tool "watchesque" model in the entire Rolex lineup.
NOPE. The previous model is perfect. The newer model they over did with the lug size cut and not bringing the ghost hands over. Also, less glossy dial is much nicer. And the Rolex text looks so much nicer on the 216570. Get one if you can.
I do not understand why this watch does not have the glidelock. Just about any physical activity you are performing will swell your wrist, especially if your arms spend any time at your sides. The glidelock seems supremely useful for that purpose. I am not going to carry a strap tool on my excursions, and the 5mm extension is too much for this use case. Missed opportunity.
Would have been nice. Tour pretty spot on about your wrists and hands swelling when your hiking especially which is basically what this watch was made for.
When I first dove into my watch obssesion and my fascination with Rolex, I didn’t even consider this watch. That is, until I tired it on at my local AD and I said whoa this watch is different and has something about it completely unique. I have since purchased both the white and black dial versions. I was only considering a submariner and sea dweller at first (which I am still on the list for) but I feel like I may have gotten the best of all worlds with these watches.
This watch looks better than the GMT-Master II, is virtually technically identical, and is less expensive and easier to obtain. Thus, it should be a no-brainer between the two. And yet ... because (as we all know) buying Rolex has only a bit to do with a watch's attractiveness, technical acumen, and value - it has infinitely more to do with the watch's status semiotics - the Explorer II will always play second fiddle to the uglier, more expensive, and harder-to-come-by GMT. I'm not a "Rolex guy," and that's why.
and there in lies the issue with your argument. Not everyone thinks the GMT Master is the uglier of the two. I personally am not crazy about 42mm size or the oversized mercedes hands. Im also a little indifferent about steel bezel. I like the black and colored ones on the GMT and Subs. I dont care about status. I just like the GMT Master. This is a hobby about preference.
The previous reference, ref #216570, with its ghost hands (reminiscent of the original 1655 reference) and it's matte black dial is the more understated reference. The new reference Explorer II with its new gloss black dial and lack of shadow hands is a looker for sure, just a bit more flashy then it's previous iteration. I prefer the older reference to the latest one.
I think my first Rolex will be an Explorer II in black but I feel conflicted about this new release. I love that Rolex kept the larger size and upgraded the movement. I am upset that they removed the black painted minute and hour hands. The 'stealth' hands were one of the truly unique features of the black dial Explorer II and something I believe will add value for future collectors. I believe they may have removed this feature because it allows for slightly more lume on the dial and for more orange paint as well but I feel the aesthetics are taking a back seat as a consequence. Whenever I buy one I'm going to have a truly difficult time deciding whether to buy the old version or new.
Get the previous model. It’s perfect. You’re right, the stealth hands are a real nice feature. The previous model just looks ‘right’ dimensionally. The changes to the newer model are just a little too much imo. EX2 black dial is an amazing watch. You won’t regret it.
I just recently got my first Rolex and I thought it would scratch my itch but now it’s already got me thinking what is next? I am thinking/hoping for a Rolex explorer 2 I do alot of hiking and this would be the ultimate companion on my various adventures
I hope not - 42 is perfectly fine for a sports watch. This isn't a dress watch, the old ones at 40 lack presence on the wrist (unless you have a small wrist), given how thin the watch is.
Well done Tim, the definitive comparison I wanted. I picked my up at my AD on Thursday, and could not be happier! Been looking at reviews and comparison videos, and they ALL missed most of the differences. Thank you for a great video. PS. If you missed something, it might be the introduction of anti-reflection of the underside of both the crystal and cyclops ...if my information is correct.
Congrats on your new watch! I’m a little jealous, the explorer 2 is an amazing watch and I’m hoping that I can get my hands on one from my AD. I have only bought one watch from them well I guess two but one Rolex ( a tissot prx and a Rolex OP 41 green ) so we’ll see.
@@omarion07 check out Austin Daniels video from time 12:15... apparently there is a trick with how to successfully hack the watch... ruclips.net/video/v8KtzJ-471g/видео.html (of course this is a different movement 3235, but I suspect the clutch mechanism is similar to the 3285)...
@@watchthisspace2099 Interesting. I think he was saying that you should turn the crown backwards (counterclockwise) just a tiny bit before pulling it out to the max to hack the seconds?
Good eye!! I’ve had 2 Explorer 2s (16570 and 226570) where the clutch won’t engage about 1 out of every 20 tries. One was purchased new and the other was freshly RSC serviced. Ditto with one I tried on at a jewelry store. I consider it the watch’s only fault in my eyes.
Got the polar last week, the subtile changes makes the watch so much more comfortable than the previous ref. Got a sub earlier and this one is in my opinion better and maybe the best Rolex in the lineup of daily drivers.The white dial is so crisp, I love it. :)
How did you land one! It sucks how much the grey market watches are going for over sticker. But at the same time I'm not sure I can walk into a store to get one, or if they will even put me on a waiting list when they can sell the watch for so much over Rolex MSRP.
@@teej05 I've been on the list for one since october and probably just got lucky. But I think if you show genuin interest in watches and build a relationship with your AD it could work out fine.
I was afraid to wear this on my smaller wrist. It somehow wears well and does not look ridiculous. Obviously a tool watch and the size can be forgiven. Not versatile enough to be a dress watch but that doesn’t matter in this case.
On list for a 226570 polar been waiting for a month. Have the polar 16570. Bored and tired of the Rolex waiting BS. Omegas are nice too. Will get a Seamaster with blue band soon. Would have bought 3 Rolexes at retail by now. Not paying s 50% premium from grey market.
Thats my theory. It does harken back to the older era ExpII vs. the previous iteration that looked as if it shared a GMT hand with the GMT Master II. I kinda dig the orange hand, it has a certain utilitarian look to it. I’d say the orange looks better on the polar dial as opposed to the black though.
I love this model, but geezus, 15k? The value isnt there. It really is a 5-6k watch at best, the retail price alone is pushing hard. The premiums are out of control. Id feel dumb paying 12k.
@@mkrete you can't go wrong with a Seamaster. The white dial model, just as good. I've wanted this one but am eyeing a Grand Seiko. I Bought the Sea Dweller 43 at 14k tax and all, but at least its another level of technology, 11k retail and upscale from Explorer. IDK if I'll ever buy another Rolex though, it's just out of hand.
Got this with polar dial 2013. My first watch I ever bought. This is a disappointment in my view.. why not put a ceramic bezel on it? The I would be sold!
@@highnrising I didn’t say it doesn’t. I love my explorer 2. It’s beautiful just like my other watches. I would have like to have seen a Yachtmaster 40 style bezel (non rotatable). That for me would warrant to be placed on my buy list. I have a blue dial Yachtmaster 40!too the platinum blasted rotatebke bezel is superb and it plays so well on ff the blue dial. It’s just my opinion. Opinions are subjective! Similar discussion are hovering around the Daytona of which I have two now both ceramic, both ss, one has a white dial the other has a black dial. Both are obviously 40mm. Both have 70 hours powers reserve with the same movement. I love them both equally. There has been discussions amongst watch enthusiasts whether they should have made it 41mm when going to the ceramic bezel. I like larger time pieces and felt that extra mum would have been the cherry on the top. Some people don’t. It’s just pure opinion. At the end of the day rolex are going to do what they want. That’s what great companies do. They call the shots, that’s because they can and they do because people buy their watches. I own every Rolex, except a day date and a sub which I can’t stand. That’s the only Rolex I’ve m not keen on. I also love AP of which I I have 5. My favourite being the blue divers offshore with yellow strap on it and my blue chrono Royal Oak 41mm. That’s a beautiful piece. I was asked fffered gbp45k for it. I noughts it for half that and that was literally a week after my purchasing it. I don’t however sell any of my pieces as I am a collector. You couldn’t put a price on n even my 39mm OP. I’d never sell it! All my watches are purchased through ADs.
This watch should either have a different name or Explorer 1 should be renamed. Both pieces should stand on their own. Same thing with the yacht series
@@SC-km5vc A-HOLE flippers... everyone knows Watchbox lowballed some sucker for retail or just under retail price (pre-2018 they would offer to buy for half retail)..... OR GOVBERG received a new Explorer from Rolex.... then had an employee/friend/family member/associate/client buy it at retail. So that their sales records look legit..... Goveberg "buys" it back under the table via Watchbox. Then sells it for almost double retail. Goveberg/Watchbox make off like bandits....
Makes me laugh when people say the lugs are more elegant, the only reason the new lugs are thinner is so the can manufacture the same size bracelet across the board! Cheaper and easier for Rolex!
Makes me laugh when you talikng bullshit...previous model has 21 mm ,which is standard for rolex sub and 1000 others ,however now it is 22mm ...cheaper ? Easier?
@@lahav6680 what’s bullshit about Rolex making most of its sports models now with the wider bracelet? Is that not cheaper as it’s got less links which with less finishing probably make it cheaper! Also easier as it would be less tool changing and programming so easier and les time consuming! The case will be the same case just different bezel movement and face?
I don’t even think they’re elegant. I think they’ve made them too thin. They don’t match the rest of the watch’s rugged utility sports appeal. Previous model lugs at 21mm were perfect for the overall aesthetic design of the watch.
![After 50 years of Rolex Explorer, we are still here. Yes, already... [ENG SUBS]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/umhttBLqkPI/mqdefault.jpg)
Hands down, one of the best Rolex watches ever made
100% I’ll get my hands on one at some point in time
You are correct Sir !!
underrated, with modern Cal.3285 (same as GMT Master II) and All stainless steel (including bezel), a true modern Rolex S/S sports watch! 🎉❤️👍
I have the 216570 black dial, and it is my daily wearer. Love it!
To me (even if I own the GMT Master ii and Submariner) the Explorer ii is the perfect utilitarian model in the Rolex catalog… it has very nice functionality and it doesn’t bling or it’s loud like that ceramic models
Same here , couldnt agree more !! Maybe the best sport Rolex today !! ( no posers bouncers car sellers 😅 watch ) PERFECT
@@sotirisvramis3108 how is a Yachtmaster 40 a posers watch? It is beautiful imo especially with the sunburst blue dial, If anything it’s one of the more understated watch in the Rolex line up.
If you want to talk about “posers” watches I would consider the yachtmaster 2 in any configuration but mainly in any gold line ups. However, for full disclaimer purposes, I own a ss one lol. I have a love hate relationship with it. Sometimes I can see people looking at it which makes me feel uncomfortable. It’s a funny one too as I can see them holding their value but it’s a bit like some of the AP Offshores, which I own two and I love them but both are actually losing value based on what I see in the second hand market. I don’t reallly care actually I just love the time pieces. Remember the Daytona…, that thing was controversial when first model introduced now the ss models are next to impossible to get and their value now has sky rocketed. I own two models. One with black dial and one with white dial. Both ceramics btw!
The newest version has a gloss black dial as opposed to previous reference #216570, which has a matte black dial. Matte black dial and ghost hands is my preference. The more understated Explorer II model.
@@YippeeKiYayMrFalcon
Yes you are correct.
As a collector I just don’t see the reason to purchase a “new” model Explorer 2.
I didn’t want a drastic change otherwise it would have rendered it as not an Explorer. I think a ceramic bezel such as that found on a Yachtmaster 40 would have been a buy for me.
The reality is that you really can’t tell the difference between the new model and the 216570. It’s almost like Rolex are trying to tell us that this is a new watch but really it isn’t.
@@anonymoushuman8962 you don’t buy Rolex to change it when a new model is released .. that’s why you buy Rolex. They’re timeless. If you feel a need to change, you’re buying for the wrong reasons
I had the 216570 and it's the nicest of of all the Rolexes. Larger dial.and more legible. The stainless bezel helps it pop more than the black. Good that the bracelwt and clasps wider. You wonder why they just don't throw a sub bracelet on it and be done with it. These swiss companies just make everything difficult. Only shame is that bezel is a scratch magnet and you do need to tread carefully with it. That aside this is the best
The old caliber 3187 also features paraflex shock absorption.
simply perfect ROLEX!
too big for my wrist sadly 😑
@@lacaprica1843 can't they remove links?
@@andyrome316 brother...
middle sand blast clasp was for 2015 n older,2016 and above 216570 are all polished..
Would you switch from the old one to the new one?
I could sell the old one with profit and wait for the new..
I personally would not. The old version (ref #216570) has a matte black dial as opposed to the new versions gloss black dial. I also prefer the old versions ghost hands, a throwback to reference 1655 (aka Steve McQueen Explorer II). The old version is a bit more understated, which is the very thing that has always drawn me to the Explorer II. The most tool "watchesque" model in the entire Rolex lineup.
NOPE. The previous model is perfect. The newer model they over did with the lug size cut and not bringing the ghost hands over.
Also, less glossy dial is much nicer. And the Rolex text looks so much nicer on the 216570.
Get one if you can.
I do not understand why this watch does not have the glidelock. Just about any physical activity you are performing will swell your wrist, especially if your arms spend any time at your sides. The glidelock seems supremely useful for that purpose. I am not going to carry a strap tool on my excursions, and the 5mm extension is too much for this use case. Missed opportunity.
Would have been nice. Tour pretty spot on about your wrists and hands swelling when your hiking especially which is basically what this watch was made for.
2:30 my 216570 2020 explorer 2 has also the polished finish they changed . You probably got an early production 216570
Already have one! Great everyday watch.
Have owned 2. Hands down one of the best Rolex have produced
When I first dove into my watch obssesion and my fascination with Rolex, I didn’t even consider this watch. That is, until I tired it on at my local AD and I said whoa this watch is different and has something about it completely unique. I have since purchased both the white and black dial versions. I was only considering a submariner and sea dweller at first (which I am still on the list for) but I feel like I may have gotten the best of all worlds with these watches.
How long did you have to wait? I am on the list for a polar
@@csowens it was a few months. I’ve been allocated quite a few pieces over the last few months too.
Is it white gold hands and hour markers?
Yes. This is the case on all Rolex watches
Contrary to what many people think I believe Rolex knock it out of the park with this new reference
I think so too ! Tried one on , display only model of course
I prefer this watch to submariner and even Daytona, since it's so pure and not too bling.
Fantastic review, every minor detail covered and great shots of the watch!
Fabulous, detailed comparison and review. Well done!! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Thanks for the post, the comparison was excellent, I love the black dial 👍👊
This right here... this is the one!!
Hi Tim. Please can you review the one in white? Thanks
Best value Rolex complication in the current catalog 🤍💫✨
Come on now. You should know that the 3187 caliber also features the Para flex shock absorbers too.
This watch looks better than the GMT-Master II, is virtually technically identical, and is less expensive and easier to obtain. Thus, it should be a no-brainer between the two. And yet ... because (as we all know) buying Rolex has only a bit to do with a watch's attractiveness, technical acumen, and value - it has infinitely more to do with the watch's status semiotics - the Explorer II will always play second fiddle to the uglier, more expensive, and harder-to-come-by GMT. I'm not a "Rolex guy," and that's why.
and there in lies the issue with your argument. Not everyone thinks the GMT Master is the uglier of the two. I personally am not crazy about 42mm size or the oversized mercedes hands. Im also a little indifferent about steel bezel. I like the black and colored ones on the GMT and Subs. I dont care about status. I just like the GMT Master. This is a hobby about preference.
That’s completely subjective. Great watch but not an attractive watch in comparison to the GMTs
GMT can track 3 timezones
Like the glossier dial but miss the floating hands
damn you tim. i have the 216570 polar, and i love it, but after watching this, i'm tempted to upgrade
Really hoped that they would’ve left the ghost hands on the new gen. I really liked those.
We’re sorry, Brian. -Rolex
The previous reference, ref #216570, with its ghost hands (reminiscent of the original 1655 reference) and it's matte black dial is the more understated reference. The new reference Explorer II with its new gloss black dial and lack of shadow hands is a looker for sure, just a bit more flashy then it's previous iteration. I prefer the older reference to the latest one.
great review
Prefer the 216570 aesthetics…..the less blingy , more subtle dial …….& obviously the floating hands…….it’s a no brainier for me ………
I think my first Rolex will be an Explorer II in black but I feel conflicted about this new release. I love that Rolex kept the larger size and upgraded the movement. I am upset that they removed the black painted minute and hour hands. The 'stealth' hands were one of the truly unique features of the black dial Explorer II and something I believe will add value for future collectors. I believe they may have removed this feature because it allows for slightly more lume on the dial and for more orange paint as well but I feel the aesthetics are taking a back seat as a consequence. Whenever I buy one I'm going to have a truly difficult time deciding whether to buy the old version or new.
Oh, and the other reason I'm getting one is because GO GIANTS!!!
Get the previous model. It’s perfect.
You’re right, the stealth hands are a real nice feature. The previous model just looks ‘right’ dimensionally.
The changes to the newer model are just a little too much imo.
EX2 black dial is an amazing watch. You won’t regret it.
@@mojojoe-jo2170 Giants suck, Go Dodgers.. =)
I just recently got my first Rolex and I thought it would scratch my itch but now it’s already got me thinking what is next? I am thinking/hoping for a Rolex explorer 2 I do alot of hiking and this would be the ultimate companion on my various adventures
Clasp internal of my 2020 polar is polished
Will it ever go back to 40mm?
I hope not - 42 is perfectly fine for a sports watch. This isn't a dress watch, the old ones at 40 lack presence on the wrist (unless you have a small wrist), given how thin the watch is.
I really want it⌚
Best review of the 226570 vs the 216570.
Just got one. Love it
I prefer it over my submariner.
Well done Tim, the definitive comparison I wanted. I picked my up at my AD on Thursday, and could not be happier! Been looking at reviews and comparison videos, and they ALL missed most of the differences. Thank you for a great video.
PS. If you missed something, it might be the introduction of anti-reflection of the underside of both the crystal and cyclops ...if my information is correct.
Congrats on your new watch! I’m a little jealous, the explorer 2 is an amazing watch and I’m hoping that I can get my hands on one from my AD. I have only bought one watch from them well I guess two but one Rolex ( a tissot prx and a Rolex OP 41 green ) so we’ll see.
Preso questo orologio ⌚️
Felicissimo
Grazie a tutti
Does the gloss clasp mean that Rolex considers the Explorer 2 no longer an entry level watch? Why no Triplock crown?
It’s not a dive watch. There’s no need for 300m water resistance
It was never an entry level watch with a GMT complication
Why would you take away the floating hands it looks much worse without them
hmm... notice how (at 7:38) the clutch refused to engage to hack the movement, requiring wiggling? the crown to engage it. poor QC perhaps?
Could it be that Tim's fingers slipped and didn't pull the crown fully? 🤔
@@omarion07 check out Austin Daniels video from time 12:15... apparently there is a trick with how to successfully hack the watch... ruclips.net/video/v8KtzJ-471g/видео.html (of course this is a different movement 3235, but I suspect the clutch mechanism is similar to the 3285)...
@@watchthisspace2099 Interesting. I think he was saying that you should turn the crown backwards (counterclockwise) just a tiny bit before pulling it out to the max to hack the seconds?
Good eye!! I’ve had 2 Explorer 2s (16570 and 226570) where the clutch won’t engage about 1 out of every 20 tries. One was purchased new and the other was freshly RSC serviced. Ditto with one I tried on at a jewelry store. I consider it the watch’s only fault in my eyes.
Got the polar last week, the subtile changes makes the watch so much more comfortable than the previous ref. Got a sub earlier and this one is in my opinion better and maybe the best Rolex in the lineup of daily drivers.The white dial is so crisp, I love it. :)
How did you land one! It sucks how much the grey market watches are going for over sticker. But at the same time I'm not sure I can walk into a store to get one, or if they will even put me on a waiting list when they can sell the watch for so much over Rolex MSRP.
@@teej05 I've been on the list for one since october and probably just got lucky. But I think if you show genuin interest in watches and build a relationship with your AD it could work out fine.
@@petereriksson6287 I will have to give it a shot then, thanks for sharing your experience! Hopefully it works out.
What a wonderful Watch !
i never took it off from 2004, swimming, showering, working, now it needs cleaning, falls back 2-3 minutes per week, great watch
i didn't know i could do that
@@ES-qe1nh definitely you don't have the sense of humor, i didn't know Covid will affect that as well.
Wearing it the way it was intended.
Really want to have this
You're right, I liked the New version👈
Why are the Rolex bracelets so short?
If you produce a 42mm watch, then the bracelet must also fit on a large wrist!
I just bought my first Rolex and was surprised that I only had to remove one link and I wear my watches right
If this thing was
Great review of the differences of the two.
I was afraid to wear this on my smaller wrist. It somehow wears well and does not look ridiculous. Obviously a tool watch and the size can be forgiven. Not versatile enough to be a dress watch but that doesn’t matter in this case.
My fav Rolex, saving for it >
Hope you get one soon !! ☝️
I looked at the white dial model today. Beautiful watches, and nice review!
My preference goes to the 21. The former.
On list for a 226570 polar been waiting for a month. Have the polar 16570. Bored and tired of the Rolex waiting BS. Omegas are nice too. Will get a Seamaster with blue band soon. Would have bought 3 Rolexes at retail by now. Not paying s 50% premium from grey market.
You sound bitter
does it really need to be 42mm tho? Rolex needs to make a 36-39mm size.
I wish they would make the date background black to match the dial.
I feel if the orange was a red, it would’ve been out of the park. Perhaps the oranges for legibility?
Thats my theory. It does harken back to the older era ExpII vs. the previous iteration that looked as if it shared a GMT hand with the GMT Master II. I kinda dig the orange hand, it has a certain utilitarian look to it. I’d say the orange looks better on the polar dial as opposed to the black though.
I love this model, but geezus, 15k? The value isnt there. It really is a 5-6k watch at best, the retail price alone is pushing hard. The premiums are out of control. Id feel dumb paying 12k.
Where are you paying 15k for this?
@@bradhepditch7605 almost every piece on this guy's store is 15+ for the new model, particularly after tax. 14.5k is pretty common on the new release.
@@LanierLegal Wow! Glad I got mine new in 2019.
Feel exactly the same. Was looking at Rolex but I think I would get more for my money going with an Omega.
@@mkrete you can't go wrong with a Seamaster. The white dial model, just as good. I've wanted this one but am eyeing a Grand Seiko. I Bought the Sea Dweller 43 at 14k tax and all, but at least its another level of technology, 11k retail and upscale from Explorer. IDK if I'll ever buy another Rolex though, it's just out of hand.
Got this with polar dial 2013. My first watch I ever bought.
This is a disappointment in my view.. why not put a ceramic bezel on it? The I would be sold!
Why should they put a ceramic bezel on it? The steel bezel looks fine.
If you put a ceramic bezel, it would lose its roots and wouldn't be the tool watch that it is.
@@highnrising I didn’t say it doesn’t.
I love my explorer 2. It’s beautiful just like my other watches.
I would have like to have seen a Yachtmaster 40 style bezel (non rotatable). That for me would warrant to be placed on my buy list. I have a blue dial Yachtmaster 40!too the platinum blasted rotatebke bezel is superb and it plays so well on ff the blue dial.
It’s just my opinion. Opinions are subjective!
Similar discussion are hovering around the Daytona of which I have two now both ceramic, both ss, one has a white dial the other has a black dial. Both are obviously 40mm. Both have 70 hours powers reserve with the same movement. I love them both equally. There has been discussions amongst watch enthusiasts whether they should have made it 41mm when going to the ceramic bezel. I like larger time pieces and felt that extra mum would have been the cherry on the top. Some people don’t. It’s just pure opinion.
At the end of the day rolex are going to do what they want. That’s what great companies do. They call the shots, that’s because they can and they do because people buy their watches.
I own every Rolex, except a day date and a sub which I can’t stand. That’s the only Rolex I’ve m not keen on. I also love AP of which I I have 5. My favourite being the blue divers offshore with yellow strap on it and my blue chrono Royal Oak 41mm. That’s a beautiful piece. I was asked fffered gbp45k for it. I noughts it for half that and that was literally a week after my purchasing it. I don’t however sell any of my pieces as I am a collector. You couldn’t put a price on n even my 39mm OP. I’d never sell it!
All my watches are purchased through ADs.
Because it would look shite!
@@dbiwatches1891
What looks like shite is your watch collection which are mostly tissots, swatch and casio
I wouldn’t recommend that watch for your 16cm wrist, let alone 15cm...
Near miss. 40mm is superior.
This watch should either have a different name or Explorer 1 should be renamed. Both pieces should stand on their own. Same thing with the yacht series
Why would they change the names??You clearly don’t understand the history behind these watches.
Well... "loving" this watch is a bit overdone.
Maybe "liking" is a better word:)
And the older version is way nicer. Lug width of 22 is too high.
Should return to the 40mm size. 😐
FLOATING HANDS ARE GONE
Slap that beauty on a Rubber B black with orange accent stripe! Wow
🔥 I’m going to be getting a green rubber B for my OP 41 green
I hope, I really hope they change the orange hand to white. The orange just looks too cartoonish.
I like Rolex, but their watches are getting a little boring.
Variations on the same thing.
Il 226570 è migliore
È più luminoso è più lucido ha una leggibilità migliore
Punto e stop
$14k ?
Polar dial being sold for $15,450 LOL!
@@SC-km5vc A-HOLE flippers... everyone knows Watchbox lowballed some sucker for retail or just under retail price (pre-2018 they would offer to buy for half retail)..... OR GOVBERG received a new Explorer from Rolex.... then had an employee/friend/family member/associate/client buy it at retail. So that their sales records look legit..... Goveberg "buys" it back under the table via Watchbox. Then sells it for almost double retail. Goveberg/Watchbox make off like bandits....
😍
Love the 42mm size and the GMT but the bezel design is lifeless making the watch BORING. COME ON Rolex, make the GMT a 42mm!!! Or AT LEAST a 41mm.
Makes me laugh when people say the lugs are more elegant, the only reason the new lugs are thinner is so the can manufacture the same size bracelet across the board! Cheaper and easier for Rolex!
Makes me laugh when you talikng bullshit...previous model has 21 mm ,which is standard for rolex sub and 1000 others ,however now it is 22mm ...cheaper ? Easier?
@@lahav6680 what’s bullshit about Rolex making most of its sports models now with the wider bracelet? Is that not cheaper as it’s got less links which with less finishing probably make it cheaper! Also easier as it would be less tool changing and programming so easier and les time consuming! The case will be the same case just different bezel movement and face?
You’re clueless
I don’t even think they’re elegant. I think they’ve made them too thin. They don’t match the rest of the watch’s rugged utility sports appeal.
Previous model lugs at 21mm were perfect for the overall aesthetic design of the watch.
A bit big I think.
It is just too big.
Just love this watch. Think I prefer the Polar a smidge more 🤍
Me 2.