Rolex Explorer 14270 or 114270?

[cfracing]

I realize more general versions of this question have probably been asked before but I think this one may be more specific.

I am not a real watch guy, but I have owned a steel/gold Datejust since I bought it new in the early '80 and think I am finally ready to let it go - either retire it to the safe, give it to my son, or sell it. However, rather than do without a Rolex, the older 36mm (or smaller) Explorer has started to sing to me. Since 1016s are more than I want to spend (I'm not a collector but would still like whichever watch I buy to retain as much of its value as possible), the research that I have done tells me my choices are either a 14270 or the newer 114270.

So what are the plusses and minuses of each reference # and which is your personal preference and why? Thanks.

[mps354]

I prefer the 14270, as you can put a jubilee bracelet on it to change the look.

[gouverneur]

If you like the vintage look, the 14270s (lots of them anyways) have tritium dials while the 114270s have a newer movement that some say is preferable to the 3000 series movement in the 14270.

[cfracing]

Thanks. I saw found a reference to the improved caliber 3130 in the 114270 and the SELs after I posted my question.

Any more, maybe subjective, reasons for preferring one over the other that I might not be aware of, like the Jubilee bracelet thing and tritium dials already mentioned?

[Speed]

I think you've about covered it.

I'd prefer a SEL version. No engraved Rehaut. You'll see them on the 114270s. I avoid if at all possible.

[tonyedmunds]

Originally Posted by Speed

I think you've about covered it.

I'd prefer a SEL version. No engraved Rehaut. You'll see them on the 114270s. I avoid if at all possible.

My thoughts exactly

[cfracing]

Originally Posted by Speed

I think you've about covered it.

I'd prefer a SEL version. No engraved Rehaut. You'll see them on the 114270s. I avoid if at all possible.

Sorry, could you tell me what an engraved Rehaut is? I did say I wasn't a watch guy or much of a detail Rolex guy either.

I apologize because I am having trouble following what you were saying. I believe the 114270 has the SEL bracelet and no engraved Rehaut? So do you avoid an engraved Rehaut, or the 114270?

Originally Posted by Mick P

cfracing

They are both brilliant watces. All I would say is take the time to actually see one in the flesh, put it on your wrist and go for the one that appeals the most.

Never make a decision based on photographs.

I went for the 214270 and regard it as my best watch ever.

Regards

Mick

Thanks for the advice. I have small wrists so I did not think I could pull off the 39mm case, but perhaps I should heed your advice and actually try one on my wrist. However, I wanted to avoid paying new(er) watch prices as I just bought a JLC Reverso. Also, something looks a little off to me on the 214270 dial that I can't put a finger on it. I prefer the look of the 36mm face better for some reason - maybe the proportions?

[Ancestral Star]

Originally Posted by cfracing

Sorry, could you tell me what Rehaut is? I did say I wasn't a watch guy or much of a detail Rolex guy either.

I apologize because I am having trouble following what you were saying. I believe the 114270 has the SEL bracelet so it has no engraved Rehaut? So do you avoid the Rehaut, or the 114270?

Just found this image off Google, courtesy of bernardwatch.com. The rehaut is the "ring" that the crystal rests on. On newer Rolex models, the rehaut is engraved with the Rolex crown at 12 o'clock, a repetition of the word Rolex, as well as the watch's serial number at 6 o'clock.



The 114270 began having the engraved rehaut on watches that begin with the M serial if I recall correctly. Some later Z serials may have the engraved rehaut as well. Solid end links may actually precede the engraved rehaut (someone kindly correct me if I'm wrong)—which means, you can get a 114270 that has solid end links and no engraved rehaut.

[Speed]

Originally Posted by cfracing

Sorry, could you tell me what an engraved Rehaut is? I did say I wasn't a watch guy or much of a detail Rolex guy either.

I apologize because I am having trouble following what you were saying. I believe the 114270 has the SEL bracelet and no engraved Rehaut? So do you avoid an engraved Rehaut, or the 114270?


Thanks for the advice. I have small wrists so I did not think I could pull off the 39mm case, but perhaps I should heed your advice and actually try one on my wrist. However, I wanted to avoid paying new(er) watch prices as I just bought a JLC Reverso. Also, something looks a little off to me on the 214270 dial that I can't put a finger on it. I prefer the look of the 36mm face better for some reason - maybe the proportions?

Sorry...looks like someone clarified Rehaut quite nicely.

I was unclear however.

I would not want the newer 114270 due to Rehaut engraving. That's just me.

Ideally I would prefer the 14270 with solid end links. Not a huge fan of hollow end links..

I think the 36mm version is the one to have. More balanced / more proportional hands as well.

[G-Web]

Personally, I like having the latest movement under the hood.
But based on some articles and posts I've seen (just Google 14270 vs 114270), you're not likely to see much, if any, difference in day to day accuracy and reliability. In other words, both are great watches, and you can't go wrong with either.

Good luck,
-GW

[franklin]

Either model is fine.

[Mick P]

cfracing

They are both brilliant watces. All I would say is take the time to actually see one in the flesh, put it on your wrist and go for the one that appeals the most.

Never make a decision based on photographs.

I went for the 214270 and regard it as my best watch ever.

Regards

Mick

[watchwatcher]

Originally Posted by Mick P

cfracing

They are both brilliant watces. All I would say is take the time to actually see one in the flesh, put it on your wrist and go for the one that appeals the most.

Never make a decision based on photographs.

I went for the 214270 and regard it as my best watch ever.

Regards

Mick

Gotta agree with Mick here.

[ADINVA]

I like to share my own experience having recently purchased a 114270. Like yourself, I tried to learn what are the differences between the 2 models. As mentioned by fellow mates here, the main differences are the newer movement and the SEL. Looking at the 2 watches, apart from the tritium dial, one can really see any significant differences.

In terms of prices, I was somewhat disappointed that the 14270 did not offer a significant discount relative to its newer "sibling". As a result, I went ahead with the decision to acquire 114270 on the basis of a newer "improved" movement, SEL and value-to-price.

However, I am having second thoughts after wearing for a few days. I think 214270 seems to fit better given that it is 39mm. The smaller 114270 (36mm) seems rather small on the wrist.

I suggest that you should try on both 214270 and 114270. The one that sings to you is the one you should purchase. After all, you want to wear it and admire a great piece everyday with a smiling face.

[dajiggalo]

just as a side note, if you decide to wear your Explorer on a strap, the 114270 (w/ the SEL) will more than likely chew up the material because the lug holes are closer to the case than in the 1016 and 14270

[cfracing]

Thanks to everyone for the input. I now know what a rehaut is and many interesting facts about the two references for me to consider that I wasn't aware of before. I'm now more unsure as to which to get, but I am in no hurry, so I can take my time deciding and looking for the right one.