ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

descartes · 11 June 2014, 04:18 AM

I'm considering swapping (upgrading???) my Explorer II (40mm), plus cash, for a Explorer II (42mm).

For those who have taken the leap, are you happy you did so?

My current Ex II finds little wrist time because I have other Rolex sport models in the 40mm range that I prefer. I think the slightly larger 42mm size will find a place in the range (i.e. more wrist time) because it has a little different look and presence than my other 40mm pieces.

Thoughts?

(Cash added to make this happen will probably be +/- $3,000)

swils8610 · 11 June 2014, 04:21 AM

I would.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

marine 337 · 11 June 2014, 04:26 AM

have both---prefer exp 2 with orange hand. To me just looks more classic

Ken

jens0125 · 11 June 2014, 04:37 AM

If you are going for the exp II 42mm with black dial then go for it , the new 42 mm white dial does not do it for me IMHO....in the 40mm versions I prefer the white dial with red gmt hand...

beshannon · 11 June 2014, 04:38 AM

It would really have to sing to me for that cash difference, not sure I would unless I loved it on my wrist

thomaspp · 11 June 2014, 04:41 AM

Sure.

mjm800 · 11 June 2014, 04:46 AM

Yes, I did it. I sold my 40mm Exp II and bought the new one. I've never regretted it, the orange hand alone makes it worth the upgrade.

WAK4 · 11 June 2014, 04:46 AM

Yup. Definitely, if you want a bigger Rolex. Assuming both watches are in good shape, I would expect to be on the minus side of that +/- on the cash involved.

I made the switch when it first came out and have had no regrets...other than it makes me realize how awesome the new Sea Dweller would have been in a similar size. Oh well.

luvsub · 11 June 2014, 04:47 AM

yes

Mr DateJust · 11 June 2014, 04:57 AM

I have a 40mm and bought the 42mm with the intention of selling the 40mm. However things did not work out that way and the new model ended up being sold and I still have the old one. Don't get me wrong the 42mm is a very nice watch but it is a big watch. It wears much bigger than the 42mm suggests especially with the white dial. I have a small wrist 6.5 inch and it looked ridiculous on me. If you have a larger wrist then it shouldn't be as much of an issue but make sure you try it on first.

E70x5 · 11 June 2014, 05:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr DateJust

I have a 40mm and bought the 42mm with the intention of selling the 40mm. However things did not work out that way and the new model ended up being sold and I still have the old one. Don't get me wrong the 42mm is a very nice watch but it is a big watch. It wears much bigger than the 42mm suggests especially with the white dial. I have a small wrist 6.5 inch and it looked ridiculous on me. If you have a larger wrist then it shouldn't be as much of an issue but make sure you try it on first.

Funny u say that because I feel like the 42mm wears much smaller than the said the size. The case is very comfortable on the wrist and the upgrades on the bracelet is priceless.

nikhsub1 · 11 June 2014, 05:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by E70x5

Funny u say that because I feel like the 42mm wears much smaller than the said the size. The case is very comfortable on the wrist and the upgrades on the bracelet is priceless.

Agreed on the size... the bezel on the EXP ruins the watch for me.

Urosfan · 11 June 2014, 05:07 AM

I would do it

Cru Jones · 11 June 2014, 05:49 AM

I don't think it's an "upgrade". Pretty different watches. Get what you like.

ExplorerChris · 11 June 2014, 06:00 AM

[QUOTE=descartes;5020772]I'm considering swapping (upgrading???) my Explorer II (40mm), plus cash, for a Explorer II (42mm).

For those who have taken the leap, are you happy you did so?

My current Ex II finds little wrist time because I have other Rolex sport models in the 40mm range that I prefer. I think the slightly larger 42mm size will find a place in the range (i.e. more wrist time) because it has a little different look and presence than my other 40mm pieces.

Thoughts?

(Cash added to make this happen will probably be +/- $3,000)[/QUOTEway htt

http://s1266.photobucket.com/albums/...xplorerChris/?

Not a chance would I swap.

I don't like the new Explorer II for the following

Don't like the larger case size
Don't like the larger hand size
Don't like the orange GMT hand red was nicer
Don't like the name Explorer II in orange on the dial

Only thing I like on the new Explorer II is the new bracelet but fr me at least it's not worth swapping and not worth the money.
I love my Explorer II 16550 and wouldn't trade it in for anything

Dr. Robert · 11 June 2014, 06:01 AM

No, non, nein, nyet.

HogwldFLTR · 11 June 2014, 06:09 AM

I don't like the orange hand. The bracelet on the 40 works just fine for me. Happy with the classic 40mm.

Psmith · 11 June 2014, 06:20 AM

I had the old model, then I got the new model

It's still a modestly sized watch at 42 mm, and quite slim in profile.
I think the relatively narrow, sloping metal bezel and slightly raised crystal make the dial appear quite large to some people.
And it's just as much a 'classic' as the previous model.

Presa canary · 11 June 2014, 06:25 AM

I've had the 3 expii versions. I only have the 16570 left. I don't miss the 216570 at all, and only wish I sold the 1655 this year as opposed to the 5 or so years earlier in which I did. That being said, the 16570 could very well be my favorite watch in this price bracket. If you do flip it for the 42, I wouldn't add anymore than $17-1900...

Saoirse32 · 11 June 2014, 07:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Presa canary

I've had the 3 expii versions. I only have the 16570 left. I don't miss the 216570 at all, and only wish I sold the 1655 this year as opposed to the 5 or so years earlier in which I did. That being said, the 16570 could very well be my favorite watch in this price bracket. If you do flip it for the 42, I wouldn't add anymore than $17-1900...

Agreed, no more than $2k...

KINGROLESAR · 11 June 2014, 06:54 AM

Yes

landroverking · 11 June 2014, 07:17 AM

I would stay 40mm.

Annan · 11 June 2014, 07:52 AM

Did the deed last September. Loved my 16570 but love my 216570 even more. Would do it again in a heartbeat.

BTW, I have a 6.5" wrist and think the 216570 looks fine.

subtona · 11 June 2014, 07:57 AM

had 42 polar … swapped for 40mm polar.

i would have to go with 42 in black.

up2nogood · 11 June 2014, 08:03 AM

Was on the fence for a long time. In the choice between NOs 40mm and the 42mm..... In the end, very happy with the 42mm.

jdmi32 · 11 June 2014, 08:10 AM

Nope. The 40mm is about as perfect as it gets.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

GTC · 11 June 2014, 08:14 AM

In a second. I think what Rolex has done with the new (2011) 42mm is perfect. I went to an AD to buy a GMT-Master II, saw two Exp II's in the case (one polar one black) and I was a goner.

The Exp II in it's latest form is understated, > masculine, still classic, but brings the style forward enough to shake off any perception that it may of been my father's watch (nothing wrong with looking like my father's watch).

(Mine has also taken a real beating in training during my part-time gig in state law enforcement [me in white pants], most notably from sustained direct weapon recoil; and man has it taken some accidental direct impacts - no problems at all. And, the black dial works great with suits.) Here's a couple of tools:

Fitz · 11 June 2014, 08:16 AM

Yes, upgrade. I like vintage watches plenty, but I don't care what those Prodigal Guide/Talking Hands guys say, the 16570 is a dud. The 216570 is the best modern Rolex sports watch, looks cool, comfortable, balanced, functional.

I also have a 6.5" wrist and it fits/looks great.

ejvette · 11 June 2014, 08:19 AM

Abso...freakin...lutley

kbutler1 · 11 June 2014, 08:29 AM

Sure, if you like the 42 better, go for it!

11 June 2014, 04:18 AM	#1
descartes "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: North Shore Posts: 1,116	Explorer II (40mm) for Explorer II (42mm)-- Would you do it? I'm considering swapping (upgrading???) my Explorer II (40mm), plus cash, for a Explorer II (42mm). For those who have taken the leap, are you happy you did so? My current Ex II finds little wrist time because I have other Rolex sport models in the 40mm range that I prefer. I think the slightly larger 42mm size will find a place in the range (i.e. more wrist time) because it has a little different look and presence than my other 40mm pieces. Thoughts? (Cash added to make this happen will probably be +/- $3,000)

11 June 2014, 04:26 AM	#3
marine 337 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: florida Posts: 112	exp 11 have both---prefer exp 2 with orange hand. To me just looks more classic Ken

11 June 2014, 04:38 AM	#5
beshannon "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Real Name: Brian Location: Northern Virginia Watch: One of Not Many Posts: 17,892	It would really have to sing to me for that cash difference, not sure I would unless I loved it on my wrist __________________ IWC Portugieser 7 Day, Omega Seamaster SMP300m, Vacheron Constantin Traditionnelle Complete Calendar, Glashutte PanoInverse, Glashutte SeaQ Panorama Date, Omega Aqua Terra 150, Omega CK 859, Omega Speedmaster 3861 Moonwatch, Breitling Superocean Steelfish, JLC Atmos Transparent Clock

11 June 2014, 04:41 AM	#6
thomaspp "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: N/A Posts: 11,137	Sure. __________________ Instagram: @watches_anonymous

11 June 2014, 04:46 AM	#7
mjm800 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: USA Posts: 1,950	Yes, I did it. I sold my 40mm Exp II and bought the new one. I've never regretted it, the orange hand alone makes it worth the upgrade. __________________

11 June 2014, 04:21 AM	#2
swils8610 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Real Name: shannon Location: usa Posts: 9,211	I would. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

11 June 2014, 04:37 AM	#4
jens0125 Banned Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: USA Posts: 34	If you are going for the exp II 42mm with black dial then go for it , the new 42 mm white dial does not do it for me IMHO....in the 40mm versions I prefer the white dial with red gmt hand...

11 June 2014, 04:46 AM	#8
WAK4 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Real Name: Bill Location: NJ Watch: Always changing Posts: 4,172	Yup. Definitely, if you want a bigger Rolex. Assuming both watches are in good shape, I would expect to be on the minus side of that +/- on the cash involved. I made the switch when it first came out and have had no regrets...other than it makes me realize how awesome the new Sea Dweller would have been in a similar size. Oh well.

11 June 2014, 04:47 AM	#9
luvsub 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: SF, south bay Posts: 5,222	yes

11 June 2014, 04:57 AM	#10
Mr DateJust "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Glasgow, UK Watch: 16570 Posts: 909	I have a 40mm and bought the 42mm with the intention of selling the 40mm. However things did not work out that way and the new model ended up being sold and I still have the old one. Don't get me wrong the 42mm is a very nice watch but it is a big watch. It wears much bigger than the 42mm suggests especially with the white dial. I have a small wrist 6.5 inch and it looked ridiculous on me. If you have a larger wrist then it shouldn't be as much of an issue but make sure you try it on first.

11 June 2014, 05:07 AM	#13
Urosfan "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: NYC Watch: Me now Posts: 19,372	I would do it

11 June 2014, 05:49 AM	#14
Cru Jones 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Paris, France Posts: 35,300	I don't think it's an "upgrade". Pretty different watches. Get what you like.

11 June 2014, 06:00 AM	#15
ExplorerChris "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2014 Real Name: Chris Location: Ontario, Canada Watch: Explorer II 16550 Posts: 1,401	No way [QUOTE=descartes;5020772]I'm considering swapping (upgrading???) my Explorer II (40mm), plus cash, for a Explorer II (42mm). For those who have taken the leap, are you happy you did so? My current Ex II finds little wrist time because I have other Rolex sport models in the 40mm range that I prefer. I think the slightly larger 42mm size will find a place in the range (i.e. more wrist time) because it has a little different look and presence than my other 40mm pieces. Thoughts? (Cash added to make this happen will probably be +/- $3,000)[/QUOTEway htt http://s1266.photobucket.com/albums/...xplorerChris/? Not a chance would I swap. I don't like the new Explorer II for the following Don't like the larger case size Don't like the larger hand size Don't like the orange GMT hand red was nicer Don't like the name Explorer II in orange on the dial Only thing I like on the new Explorer II is the new bracelet but fr me at least it's not worth swapping and not worth the money. I love my Explorer II 16550 and wouldn't trade it in for anything __________________ There's a crown for every achievement A Watch Is Just A Watch A Rolex Is A Timepiece

11 June 2014, 06:01 AM	#16
Dr. Robert 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Real Name: Bob Location: U.S.A. Watch: 1655 Posts: 64,282	No, non, nein, nyet. __________________ Founder & Card Carrying Member of the Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons

11 June 2014, 06:09 AM	#17
HogwldFLTR 2024 ROLEX SUBMARINER 41 Pledge Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Real Name: Lee Location: 42.48.45N70.48.48 Watch: Too many to list! Posts: 33,697	I don't like the orange hand. The bracelet on the 40 works just fine for me. Happy with the classic 40mm. __________________ Troglodyte in residence! https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=808599

11 June 2014, 06:20 AM	#18
Psmith "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Real Name: Clive Location: Exoplanet Watch: spring-driven Posts: 38,856	I had the old model, then I got the new model It's still a modestly sized watch at 42 mm, and quite slim in profile. I think the relatively narrow, sloping metal bezel and slightly raised crystal make the dial appear quite large to some people. And it's just as much a 'classic' as the previous model. __________________

11 June 2014, 06:25 AM	#19
Presa canary "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Real Name: Justin Location: Pa Watch: Explorer ii Posts: 3,155	I've had the 3 expii versions. I only have the 16570 left. I don't miss the 216570 at all, and only wish I sold the 1655 this year as opposed to the 5 or so years earlier in which I did. That being said, the 16570 could very well be my favorite watch in this price bracket. If you do flip it for the 42, I wouldn't add anymore than $17-1900...

11 June 2014, 06:54 AM	#21
KINGROLESAR "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Real Name: Drew Location: PHILADELPHIA Watch: CROWN MARKED Posts: 2,158	Yes __________________ "Raise your glass high, those here for those not with but a sigh; for enjoy each day, it comes but once, then quickly to the past as it must" - King Rolesar 03

11 June 2014, 07:17 AM	#22
landroverking "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Real Name: Jay Location: TEXAS Watch: Daytona Posts: 7,648	I would stay 40mm.

11 June 2014, 07:52 AM	#23
Annan "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Real Name: Ron Location: Arizona, USA Watch: 116233 Posts: 3,180	Did the deed last September. Loved my 16570 but love my 216570 even more. Would do it again in a heartbeat. BTW, I have a 6.5" wrist and think the 216570 looks fine. Attached Images __________________ *so many Rolexes.....so little time*

11 June 2014, 07:57 AM	#24
subtona "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Real Name: gus Location: East Coast Watch: APK & sometimes Y Posts: 26,599	had 42 polar … swapped for 40mm polar. i would have to go with 42 in black. __________________

11 June 2014, 08:03 AM	#25
up2nogood "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Real Name: Alex Location: Sydney, Australia Watch: Idiot Savant Posts: 1,944	Was on the fence for a long time. In the choice between NOs 40mm and the 42mm..... In the end, very happy with the 42mm.

11 June 2014, 08:10 AM	#26
jdmi32 "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Real Name: Ky Location: Bay Area, CA Watch: 16570 Posts: 2,362	Nope. The 40mm is about as perfect as it gets. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

11 June 2014, 08:14 AM	#27
GTC Banned Join Date: May 2014 Real Name: Douglas Location: HSV / ANC Watch: 126660 Posts: 626	In a second. I think what Rolex has done with the new (2011) 42mm is perfect. I went to an AD to buy a GMT-Master II, saw two Exp II's in the case (one polar one black) and I was a goner. The Exp II in it's latest form is understated, > masculine, still classic, but brings the style forward enough to shake off any perception that it may of been my father's watch (nothing wrong with looking like my father's watch). (Mine has also taken a real beating in training during my part-time gig in state law enforcement [me in white pants], most notably from sustained direct weapon recoil; and man has it taken some accidental direct impacts - no problems at all. And, the black dial works great with suits.) Here's a couple of tools: Attached Images

11 June 2014, 08:16 AM	#28
Fitz "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2014 Location: Austin, TX Watch: JLC Casa Fagliano Posts: 15	Yes, upgrade. I like vintage watches plenty, but I don't care what those Prodigal Guide/Talking Hands guys say, the 16570 is a dud. The 216570 is the best modern Rolex sports watch, looks cool, comfortable, balanced, functional. I also have a 6.5" wrist and it fits/looks great. Attached Images

11 June 2014, 08:19 AM	#29
ejvette 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Apr 2014 Real Name: Ed Location: East Hampton NY Watch: me break clays.. Posts: 7,516	Abso...freakin...lutley Attached Images __________________ Rolex•Omega•Breitling•Grand Seiko•Tudor "No one on their death bed ever said I wish I worked more" My Grandma * Card carrying member of TRF's Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons *

11 June 2014, 08:29 AM	#30
kbutler1 "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2013 Real Name: Kevin Location: Colorado Watch: This one Posts: 633	Sure, if you like the 42 better, go for it!

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)