Explorer 214270- a few questions...

[Tbonewalk]

I had the short hand model and it didn't last long here. I never fully connected with it. I am interested in the revised, long hand, blue luminescent hour numeral model. I understand these, and many steel Rolex watches are not so easy to find. I have a local Rolex dealer, AD, who has one. Is finding one indeed somewhat difficult these days? And, is the new model more charming than the one it replaced? Is it a fabulous watch? Any opinions on it are appreciated. Thank you!

[Kosgad]

New Explorer is a real beauty.
The symmetrical/clean look, luminous markers, Matt black dial and proportionate hands are some of the features this watch offers. It is a watch for every occasion yet built with quality. You can't go wrong with this.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[Tbonewalk]

Originally Posted by Kosgad

New Explorer is a real beauty.
The symmetrical/clean look, luminous markers, Matt black dial and proportionate hands are some of the features this watch offers. It is a watch for every occasion yet built with quality. You can't go wrong with this.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

thank you, it certainly is. I can't say that I love the "blue lume", though the lack of lume on the short hand bothered me. I also feel the lume is more in line with its ancestry of being an "explorer", and not a dress watch. I like the idea of an "every occasion" every day watch and from what I gather, it is not nearly as bulky and heavy (except in price lol) as many of today's watches. Thank you!

[scy121]

This is such a beautiful and classic piece

[mattty]

New and old model cannot and should t be compared. Sadly they are the same references but imo completely different.
I’ve had the mk1, thought I preferred it but wasn’t till I owned a sub for a while realised all I really wanted was the new explorer so chopped the sub in for it.
I’m gonna buy another in due course and just keep hold of it when I can get one.

[Vaxe]

I never bonded to the look, in particular the polished bezel. I think the 114060 is much more balanced with a similar dial layout.

[Tbonewalk]

Originally Posted by Vaxe

I never bonded to the look, in particular the polished bezel. I think the 114060 is much more balanced with a similar dial layout.

I considered it and may yet end up with one. But I fear the new sub may be heavier than I like. I have a 14060... I am in a bit of a dilemma. I have grown to dig lume...

[digitalcrocodile]

Personally I like the original 214270 (with the mk1 dial). But, too each his or her own.

[Tbonewalk]

Originally Posted by digitalcrocodile

Personally I like the original 214270 (with the mk1 dial). But, too each his or her own.

nothing not to like, both are beauties... go Big Orange!

[diracpoint]

Originally Posted by Tbonewalk

I had the short hand model and it didn't last long here. I never fully connected with it. I am interested in the revised, long hand, blue luminescent hour numeral model. I understand these, and many steel Rolex watches are not so easy to find. I have a local Rolex dealer, AD, who has one. Is finding one indeed somewhat difficult these days? And, is the new model more charming than the one it replaced? Is it a fabulous watch? Any opinions on it are appreciated. Thank you!

I think explorers are easier to find compared to other sports models. I bought mine last fall, and it was in my AD's showcase.

I find the new model 99.99999 ...% charming ... I would have given it a full 100% if they had updated the movement with 70 hours power reserve. Anyways, that's not a big deal for a time-only watch.

I was always a fan of the explorer line. Wanted matte dial and fully luminous hands and markers like the famous 1016 and its predecessors, and in a 39mm case. So, for me, it was perfect!!

[Tbonewalk]

Originally Posted by diracpoint

I think explorers are easier to find compared to other sports models. I bought mine last fall, and it was in my AD's showcase.

I find the new model 99.99999 ...% charming ... I would have given it a full 100% if they had updated the movement with 70 hours power reserve. Anyways, that's not a big deal for a time-only watch.

I was always a fan of the explorer line. Wanted matte dial and fully luminous hands and markers like the famous 1016 and its predecessors, and in a 39mm case. So, for me, it was perfect!!

well put... re "charming", well... that was the best I could come up with at the moment lol, and no coffee yet today... so...

[diracpoint]

Originally Posted by Tbonewalk

well put... re "charming", well... that was the best I could come up with at the moment lol, and no coffee yet today... so...

"charming" is a very good description ... this watch is indeed charming

[Tbonewalk]

Originally Posted by diracpoint

"charming" is a very good description ... this watch is indeed charming

and I think you touched on a concern of mine... less bling than the non lume short hand predecessor... again, is this easy to read when dark?

[diracpoint]

Originally Posted by Tbonewalk

and I think you touched on a concern of mine... less bling than the non lume short hand predecessor... again, is this easy to read when dark?

Yup, less blingy than the non-lume short-hand version for sure. But, for me, that's what I love about this watch and the vintage explorers in general. Brutish tool watch ... arguably the very first sports watch for Rolex ...with ruthless form-follows-function ethos. No fat, no frills. It feels like some sort of very well built instrument on the wrist, rather than a blingy luxury watch --- and that's exactly what I wanted.

Lume is pretty good. If you charge it before going to bed, it should last the whole night. The lume will be weakened near the end, but if the background light is low, you should still be able to read the time. Never had any legibility issue with this watch so far,

[Tbonewalk]

Originally Posted by diracpoint

I think explorers are easier to find compared to other sports models. I bought mine last fall, and it was in my AD's showcase.

I find the new model 99.99999 ...% charming ... I would have given it a full 100% if they had updated the movement with 70 hours power reserve. Anyways, that's not a big deal for a time-only watch.

I was always a fan of the explorer line. Wanted matte dial and fully luminous hands and markers like the famous 1016 and its predecessors, and in a 39mm case. So, for me, it was perfect!!

do you get -2/+2 sec/day? I don't, I am at about +4 sec/day

[diracpoint]

Originally Posted by Tbonewalk

do you get -2/+2 sec/day? I don't, I am at about +4 sec/day

I haven't checked recently. When I bought it was roughly +0.5 sec per day or so. RSC should be able to fix it very easily. You can send it to RSC via your AD,

[scy121]

This one always seems to be in stock, though I wonder if I should keep by Tudor Ranger if I purchase the Explorer

[c0de]

Originally Posted by Tbonewalk

Is finding one indeed somewhat difficult these days? And, is the new model more charming than the one it replaced? Is it a fabulous watch? Any opinions on it are appreciated. Thank you!

There are two ADs in my town, and both are out of Explorers, I am trying to get one. My preferred AD said he will call me when one comes in, but he doesn't know when. So availability is hit or miss, yet not as bad as other much more sought after SS models..

For reference, same AD was willing to give me 10% off the 214270 in February. Needless to say, I am kicking myself for not getting it then

[Tbonewalk]

Originally Posted by c0de

There are two ADs in my town, and both are out of Explorers, I am trying to get one. My preferred AD said he will call me when one comes in, but he doesn't know when. So availability is hit or miss, yet not as bad as other much more sought after SS models..

For reference, same AD was willing to give me 10% off the 214270 in February. Needless to say, I am kicking myself for not getting it then

right now, I am kicking myself for parting with this watch, again, mine was the short handed one. 10% is sweet, no? I just called and this local AD says they have it, I guess I'd have to guess it is the current model, which I asked clearly... but when you go in person, sometimes you find people don't always know what they are talking about... I say this because she said it is $6500, and I think the current price is more like $7k. I paid 6500 out the door 2 years ago. NYC sales tax is 9%. They discounted the watch from 6500 to 6k. So glad I put this out here to you guys, and I am surprised to say I am leaning to the short hand, gold numerals, first 39mm edition... and kicking myself for ditching it...

[Tbonewalk]

Originally Posted by c0de

There are two ADs in my town, and both are out of Explorers, I am trying to get one. My preferred AD said he will call me when one comes in, but he doesn't know when. So availability is hit or miss, yet not as bad as other much more sought after SS models..

For reference, same AD was willing to give me 10% off the 214270 in February. Needless to say, I am kicking myself for not getting it then

I told ur story to a fellow watch friend. I bought the watch yesterday, and got the 10% off... I couldn't believe it.

[diracpoint]

Originally Posted by Tbonewalk

I told ur story to a fellow watch friend. I bought the watch yesterday, and got the 10% off... I couldn't believe it.

Which one did you buy? Mk1 or Mk2? I think both have blue lume,

[Tbonewalk]

Originally Posted by diracpoint

Which one did you buy? Mk1 or Mk2? I think both have blue lume,

my diner has excellent lighting... funny but I was watching a short hand on ebay, I liked the looks of it and it ended today at a good price. But I say to myself that I owned it and never bonded with it. I wonder though if I just didn't appreciate it and may like it now. But I really dig this watch. Your opinion helped alot!

[Tbonewalk]

Originally Posted by diracpoint

Which one did you buy? Mk1 or Mk2? I think both have blue lume,

I think the lume is much better. I was seeing someone when I had the short hand and we were sleeping and she broke out laughing when I said "seven thousand dollars for a watch and I can't even read the goddamn time!"...

[Tbonewalk]

Originally Posted by diracpoint

Which one did you buy? Mk1 or Mk2? I think both have blue lume,

the point you made that really resonates with me is that it fits everything, everywhere, any time, every time... this fits the bill for anything you do or wear.

[diracpoint]

Originally Posted by Tbonewalk

my diner has excellent lighting... funny but I was watching a short hand on ebay, I liked the looks of it and it ended today at a good price. But I say to myself that I owned it and never bonded with it. I wonder though if I just didn't appreciate it and may like it now. But I really dig this watch. Your opinion helped alot!

Originally Posted by Tbonewalk

I think the lume is much better. I was seeing someone when I had the short hand and we were sleeping and she broke out laughing when I said "seven thousand dollars for a watch and I can't even read the goddamn time!"...

Originally Posted by Tbonewalk

the point you made that really resonates with me is that I like a watch that fits everything, everywhere, any time, every time... this fits the bill for anything you do or wear.

Congrats again! It is a beautiful, timeless piece. Enjoy in great health!

[Looking forward to a review, when you have time (like your earlier one) :-)]

[Yobber76]

I am considering the Mk 2 as my next watch. I prefer the longer hands and lumed numerals.

[Colin G]

I have one and it is my favourite Rolex that I own.

I had the MKI with gold numbers and now I have the MKII with lumed numbers which I vastly prefer. The no lumed numbers on the MKI bothered me enough to sell it for a MKII.

Personally, I had no issue with the short hands on the MKI. They were not much shorter at a couple mm than the new ones so that would just be splitting hairs for me.

[Tbonewalk]

Originally Posted by Colin G

I have one and it is my favourite Rolex that I own.

I had the MKI with gold numbers and now I have the MKII with lumed numbers which I vastly prefer. The no lumed numbers on the MKI bothered me enough to sell it for a MKII.

Personally, I had no issue with the short hands on the MKI. They were not much shorter at a couple mm than the new ones so that would just be splitting hairs for me.

they bothered me too, too much bling!

[Voltesvdx]

I think the Explorer I is one of those watches that takes a while to bond with. I also got the 214270 with the short hands but flipped it because it just looked off to me. The hands, the white gold 3,6,9 indices just didn't do it for me.

Fast forward a couple years later, I tried on the 214270 with the longer hands/full lume and thought it was near perfect. However, I didn't truly appreciate the watch until I owned it for a while.

The simplicity of the design and fact that it dresses well in numerous situations (casual, office, dress) is why I will never part with it. Out of the three below, it's the the one I wear the most.

[AEC]

Originally Posted by Tbonewalk

...I had the short hand model and it didn't last long here. I never fully connected with it. I am interested in the revised, long hand, blue luminescent hour numeral model...

Same here. I figured I would have my Mk1 Explorer upgraded with the new dial and hands at its first service, but then I decided to replace it with a Submariner (a 114060).

If you didn't bond with the 214270 you had before, then I think there is a pretty good chance the same thing could happen again (even with the new dial & hands).

Do some deep reflecting on why that watch didn't please you (some wine or whiskey may be required). In my case, I realized I was looking for a Rolex with a bit more "oomph" than the 214270 offered, and the 114060 was just the ticket.