Explorer thoughts.

[Speedbird-1]

The Explorer; As Rolexes, ruffty-tuffty, go anywhere with Sir Edmund Hilary or Sir Ranulph Feinnes and survive-it-all timepeice.
Would it's overall, survivabilty be improved with crown guards?
The GMT is so equipped for the rigors and hazards of the flight deck/cockpit.
So wouldn't they be more relevant on the 214270 ?
Its sister, the 216570 has them, after all.

[brandrea]

There’s the 216570 for that

[Hub6152]

Obviously not otherwise they’d have had them by now!!

[mui.richard]

My Tudor OysterPrince has no crown guard and managed to survive almost 70 years of use. YMMV

Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk

[Sunny Arizona]

Originally Posted by mui.richard

My Tudor OysterPrince has no crown guard and managed to survive almost 70 years of use. YMMV

Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk

Ranger is a nice timepiece.

[kohe321]

Remember that the screw down crown in and of itself acts as a of crown guard of sorts. By fastening the crown to the case it can endure bumps and shocks without moving the stem in the tube, protecting the movement and maintaining the seal of the gaskets.

Of course the double protection of having crown guards hugging the already screwed down crown is better, but still, just having it screwed down to the case makes it very solid. More than enough to handle most of what life will throw at you.

[Speedbird-1]

Are we saying crown guards are unnecessary then?

[kohe321]

Originally Posted by Lt Virgil Hilts

Are we saying crown guards are unnecessary then?

No. They provide extra protection, but they're not essential for a tool watch.

[Speedbird-1]

Originally Posted by kohe321

No. They provide extra protection, but they're not essential for a tool watch.

I hear what you are saying.
Perhaps, as you point out, they are not absolutely necessary, given the apparent, robust qualities of the screw-down crown.

My original question was: would the survivabilty be improved?
I see the guards as a kind of insurance against the unforeseen, and, given the Explorers' heritage it seems slightly surprising that the case wasn't updated.
As we know, the early GMT's were guard less.

Maybe, after all they are just a 'styling cue' for today's 'tool watches' most of which probably wouldn't qualify for that title.

[Slider817]

Originally Posted by Lt Virgil Hilts

I hear what you are saying.
Perhaps, as you point out, they are not absolutely necessary, given the apparent, robust qualities of the screw-down crown.

My original question was: would the survivabilty be improved?
I see the guards as a kind of insurance against the unforeseen, and, given the Explorers' heritage it seems slightly surprising that the case wasn't updated.
As we know, the early GMT's were guard less.

Maybe, after all they are just a 'styling cue' for today's 'tool watches' most of which probably wouldn't qualify for that title.

I think you pretty much answered your own question, of course crown guards would enhance the durability. However, so could many other “enhancements” like a sunken crystal below the bezel, faraday cage, and many others.

It’s really an aesthetic choice, to remain somewhat true to the original, and the way the Explorer I is currently configured will be adequate.

If you like the look or utility of Crown guards, there are many other Rolex models to choose from, personally the simplicity and clean looks of the Explorer I is the main draw of that watch.

[TK-710]

Originally Posted by Lt Virgil Hilts

The Explorer; As Rolexes, ruffty-tuffty, go anywhere with Sir Edmund Hilary or Sir Ranulph Feinnes and survive-it-all timepeice.
Would it's overall, survivabilty be improved with crown guards?
The GMT is so equipped for the rigors and hazards of the flight deck/cockpit.
So wouldn't they be more relevant on the 214270 ?
Its sister, the 216570 has them, after all.

I don’t have the answer but I’ve pondered the same question.

[Brew]

Interesting question.

Would it still be an "Explorer," if Rolex included crown guards, or would Rolex name a new reference?

[Pauln]

Just heritage IMO. And as a true GADA, would lessen its versatility, I think.

[rtalk]

Ahhh I want an Explorer so bad. Stop tempting me.

Seriously I’m going to trade for a 1016.

[RyanJ]

Please Rolex, don't make any changes to the Explorer case. It is, in my opinion, nearly a perfect watch.

[Speedbird-1]

Originally Posted by RyanJ

Please Rolex, don't make any changes to the Explorer case. It is, in my opinion, nearly a perfect watch.

Nearly?

For it to be 'perfect', wouldn't Geneva have to make changes?

[rtalk]

I’m strongly debating trading my 116500LN for a mint 1016.

[ExplorerTime]

Originally Posted by rtalk

I’m strongly debating trading my 116500LN for a mint 1016.

if it's truly a "Mint" 1016 then you should make that trade.

That is all.

[rtalk]

Originally Posted by ExplorerTime

if it's truly a "Mint" 1016 then you should make that trade.

That is all.

I’m not sure if I am worthy of such greatness. Honestly.