Does every collection need an Explorer 1?

[IR201]

I've seen a lot of posts about how every collection needs a sub or speedmaster. And obviously it's not true, as collections need whatever people like at whatever level they can afford. But just following that idea, in your opinion, where would the Explorer 1 sit in the hierarchy of "every collection needs one" watches?

[Josunese1975]

Of course that is just my humble opinion. I've owned 14270 and 114270 previously. Currently own 124270 and 214270. Should every collection have an Explorer? That depends on the person's taste. Submariner, GMT, Daytona, Speedmaster, Seamaster does nothing for me. But that 3,6,9 dial is the best in my world. To each is his own.

[seabreeze60]

Here’s my Rolex top 7 list

1. Explorer 36MM - own
2. Rolex Date 34MM - past owner
3. Cellini - past owner
4. Submariner 5 digit - past owner
5. Yacht Master - goal
6. GMT - goal
7. DJ - TT - past owner

[Giovannibravo]

I might get heat for this. But I personally don't think the quality of the speedmaster is enough for the price. I recently went to my AD and tried on the new reference. The pressing the pushers felt terrible. Also winding the watch was very uncomfortable. Love the story of the watch but you are better off with Rolex if you can get one. Nothing get better than the Explorer. Most low key Rolex available.

[Kyle3130]

My one watch collection has one. Haha

[mfserge]

Explorer 1 wouldn’t sit anywhere close to a respectable watch collection. That watch has nothing to offer.

[Vetracer]

I’m guilty of currently owning the 39mm mk I and mk II so I’d say yes,

[doboy007]

Nope, don't care for one.

[danwang0520]

No.......every collection needs at least one of Submariner/GMT-Master/Daytona, and one of Datejust/Day-Date

[wetsum3]

I think it’s a great reference

[Dr. Robert]

I like them….I have a 114270 & a 214270. If I wasn’t a watch addict, those 2 would be it. All I need.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[savka]

No such thing as a necessary watch.

[ExplorerI]

I find mine gets more wrist time than all the others combined. Just so comfortable and versatile.

[AF_Rob]

I love the Explorer on its own. I've had one, but I ended up selling it because I felt it overlapped with my Sub.

All of my watches have a different dial texture and/or color.

Everyone is different.

[Seddyspaghetti]

Personally don’t care for the explorer 1.

[Lew Archer]

Well, I think it depends on the nature of one’s collection. Some collections are a random accumulation of various makes and models, while some are very focused—maybe focusing on a specific brand, even a specific model—or type.

For example, someone might have every variation of Submariner. Or, an array of dive watches. Or, might choose watches according to a theme, or related themes, like the “land, sea, air” posts we see.

If the Explorer is relevant to a particular collection’s theme or focus, it’s a natural choice. One might even collect nothing but Explorers, given the variations over the years.

For example, if “exploration” is a theme of a collection, the Explorer is an obvious choice, along with watches with a link to exploration, such as the Omega Speedmaster Professional, the Explorer II and the Submariner, or Sea-Dweller, or Deepsea.

Now, if your collection—or accumulation—of watches is of a different nature—say you’re into chronographs—then it’s not a “must have”.

However, if you’re into Rolex watches, and want a fair representation of its iconic models, then an Explorer belongs on your list, unless you just don’t like it.

And, if you’re not really a collector, just enjoy owning a few nice watches, the Explorer is a great option if you like its simplicity and its versatility.

I particularly like that it has some of the traits of the professional models, such as a secure clasp on the bracelet, and the triangle marker at 12 o’clock, yet is an understated general purpose watch, like the OP or the DJs on oyster bracelets with dome bezels.

And, I like that “3-6-9” dial, which can also be found on older OPs.

[Santiago32]

Subjective… but I think an explorer 1 should be owned by collectors that appreciate the classics.

[ROLEX*]

Originally Posted by Lew Archer

Well, I think it depends on the nature of one’s collection. Some collections are a random accumulation of various makes and models, while some are very focused—maybe focusing on a specific brand, even a specific model—or type.

For example, someone might have every variation of Submariner. Or, an array of dive watches. Or, might choose watches according to a theme, or related themes, like the “land, sea, air” posts we see.

If the Explorer is relevant to a particular collection’s theme or focus, it’s a natural choice. One might even collect nothing but Explorers, given the variations over the years.

For example, if “exploration” is a theme of a collection, the Explorer is an obvious choice, along with watches with a link to exploration, such as the Omega Speedmaster Professional, the Explorer II and the Submariner, or Sea-Dweller, or Deepsea.

Now, if your collection—or accumulation—of watches is of a different nature—say you’re into chronographs—then it’s not a “must have”.

However, if you’re into Rolex watches, and want a fair representation of its iconic models, then an Explorer belongs on your list, unless you just don’t like it.

And, if you’re not really a collector, just enjoy owning a few nice watches, the Explorer is a great option if you like its simplicity and its versatility.

I particularly like that it has some of the traits of the professional models, such as a secure clasp on the bracelet, and the triangle marker at 12 o’clock, yet is an understated general purpose watch, like the OP or the DJs on oyster bracelets with dome bezels.

And, I like that “3-6-9” dial, which can also be found on older OPs.

This post has elevated the status of the Explorer 1
Can you share other watches in your collection?

[AlbionJackal]

I hope not!

[Pinchy]

out of my 5 steel sports including 2 submariners, a gmt and daytona. The explorer is my most worn by far.

[JacksonRain]

Absolutely not. It belong in collections where the collectors like it. It's a classic watch with history, but not for everyone.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

[ROLEX*]

Originally Posted by Pinchy

out of my 5 steel sports including 2 submariners, a gmt and daytona. The explorer is my most worn by far.

Why why why?

[Pinchy]

Originally Posted by ROLEX*

Why why why?

Explorer beats all other sports rolex onto my wrist because they are all overstated, overhyped, over flashy.

I do sometimes want a watch that makes a bit of a splash and statement, but for that purpose the gmt sub and daytona all compete. But then when I want something classy, sporty, actual heritage, the explorer wins.

It's a cool watch. And out of all the entire Rolex line up, if I could have only one, it would be the explorer.

[LFFL]

This thread should have had a poll option! The explorer was the first Rolex I laid eyes on and wanted but I ended up with a sub, needless to say I am now looking to get my hands on the new ref since it went back to its 36mm roots with a nicer bracelet, etc. I am a simple man, I love the explorer and I get that it isn’t for everyone.

[Lew Archer]

Originally Posted by ROLEX*

This post has elevated the status of the Explorer 1
Can you share other watches in your collection?

Thanks! I have managed to accumulate a range of watches over the years, beginning wtth Omega, then Breitling, then Rolex. And, one Tudor, the black bay 58, blue dial.

I'm not one of those highly organized collectors who only has, say, Omega Speedmasters from the 1960s.

But, I tend to have, within the accumulated pieces, some watches that run to a theme...for example, along with my dad's 1970s era Speedmaster Professional, a Breitlng Cosmonaute based on the watch Breitling configured for Mercury astronaut Scott Carpenter. And, I've got the "First Omega in Space" version of the Speedmaster, worn by Mercury astronaut Walter Schirra, before NASA officially selected the successor to this watch, the Speedmaster Professional. So, those three kind of run to a space exploration theme. The Breitling is interesting because it's a Navitimer, but with a 24 hour dial. Takes some getting used to, but practical if one is traveling in Europe...or outer space.

And, another sub-group of my collection/accumulation are “Bond watches"...I’m a fan, naturally. So, starting in 1997, I started to slowly acquire some 007 gear: the Omega Seamaster Professional, blue wave dial, the mechanical reference from the Brosnan films after "Goldeneye" (the one in “Goldeneye” was quartz); the Seamaster 300 developed for "Spectre", a limited edition; and the most recent Seamaster from "No Time to Die"; as well as an Aqua Terra from "Skyfall". I've got a Submariner Date, 16610, which I think is the same reference as the Rolex worn by Timothy Dalton in "License to Kill". Last in this cluster is a 14060M, which is as close as I can get to Roger Moore’s Submariner 5513 from “Live and Let Die”, the watch that, along with my dad’s Speedmaster, really hooked me on fine watches as a boy.

A few years ago, I visited the Omega boutique and during a conversation with the manager, asked about a watch I'd read about...a reproduction of the Omega JFK wore during his inauguration. The manager smiled, disappeared in the back for a moment, then emerged with this reproduction. A small quantity were produced...a manual wind, tank watch, gold case, very slim. I bought that, because I admire the late president and was impressed with this recreation of that historic timepiece, which is now in Omega's collection. It was a gift to the president from a friend and Mrs. Kennedy told the friend he liked it because it was slim and light, unlike chunkier watches she'd given him.

I don't wear it that often, but it's a wonderful example of a classic "dress watch", on a black leather strap. It's the only "full gold" watch I own!

I have one other tank watch, also an Omega. This one is not "full gold", just plated, but it's vintage...probably 1960s, and it's very special because it was a wedding present. It belonged to my wife's father, who died when she was a teenager, long before I met her. Her mom gave me that watch. I am having Omega restore it...it's in Switzerland now, and I look forward to wearing it more often. The boutique will fix me up with a proper Omega strap, to replace the aftermarket strap I put on it (the bracelet didn't fit, and I didn't want to tamper with it). I've worn it only a couple of times. One time was very special. My wife's sister asked me to give her away on her wedding day. Since I was a stand-in for her dad, I wore his watch, on its original bracelet, loose though it was. That morning, I took the bride aside and showed her that watch, to let her know that I was wearing something her father, who died when she was only 8, would have worn every day. She was quite moved and I think that meant a lot to her.

Though this watch was a gift to me, a very thoughtful, generous gift, I consider myself merely its caretaker. One day it will go to my daughter, or, if she's not interested, to one of her cousins. Out of the three girls, hopefully one will appreciate a restored watch from the 1960s worn by their grandfather.

Watches! They can mean so much more than mere timepieces...

[DCheeta]

I would never say that another person’s collection “needs” anything. Each person should have what they want to have.

For me, personally, I think I’d always need one of these two basics (Sub is mine, Explorer is my wife’s).

[Lew Archer]

Originally Posted by DCheeta

I would never say that another person’s collection “needs” anything. Each person should have what they want to have.

For me, personally, I think I’d always need one of these two basics (Sub is mine, Explorer is my wife’s).

Two icons! A great collection, in and of itself. And, very nice that one is yours and one is your wife's...and they look to be in perfect synchronization!

[kieselguhr]

Not really.

[S.Explorer]

Not mandatory but I highly recommend it if you have a <7" wrist.

[Harry-57]

Your collection might. My collect doesn't. If you think your collection needs one, it does.