ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
26 May 2019, 10:40 PM | #1 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Real Name: Steve.
Location: UK
Posts: 6,473
|
Explorer thoughts.
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. |
26 May 2019, 10:45 PM | #2 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Brian (TBone)
Location: canada
Watch: es make me smile
Posts: 78,106
|
There’s the 216570 for that
|
26 May 2019, 10:46 PM | #3 |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 893
|
Obviously not otherwise they’d have had them by now!!
|
26 May 2019, 10:59 PM | #4 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 673
|
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 |
26 May 2019, 11:12 PM | #5 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Norway
Posts: 260
|
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.
__________________
My Flickr Photostream |
26 May 2019, 11:29 PM | #6 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Real Name: Steve.
Location: UK
Posts: 6,473
|
Are we saying crown guards are unnecessary then?
|
26 May 2019, 11:30 PM | #7 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Norway
Posts: 260
|
No. They provide extra protection, but they're not essential for a tool watch.
__________________
My Flickr Photostream |
26 May 2019, 11:32 PM | #8 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Real Name: Brad
Location: Colorado
Watch: 16613
Posts: 1,263
|
|
26 May 2019, 11:54 PM | #9 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Real Name: Steve.
Location: UK
Posts: 6,473
|
Quote:
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. |
|
27 May 2019, 12:02 AM | #10 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Real Name: William
Location: New York
Watch: Journe, AP & Lange
Posts: 868
|
Quote:
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. |
|
27 May 2019, 12:58 AM | #11 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Upstate
Watch: 116600
Posts: 2,156
|
Quote:
|
|
27 May 2019, 01:03 AM | #12 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2018
Real Name: Larry
Location: Finger Lakes
Posts: 6,007
|
Interesting question.
Would it still be an "Explorer," if Rolex included crown guards, or would Rolex name a new reference? |
27 May 2019, 02:18 AM | #13 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2018
Real Name: Paul
Location: Colorado
Watch: Explorer
Posts: 1,543
|
Just heritage IMO. And as a true GADA, would lessen its versatility, I think.
|
27 May 2019, 02:30 AM | #14 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Seattle
Watch: 16710T
Posts: 547
|
Ahhh I want an Explorer so bad. Stop tempting me.
Seriously I’m going to trade for a 1016.
__________________
116519 Grey dial Oysterflex Daytona. 116500 Black. 116710BLNR. 16710T. Rolex Explorer I 39MM. 4 digit DateJust. JLC Master Control with Sector Dial. Omega FOIS. Grand Seiko Four Seasons (Spring Version). Tudor Royal. IWC Cal 83 (~1940s). 41MM sub. Omega CK859. |
27 May 2019, 02:50 AM | #15 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Atlantis
Posts: 1,448
|
Please Rolex, don't make any changes to the Explorer case. It is, in my opinion, nearly a perfect watch.
|
27 May 2019, 05:15 AM | #16 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Real Name: Steve.
Location: UK
Posts: 6,473
|
|
27 May 2019, 06:22 AM | #17 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Seattle
Watch: 16710T
Posts: 547
|
I’m strongly debating trading my 116500LN for a mint 1016.
__________________
116519 Grey dial Oysterflex Daytona. 116500 Black. 116710BLNR. 16710T. Rolex Explorer I 39MM. 4 digit DateJust. JLC Master Control with Sector Dial. Omega FOIS. Grand Seiko Four Seasons (Spring Version). Tudor Royal. IWC Cal 83 (~1940s). 41MM sub. Omega CK859. |
27 May 2019, 06:26 AM | #18 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Los Angeles
Watch: 116200/14270
Posts: 95
|
|
27 May 2019, 07:14 AM | #19 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Seattle
Watch: 16710T
Posts: 547
|
I’m not sure if I am worthy of such greatness. Honestly.
__________________
116519 Grey dial Oysterflex Daytona. 116500 Black. 116710BLNR. 16710T. Rolex Explorer I 39MM. 4 digit DateJust. JLC Master Control with Sector Dial. Omega FOIS. Grand Seiko Four Seasons (Spring Version). Tudor Royal. IWC Cal 83 (~1940s). 41MM sub. Omega CK859. |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.