Does anyone else find the allure of the 39mm Explorer intoxicating?

[BeekerMuppet]

Doesn't sing to me, so no

[Clocker Bob]

For my first Rolex (and only, so far), I was deciding between a Sub date classic (16610), and the new Explorer I 39mm. I really was liking the new Explorer from pictures I had seen, and then tried it on at an AD. I just felt there wasn't enough wow factor for me with the new Explorer (being my first Rolex, and dropping some serious money too). Ultimately, I found my sub date here on the forums (thanks Oscar - bodybump - awesome guy!). After all is said and done however, I do think the new Explorer is a great looking watch, and simply a classic.

Clocker Bob
"One must give Time it's time"

[Rebel]

yes

[Dan2010]

I have owned both the old and new Explorer I and they are great, great, great watches. Classy.

[bscepter]

love it. it's one of my grail watches, along with a late-model pepsi GMT and an SS daytona.

[Joey_V]

Tried it again.... but this time, it didn't sing to me.

Huh? I confuse myself...

[rodrob59]

Loved it enough to be my first and, so far, only Rolex. Sneaky good looks!

[erikscollectables]

Went to the AD last week to look at the new Sub and went out with the new Explorer 1. Always wanted an Explorer but found it too small in the past. Was also offered a 2nd hand (once worn) Milgauss but the Explorer is the one! The new size and updated look really make it the perfect "general" watch for each occasion. I have several Rolexes and also other brands but I think this will get a lot of wrist time in the future!

Erik

[cheesesalad]

I'm with rodrob59, had mine a month and love it more eveyday.

[Speed]

Me No likey...

Hands too short!!

[canon168]

Hands too short +1

[Explorer 2011]

Gets my vote

[Singslinger]

Originally Posted by canon168

hands too short +1

+2.

[ZM73]

I got my Explorer on Wednesday. I am still intoxicated.

[GradyPhilpott]

The Explorer and its "too small hands" is going to be a big success after everyone gets used to the proportions.

When I first saw the pictures, I, too, was appalled, but having seen one at the AD and tried it on, I'm convinced that its appeal will grow.

I own a 114270Z and I'm very happy with it, so it's very unlikely I'll ever own the 214270, but it'd be on my short list, otherwise.

[Sixxgrand1]

Originally Posted by Singslinger

+2.

+3 far too short...

[TheWatchFiend]

I love the new Explorer 39mm. As for hands go, my Omega watch has "short hands" too, so it doesn't bother me. I can see why some long time Rolex wearers would be upset about the change though. Like you, the first time I tried it on at the AD, I was very impressed and basically blown away by such an elegant, yet sporty watch that is so simple, yet there is just something special about it, something stealthy. And I love matte dials. And again, like yourself, I tried it on a second time and wasn't impressed. But after seeing it in the case, looking at pictures, watching a video about it, I'm back to wanting to make the Explorer 39mm my first Rolex. But then again, I seem to suffer from the same disease that causes some people to change their mind all the time when it comes to watches. Next week, I'll probably be back to wanting the Submariner as my first. I've still got a year before I make my decision. I'll just be racking my head over it for a while. Explorer? Submariner! Submariner? Explorer! Maybe I'll just end up getting both!

[glimmer]

Originally Posted by ZM73

I got my Explorer on Wednesday. I am still intoxicated.

Looks really good on your wrist! Makes me lust after one even more...

[gregmoeck]

its a great watch

[jamesbondOO7]

It does look very good, but no date, so not for me.

[Minutehand]

Intoxicating to fatally toxic, I'd say.....

If it had a longer minute hand I would have OD'ed by now

[ZM73]

Originally Posted by glimmer

Looks really good on your wrist! Makes me lust after one even more...

Thanks, Clarence

Like many others, I was a "hands too short" believer... until I converted. The hour hand is shorter than the minute hand, which is shorter than the second hand, which makes sense to me. And all the hands are differently shaped, making it very easy to read at a glance.

The one thing that worried me was that it would be too big on my 6.5" wrist. All my other watches are small and older and I'm not into the huge watch trend. The Explorer fits wonderfully and doesn't sit very tall on me, unlike the Milgauss or Submariner. I was concerned that the gilded numerals would be too flashy, but at most viewing angles they fade into the background.

To me it's a tough, dependable (+1 second/day), go-anywhere, do-anything watch. I don't intend to baby it and I don't expect to worry about it being lost or stolen. If it were, I'm sure I would simply find another, as I wouldn't want to lose my buzz.

Hope you make the leap, too.

[glimmer]

Originally Posted by ZM73

Thanks, Clarence

Like many others, I was a "hands too short" believer... until I converted. The hour hand is shorter than the minute hand, which is shorter than the second hand, which makes sense to me. And all the hands are differently shaped, making it very easy to read at a glance.

The one thing that worried me was that it would be too big on my 6.5" wrist. All my other watches are small and older and I'm not into the huge watch trend. The Explorer fits wonderfully and doesn't sit very tall on me, unlike the Milgauss or Submariner. I was concerned that the gilded numerals would be too flashy, but at most viewing angles they fade into the background.

To me it's a tough, dependable (+1 second/day), go-anywhere, do-anything watch. I don't intend to baby it and I don't expect to worry about it being lost or stolen. If it were, I'm sure I would simply find another, as I wouldn't want to lose my buzz.

Hope you make the leap, too.

Thanks for your reply...am wondering how it fits compared to the Milgauss...I guess I'm bound to find out soon...

[idealbaby]

I love this watch, it's just a shame the price increased so much compared to the 36mm

[Boothroyd]

Originally Posted by idealbaby

I love this watch, it's just a shame the price increased so much compared to the 36mm

Understand your comment on price increase, but all models increased. And the new Explorer 1 is priced the same at AD's as any 36mm examples still in inventory.

[imaddhatter]

no crown guards, no date, mix of index and arabic...not my cup of tea

[NightOwl]

I originally didn't like the short hands or the shiny 3 6 9. For some reason the 369 doesn't bother me much anymore but the short hands still look odd to me.

I was wondering where they got the idea to do this and then it occurred to me that car designers often copy certain design cues from one another and this may be a similar case but what a bad one to borrow. But who did they copy?... since short hands seems to be a common characteristic on a lot of inexpensive watches from Asia such as Citizen and Seiko, this may be this source of their inspiration. It's not just about looks either; a Citizen watch I have has short hands and setting it accurately can be a bother. Hope Rolex can address this in the future. I certainly would not buy until they do.

[warrior]

I owned the Milgauss which is a fine great looking watch. However, it's very top heavy--felt signficantly heavier than a Sea Dweller. Very heavy for a Rolex.

The Explorer is going to be waaay more comfortable. Light yet not flimsy. In fact, it feels very very solid on the wrist. Just a perfect balance between comfort and subtle heft IMO.

Originally Posted by glimmer

Thanks for your reply...am wondering how it fits compared to the Milgauss...I guess I'm bound to find out soon...

[Nasoelegans]

For me the choice stod between the Milgauss black dial or the new Explorer. I found the milgauss very attractiv, and still do, but in the long run, I belive that the explorer will the best one, to put a smile on my face every morning.

So i bought my first Rolex, the Explorer, at age 40. Look forward to explore the Rolex line futher in the comming years, cheers from Copenhagen.

[Boothroyd]

CONGRATS! Great choice!