ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
10 January 2014, 05:45 PM | #31 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2013
Real Name: Dave
Location: Cornwall
Watch: Explorer 2 216570
Posts: 116
|
That polar looks perfect on your wrist, for me it's a no brainer. The Explorer 1 does look good but I can definitely see why you might think it felt too small.
Looking forward to seeing the incoming thread:) Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
10 January 2014, 05:59 PM | #32 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Real Name: Len
Location: SoCal
Watch: 116610LN
Posts: 987
|
The Explorer fits your wrist perfectly. Seems like a logical choice.
|
11 January 2014, 02:21 AM | #33 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2013
Real Name: Christopher
Location: Georgia, USA
Watch: ing the Sea...
Posts: 6,713
|
That EXP II was made for you mate!
__________________
"I wish to have no Connection with any Ship that does not Sail fast for I intend to go in harm's way." Captain John Paul Jones, 16 November 1778 "Curmudgeons " Favorites: 1665 SD, Sub Date, DSSD, Exp II, Sub LV, GMTIIc |
14 January 2014, 05:53 PM | #34 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Brisbane, QLD
Posts: 24
|
OK...throwing a spanner into the works here, but here goes:
The SubC had always stood out to me, but after reading a lot of peoples negative sentiments about their ubiquity, I kind of got turned off the idea. However, lately I've grown to appreciate them even more, but still was leaning towards an LV or GMTIIc instead, in order to be a little bit different. Unfortunately, the 116610, 116710, and 116610LV were all a bit out of my price range, so I just kind of gave up on the idea. Then I realised that the 114060 retails for over $1200 less than the 116610, putting it within budget. Had to go and check it out for myself Now I am going to lose even more sleep over trying to decide this and the explorer 2 haha Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk |
14 January 2014, 06:08 PM | #35 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Real Name: Dave
Location: NYC
Posts: 7,181
|
I still think the white ExpII is the one for you. The 42mm size is perfect for your arm, and you already have a black watch in your Speedy Pro. There's always time to add a Sub later, get the Polar ExpII!
|
14 January 2014, 06:10 PM | #36 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Brisbane, QLD
Posts: 24
|
Quote:
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk |
|
14 January 2014, 06:33 PM | #37 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Real Name: Dave
Location: NYC
Posts: 7,181
|
Quote:
In my case, I find that I know in my gut what I want, but then try to intellectualize it until I end up confused. And as all here will attest, you always end up in the end with the one you initially wanted anyway, so why waste time and money on the way there? Incidentally, I also work in advertising and dress much the same as you in the office. My Subs, my Speedy Pro and my white ExpII are all perfect in our environment, so that's not really a deciding factor...go with your gut! |
|
14 January 2014, 07:19 PM | #38 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Real Name: Neil
Location: UK
Watch: ing ships roll in
Posts: 59,369
|
|
14 January 2014, 08:57 PM | #39 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 103
|
I think the Polar Explorer II suits better than the SubC which looks a bit too small.
I love the Polar Explorer II but unfortunately its a bit too big for my wrists. |
14 January 2014, 09:20 PM | #40 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Brisbane, QLD
Posts: 24
|
My heart is telling me Sub, brain is telling me Explorer 2. First world problems
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk |
14 January 2014, 09:25 PM | #41 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Real Name: Craig
Location: Sydney
Watch: 4 Broken glass
Posts: 5,808
|
Both look good go with your heart if that does not work flip a coin...... size is not an issue, I tell my wife the same thing everyday, but she wants more...... one day......she can have a gold Daytona, till then she can keep her ladies DJ!
__________________
Day Date 118206, Daytona 116509 & 116505, AP 25859ST Gone but not forgotten and genuinely missed..... Root Beer GMT, Sub, TT Daytona, YG DD Bark, Datejust(2 his & hers), AP RO, PP Aquanaut, Lange 1, Heuer Monza, Piaget Altiplano, GP Chrono, Seamaster, Tudor Sub, Tudor Chrono, Tudor Black Bay Bronze |
19 January 2014, 09:38 PM | #42 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2012
Real Name: Matt
Location: Austin, TX USA
Watch: SDc, PO
Posts: 200
|
There is no bad choice here. You have a great watch if you keep it. If you flip, then either the Sub or ExpII look good on your arm.
I would guess the reason most people say to buy a Sub first is because so many end up buying it later anyway. Maybe for no other reason than to try a Sub out, but most seem to have one at some point. Better to try it out first than flip a piece you like to try a Sub and then want to go back. Personally, I love the ND Sub. I have one and like the clean look without the cyclops. There is something very cool with the new Exp2 though and it might be my next purchase, but I wouldn't flip my Sub for it. If your heart is calling for the Sub then go that route or you'll regret it. SubC definitely seems to wear bigger than 40mm and closer to a 42mm Omega, so it won't seem as small as your Exp1. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk |
23 January 2014, 08:21 PM | #43 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Brisbane, QLD
Posts: 24
|
Bit of an update - went a (somewhat) completely different route:
The Pelagos is everything that I wanted a Rolex to be, but just wasn't. 42mm....check Date....check Rotating bezel (I use this very often)...big check - the best I've ever used! Rolex build quality....check "Under the radar" appeal....check Great WR (this thing will see heaps of beach/dive use)....check Unique, in-house movement....check......(just kidding) All in all, the movement is literally the only thing that could be improved upon. Having said that, however, after a few weeks of thinking I came to realise that the benefits of owning a Rolex with an in-house movement are not worth (to me) the $2.5k+ that it would cost to do so. In opting for the Pelagos, I was also able to pay off a huge chunk of credit card debt, buy a nice pair of shoes, and put several hundred dollars towards a trip to Fiji with my girlfriend at the end of the year after flipping the Explorer 1. Its a great feeling overall, and I'm loving everything that the Pelagos has to offer. The whole movement thing doesn't really matter to me now that I've gotten my head around it, and I feel it is at LEAST twice the bang for buck that I would've gotten with the Explorer 2 or Sub. Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk |
23 January 2014, 08:36 PM | #44 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Real Name: Alex
Location: Sydney, Australia
Watch: Idiot Savant
Posts: 1,944
|
Good for you and still a great choice! Get the EII once you've a bit more coin behind you.
|
23 January 2014, 08:40 PM | #45 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: New York
Watch: Omega PO 8500
Posts: 30
|
Can't go wrong w/ the Pelagos...
|
23 January 2014, 08:44 PM | #46 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 103
|
Great choice. Lets see some wrist shots!
I think the Pelagos is an absolutely fantastic watch and fantastic value to boot. |
23 January 2014, 10:15 PM | #47 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Brisbane, QLD
Posts: 24
|
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk |
23 January 2014, 11:36 PM | #49 | |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Cave
Watch: Sundial
Posts: 33,940
|
Quote:
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.