Any love for the 1016 Explorer?

[Time Exposure]

Am I out of touch here? I don't see much love for 1016. I jokingly refer to this vintage discussion forum as the Red Sub forum (only 'cause I'm jealous!) I am interested in the 1016, and prices seem to be all over the place. Are they out of favor due to their minuscule size? (tongue-in-cheek, 36mm looks great to me). I like 'em later (hack set, 80's). I see one on a website at $6900 from 1978-ish. Is that on the high/low side?

[psv]

Nothing but respect for that piece. Hard to find in minty conditions though - most of them were serviced a couple of times through their life back when "unmolested/unpolished" was not the craze. I'd love to pick one up if I found the right one.

[Keeperoftime]

They are not out of flavor... I mean Ian Fleming wore one!
I think they are out range $ wise. For the cash I think many prefer a less subtle vintage.

[joe100]

I love the 1016 but the prices are anywhere between $4500 for an RSC special to $10k+ for gilt tropical dials. You could really almost have a pair of nice 1675s for what a 1016 gilt costs.


Sent from my  using Tapatalk

[gregorpal]

agree with joe and jeremy. A nice 1016 specimen, dial and case, are not less than 6.5 / 7k and for that money you can get other vintage rolex sport such as 5513 /5512 /1675 gilt.

[kyle L]

I would love one, but I'm just too addicted to the old Omegas.

[joe100]

It seems the older Explorers are terribly easy to fake and the genuine examples are pricey. I'm starting my slow search for an Explorer 5500 and it's going to be a slog.


Sent from my  using Tapatalk

[Nalk7]

Currently saving for one

[StuartM1970]

The issues discussed led me to buy the later model. '90s models, though not terribly vintage, are the bargains of the moment it seems.

Just my two cents...

[Time Exposure]

Excellent point about what you can get for the same price, especially considering the difficulty of spotting fakes and Frankens if not disclosed up front. I hadn't considered this!

[joe100]

5500s are the worst I'm my opinion. Easy to fake with genuine parts and for very cheap. 1016s are just plain expensive


Sent from my  using Tapatalk

[homathetes]

1016 is so quintessentially Rolex and a total grail for me. Hunted for a 5500 for a while and then gave up, they are as rare as genuine Tudor Rangers...

[mks4]

Yep, the 1016's are frustrating. After looking here, VRF, timezone, ebay, and chrono24, I finally found a perfect last year of production model. The price was pretty ugly, but I swallowed hard and took the plunge. The whole time, I was wondering why the heck these things are so tough to find versus other same era sports models...I guess they simply weren't as popular.

Agree with the others on replacement parts...I looked at so many with replaced hands, dials, crystals, bracelets, etc. I just couldn't go in that direction.

Good luck...you will find one!

[michael e]

I love the 1016, my favourite Rolex.
I have two in my collection. One gilt 1966 and one 1966 owned by polar explorer Allan Gill, one of the first men to walk to the North pole amongst other achievements.
Cheers Mick

[ralpie]

Originally Posted by michael e

I love the 1016, my favourite Rolex.
I have two in my collection. One gilt 1966 and one 1966 owned by polar explorer Allan Gill, one of the first men to walk to the North pole amongst other achievements.
Cheers Mick

Awesome!

[Rennfahrer]

Love my 1.9mm 1016. It was the first Rolex I fell for in the late 1980s before being discontinued. I finally found a nice one from a fellow on TimeZone last year. Yes, it was polished at some point, but the dial is wonderful with slightly "fluffy" off-white lume. It was reasonably priced for a non-museum piece, too.

[adam78]

Originally Posted by gregorpal

agree with joe and jeremy. A nice 1016 specimen, dial and case, are not less than 6.5 / 7k and for that money you can get other vintage rolex sport such as 5513 /5512 /1675 gilt.

I guess I did pretty well for this one, then. Spent about $3700 a couple of years ago (but domed crystal was extra)...I'm not letting it go!

[Ditch]

Originally Posted by Time Exposure

Excellent point about what you can get for the same price, especially considering the difficulty of spotting fakes and Frankens if not disclosed up front. I hadn't considered this!

About a year ago I started searching for a 1016, but concluded that identifying an entirely legitimate example, when they are so easy to franken-fake, was far beyond my current skill level.

Awesome watches though!

[kyle L]

Originally Posted by adam78

I guess I did pretty well for this one, then. Spent about $3700 a couple of years ago (but domed crystal was extra)...I'm not letting it go!

Shucks... I don't blame you though!

[Submarino]

Originally Posted by michael e

I love the 1016, my favourite Rolex.
I have two in my collection. One gilt 1966 and one 1966 owned by polar explorer Allan Gill, one of the first men to walk to the North pole amongst other achievements.
Cheers Mick

Great story and piece of history. Thanks for sharing.

[adam78]

Originally Posted by kyle L

Shucks... I don't blame you though!

Do not despair. I will let you try it on if you ever visit Chicago, Kyle...

[garpesce]

i've had my 1016 since 1968, it's been serviced once, not overhauled.
it's clark kent...looks good in a suit... underneath, ready for anything that comes along.
it's a keeper.

[bubble collector]

a great piece in my opinion and much more understated/dressy than some of the larger sport watches.

[watchandbb]

here's mine

[deej]

Originally Posted by adam78

I guess I did pretty well for this one, then. Spent about $3700 a couple of years ago (but domed crystal was extra)...I'm not letting it go!

Very nice. I like!

[Marrk]

I like the 1016 very much. As you can see from the dials posted in this thread, the older dials are simple and tooly and uncluttered. Rolex really needs to figure out a way to get rid of the WG surrounds on all its watches.

[adam78]

Originally Posted by Marrk

I like the 1016 very much. As you can see from the dials posted in this thread, the older dials are simple and tooly and uncluttered. Rolex really needs to figure out a way to get rid of the WG surrounds on all its watches.

Ever since they went LumiNova, there's really no reason at all to keep the white gold surrounds, except misguided aesthetics. Originally they were designed to prevent "tritium creep". It certainly would improve things to be rid of them. But then again most modern watch buyers have different taste than we do (or lack thereof), IMO.

[Lol-x]

You gotta love the 1016 dial's classic tool watch symmetry. I agree with the lack of white gold hour marker surrounds too.

[Kingair]

Originally Posted by michael e

I love the 1016, my favourite Rolex.
I have two in my collection. One gilt 1966 and one 1966 owned by polar explorer Allan Gill, one of the first men to walk to the North pole amongst other achievements.
Cheers Mick

Thanks for sharing !

And . . . also a nice Speedy you got

HAGOne

[motoikkyu]

Thanks for showing these nice examples. My current favorite daily-wear is a 1018. Much cheaper with the same movement. Getting harder to find because of the rage to convert them all into 1016s.