Explorer II - 16570 Lume?

[cidcock]

I am throwing around the idea of getting into the luxury watch game. I have a modest collection of Seiko and Citizen divers currently and wear my (gasp) Squale 1545 most of the time.

I have really grown to love the size of the 1545 and actually prefer it to that of my buddy's 116610. I have been looking at some used 16610 and 14060's, but the price of those is a bit of a deterrent in that the savings over a like new 116610 can be had for nearly the same dime, with a far superior bracelet.

All of this being said, the $3-$4k price range is a little more palatable for me currently and has led me to the 16570. It seems to be one of the "bargain?" Rolexes out there. Which leads me to my question, how's the lume on the mid 2000's Explorer II's?

[MGWT]

It's not bad.

[Dirt]

Yes, not bad.
But it would be nice if it was better.
From experience I would say it's somewhat adequate.

[SearChart]

I'm not impressed by Rolex lume anyway, Seiko does a way better job, even on the low end watches.

[cidcock]

Thanks for input

Seiko really kinda ruins it for you, lot of value for so little money. I want to step up, but hate that that a luxury watch isn't necessary better in ALL aspects.

[incontrol]

It is not good. If you compare the lume of a 16570 to your current collection of watches, it would be as if it did not have much lume at all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cidcock]

I'm not impressed by Rolex lume anyway, Seiko does a way better job, even on the low end watches.

Disappointing, guess I need to set my sights on a 16610 or 14060.

[landroverking]

My 2001 Exp II still has good lume.