Rolex Explorer Ref# 214270 Mark I or Mark II

[Sinanamus]

Originally Posted by gg922

I really want to thank you all for your recommendations. I ended up purchasing a MK I. I liked both versions I just got a decent deal on the MK I so I went with it.

That's what I call a happy ending.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[bellesdad0417]

In 2016 I actually had a choice between the two, I chose the MKII.

[AJMarcus]

Originally Posted by 2nastie

MK2, overall better looking watch.

There is a probably a few that prefer the look of the MK1 but not let's kid ourselves, the majority of MK1 advocates is for the investment standpoint because many think it has been produced for a shorter period of time and therefore "rarer".

In fact, MK1 is from 2010 to 2016 (+/- 6 years) vs. MK2 is 2016-present (+/- 4 years). If you want to speak about rarity, technically there should be more MK1s than MK2s. If Rolex comes out with another dial tomorrow, suddenly the MK2s are produced less.

Go with the watch you like more. Simple as that.

Your Analysis is flawed. The MK 1 we know was less popular and so a lot less were manufactured and bought. Less demand means less manufactured means smaller supply. There are a lot less MK 1 variants as witnessed by how few turn up on the pre owned sites anywhere these days. Also, many who had their MK 1 serviced by RSC opted to change their dial and hands for those on the MK 2. In summary, like it or not, the variant MK 1 is less rare than even the Mark 2, 114270 or 14270.

[Justinmg]

mark 2

[franktehtank]

I'd probably opt for the mk ii, but if I already had the mk i I wouldn't bother trying to flip it into a mk ii.

The Mk I is a beauty and could become a collectible one day.

[Rexplorer214270]

If you don't have a 214270, then the MK II