The 36mm Explorer wears big for its size

[Kevin of Larchmont]

Originally Posted by TimeAZ

If the 124270 were marketed at 36, but actually measured 37 and came with a 20mm bracelet, then it would have been the perfect happy medium between the arguments "36 too small" and "39 too big". Guess we will have to wait until the 224270 gets released

Laughable. There is absolutely no possible scenario where a forum full of thousands of disparate individuals with different life experiences and different wrist sizes will ever not argue about the perfect size watch.

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by TimeAZ

What on Earth are you talking about??? That 35mm diameter explorer "36" looks like a small button on that wrist... maybe works if you are looking for a dress piece or wanted to capture the vintage spirit. Whereas the 39mm is literal perfection, perfectly sized and sporty.

If the 124270 were marketed at 36, but actually measured 37 and came with a 20mm bracelet, then it would have been the perfect happy medium between the arguments "36 too small" and "39 too big". Guess we will have to wait until the 224270 gets released

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

Laughable. There is absolutely no possible scenario where a forum full of thousands of disparate individuals with different life experiences and different wrist sizes will ever not argue about the perfect size watch.

I’ll do you one better: going to start an argument about the reference number. I believe it’ll be the 134270. The first digit only increases when size increases (marketed size that is). The DSSD showed that the “3” had begun to appear on same sized updates.

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by dannyp

I’ll do you one better: going to start an argument about the reference number. I believe it’ll be the 134270. The first digit only increases when size increases (marketed size that is). The DSSD showed that the “3” had begun to appear on same sized updates.

Well if you're going to start an argument about that then I'm going to finish it!! Just kidding, but... The Submariner went from 40 to 41mm and the ref went from 116610 to 126610. If the first digit were related to size, shouldn't it have gone to 216610 instead? This is funny, because just yesterday I posted about decoding reference numbers to see if there were any beautiful mind types floating around here who could crack the code.

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

Well if you're going to start an argument about that then I'm going to finish it!! Just kidding, but... The Submariner went from 40 to 41mm and the ref went from 116610 to 126610. If the first digit were related to size, shouldn't it have gone to 216610 instead? This is funny, because just yesterday I posted about decoding reference numbers to see if there were any beautiful mind types floating around here who could crack the code.

Good point! Should have been 21 instead of 12 if the Explorer series is anything to go on. Explorer was strange situation since it was a six-digit before that was a thing, but the II should have gone to 116570…

[matthew P]

Originally Posted by TimeAZ

If the 124270 were marketed at 36, but actually measured 37 and came with a 20mm bracelet, then it would have been the perfect happy medium between the arguments "36 too small" and "39 too big". Guess we will have to wait until the 224270 gets released

When images were first released everyone assumed the lug width would have been 20mm …… reverse engineering the specs lead many to believe a 37mm explorer was going to fill the space between the modern vintage and the MKII



For me this size would have been an absolute slam dunk and I agree it would have made it easier to push a “single size” explorer .

I personally think the 124270 is as small as I could accept in my wrist……
I also think that a 39.5/ OP41mm explorer will be announced in a year or two……..I’m Also sure that it will be too large for my taste.

I’m firmly in the classically sized > sporty size Explorer camp.

I will say that after almost a years ownership this has become my all time favorite piece.

It’s should also be noted that photography plays a large part in shifting perceptions.

IPhone close ups distort relative sizes of wrists compared to watches and we get used to seeing “exaggerated “ watches on wrist leading people to expect/ aspire to the same large presence on their wrist.
The 124270 can be photographed with a long lens to appear small ( lume shot ) or with a wide angle lens to appear large compared to the wrist it sits on….. my photos on my own wrist show the different perspectives.










….Save the drama - I’m just here for the photos….

[matthew P]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

Which you feel looks better is entirely a matter of opinion. But on the topic of proportions specifically, I have to strongly disagree. I feel this is more a matter of math than of opinions………,They consist of a 39-40mm case and a 20mm bracelet. As such, the 39mm Explorer with the 20mm bracelet is holding up this golden ratio (1.95:1) more closely. The 36mm Explorer on the 20mm bracelet presents a decidedly diminutive case look (1.8:1). For further proof of this concept just look at the latest 36mm Explorer. Rolex dropped the bracelet size to 19mm to make the new 36mm case look proportionally bigger and in doing so restored the ratio back to 1.9:1.

Agree with this


….Save the drama - I’m just here for the photos….

[LA_LEC]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

I have both in hand at the moment and find the 39 to be a visually perfect fit for my 7" (2.25" wide) wrist. That said, the 36 (mine is the 114270, not the latest) is quite comfortable and completely disappears on the wrist. For some this is a pro, for others it's a con.

I really feel like Rolex should have kept both sizes in production. Cartier makes a Medium and a Large Santos. Samsung and Apple make a regular and a "plus" size for their phones. I just don't get the premise behind "the entire world needs to make this one size work". So whether you are a 100 lb female or a 300 pound male, one size fits all? That's absurd at face value.

Attachment 1317846

IMHO that the 39mm fits you perfectly.

[SaddleSC]

I really just prefer the proportions of the 36mm...it is a very special watch:)



And proportionately it can certainly hold its own against other 40mm references...

[shaunylw]

I was really excited about the 36, but it felt dainty. I don’t like big watches but i couldn’t get into the size. I had the 39 and it felt perfect. But, I may give the 36 a try at some point. It looks great, and I’m sure after a few days it will feel perfect.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GST15]

For me personally, with a 7" wrist I felt it was a bit small on me, so I will opt for finding a 39

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

Which you feel looks better is entirely a matter of opinion. But on the topic of proportions specifically, I have to strongly disagree. I feel this is more a matter of math than of opinions. It would be really hard to argue that there is a more iconic and classic look than a traditional (pre ceramic) Rolex GMT or Daytona. These watches basically defined "the" look of men's sport watches for multiple generations. They consist of a 39-40mm case and a 20mm bracelet. As such, the 39mm Explorer with the 20mm bracelet is holding up this golden ratio (1.95:1) more closely. The 36mm Explorer on the 20mm bracelet presents a decidedly diminutive case look (1.8:1). For further proof of this concept just look at the latest 36mm Explorer. Rolex dropped the bracelet size to 19mm to make the new 36mm case look proportionally bigger and in doing so restored the ratio back to 1.9:1.

This

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by GST15

For me personally, with a 7" wrist I felt it was a bit small on me, so I will opt for finding a 39

I agree.
I used to have a 114270 and it wore on my >7" wrist like a boys watch size. Alas, there was no 39mm size.
It ran beautifully but it had to go to a new home where it was better loved.

[nachopc]

To me 36mm watches and Daytona are by far the most comfortable watches in the Rolex line up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Bet]

I love my Explorer, it wears pretty good,
But It does not get much wrist time.

[Sunny Arizona]

I tried one on about a year ago and didn’t like it. Was offered one in Aspen a couple weeks ago and pulled the trigger. No regrets at all.

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by Sunny Arizona

I tried one on about a year ago and didn’t like it. Was offered one in Aspen a couple weeks ago and pulled the trigger. No regrets at all.

Was in there not long ago. Among the better selection of exhibition pieces, including a steel jubilee DJ and OP36 silver. Was actually my first time trying the former, as well as the blue YM.

Also saw Tudor BB Pro in case, which I didn’t bother trying since I could for the first time see just how thick it was.