New Air-King vs. Explorer

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by dannyp

Read about the pilots who all relied on Rolexes, for whom the AK was named. Remember, the Explorer never climbed Everest - it was introduced as a tribute to the watch worn by Norgay on the expedition - so also lacks a "legacy" by your logic.

Listen, the explorer was the bond watch, game set and match for me right there. No they were not worn to the summit, but they were given 6098’s that were the precursor to the explorer and many went on expeditions to the Himalayas. Look into the expedition by Lohner. Likewise the first ascents of kedarnath, satopanth, kalindi peak and some others were worn by a group with the precursor to the explorer

The old 6150 explorer still looks very similar to the current versions while the AK is massively different and what we’re they thinking with that concentric circle AK? That kind of deviation never happened with the explorer. For me, that vast change in dial design, case size, etc make it a deal breaker for me if I’m choosing between the AK and Explorer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tools]

Originally Posted by Chester01

No, I mean what legacy is the AK known for? I mean, like the sub was worn in combat and by navy divers, the gmt on the wrist of astronauts and fighter pilots. Does the AK model itself have any such connection?

No, it is the Air King style of watch that was worn by fighter pilots in WW II and Rolex honored pilots with Air King badging in 1945.

The GMT wasn't even around for another decade, and it wasn't for fighter pilots, it was made for commercial international pilots.

The Air King is now dialed with seconds markings, useful for all timing typically found in the cockpit. Flying isn't all about what time it is in Greenwich

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by Chester01

How far was that version of the air king versus the current version? Went from watch which was basically like every other Rolex with the exception of air king printed in the dial. I mean went from a basic oyster and look at the 114200 with a concentric dial? Like what, then a 34mm case (I mean let’s get serious for real practicality the 48mm B-UHR were visible and functional.

Now it’s like 40mm, then it had a pizza logo printed on it. The air king was a stable reference for like many decades and then Rolex kept changing it. At one point it had stick makers, then Rolex basically turned it into an explorer.

I like Rolex like the next guy, but let’s be real, it lacks the legacy of the dirty dozen watches, the breitling navitimer, and gmt. As far as it’s real aviation legacy, it’s way, way down on the list of we are being real with ourselves.

The modern air king bears little resemblance to the air king of old and Rolex constant changing it tarnished its legacy. The modern gmt and sub and explorer, one look at the dial, case etc and there are little changes and still recognizable from their older siblings.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

On this, I largely agree. And it's a big part of why I personally prefer the Explorer by a wide margin. But once again, we're mixing definitions of "legacy" in this discussion. There's the legacy of the name, and then the legacy of the current design.

Also, to your point about ever-changing dials: That's always been a Rolex trait outside of the Professional line, of which the AK wasn't part until the past decade. Remember, until the 116900, there was no stainless OP34, just the AK (TT/gold OP/OPD as well as steel OPD existed, though). So changes in dials would be expected, just like a DJ or DD. More recently I think of the "quintessential" AK dials as the 3-6-9 and the small, printed Romans inside a more finely graduated ring of minute markers.

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by Chester01

Listen, the explorer was the bond watch, game set and match for me right there.

Sorry, but when a watch's "legacy" is tied to its appearance on the wrist of a fictional movie character... (who I thought wore a Sub prior to the 90s)...

Originally Posted by Tools

No, it is the Air King that was worn by fighter pilots in WW II.

The GMT wasn't even around for another decade, and it wasn't for fighter pilots, it was made for commercial international pilots.

The Air King is now dialed with seconds markings, useful for all timing typically found in the cockpit. Flying isn't all about what time it is in Greenwich

Hate to contradict you on Rolex history (since you've forgotten more of it than I'll likely know) but I don't think that was the case. It wasn't even put out until the year the War ended. However nearly identical watches (but w/o AK name) most certainly adorned their wrists in combat!

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by dannyp

On this, I largely agree. And it's a big part of why I personally prefer the Explorer by a wide margin. But once again, we're mixing definitions of "legacy" in this discussion. There's the legacy of the name, and then the legacy of the current design.

Also, to your point about ever-changing dials: That's always been a Rolex trait outside of the Professional line, of which the AK wasn't part until the past decade. Remember, until the 116900, there was no stainless OP34, just the AK (TT/gold OP/OPD as well as steel OPD existed, though). So changes in dials would be expected, just like a DJ or DD. More recently I think of the "quintessential" AK dials as the 3-6-9 and the small, printed Romans inside a more finely graduated ring of minute markers.

I agree with that. I just saying for me, if I were to choose, the explorer is the more classic watch. Both to a large degree are more Rolex hype than real legacy and both lack the real heritage and legacy of the sub and gmt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ArsenX]

They’re both great watches but I’ll always prefer the explorer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by Tools

No, it is the Air King that was worn by fighter pilots in WW II.

The GMT wasn't even around for another decade, and it wasn't for fighter pilots, it was made for commercial international pilots.

The Air King is now dialed with seconds markings, useful for all timing typically found in the cockpit. Flying isn't all about what time it is in Greenwich

I am unaware that the AK was considered a dirty dozen watch, and I have not seen any with military markings. The gmt was used in combat and space by pilots, and military. The AK is largely hype and never saw the action of the dirty dozen watches or the B-uhr watches.

The harsh reality is the sub and gmt are the real deal, but the Daytona, explorer, and AK largely Rolex hype, marketing, and selling an image. The humble seiko has far more heritage than the models we are discussing here. If I’m going for a pilots watch, the AK would not even be on my radar. The gmt or navitimer rule that domain.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by Chester01

I am unaware that the AK was considered a dirty dozen watch, and I have not seen any with military markings. The gmt was used in combat and space by pilots, and military. The AK is largely hype and never saw the action of the dirty dozen watches or the B-uhr watches.

The harsh reality is the sub and gmt are the real deal, but the Daytona, explorer, and AK largely Rolex hype, marketing, and selling an image. The humble seiko has far more heritage than the models we are discussing here. If I’m going for a pilots watch, the AK would not even be on my radar. The gmt or navitimer rule that domain.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"Dirty Dozen" watches refer to a very, very specific MOD specification, and neither the AK, nor any other Rolex, was included. But that hardly comprised the entirety of WWII Allied pilot or combat watches.

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by dannyp

"Dirty Dozen" watches refer to a very, very specific MOD specification, and neither the AK, nor any other Rolex, was included. But that hardly comprised the entirety of WWII Allied pilot or combat watches.

I’m not saying they were. But that legacy, and that’s heritage. The AK (and to a slightly lesser degree) both watches are Rolex marketing hype and both lack the real heritage and legacy of a humble seiko.

But if you are saying Rolex was used in wwii, I would be interested in reading about that as that would be the first I have heard about that.

But if one is interested in a watch with real flight heritage the AK would be way, way down on the list. The reality is the sub has likely more aviation heritage than the AK. The sub was issued by various navy’s and many of them also pilots.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by Chester01

How far was that version of the air king versus the current version? Went from watch which was basically like every other Rolex with the exception of air king printed in the dial. I mean went from a basic oyster and look at the 114200 with a concentric dial? Like what, then a 34mm case (I mean let’s get serious for real practicality the 48mm B-UHR were visible and functional.

Now it’s like 40mm, then it had a pizza logo printed on it. The air king was a stable reference for like many decades and then Rolex kept changing it. At one point it had stick makers, then Rolex basically turned it into an explorer.

I like Rolex like the next guy, but let’s be real, it lacks the legacy of the dirty dozen watches, the breitling navitimer, and gmt. As far as it’s real aviation legacy, it’s way, way down on the list of we are being real with ourselves.

The modern air king bears little resemblance to the air king of old and Rolex constant changing it tarnished its legacy. The modern gmt and sub and explorer, one look at the dial, case etc and there are little changes and still recognizable from their older siblings.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I fail to see how any of that is relevant, but apparently it's important to you, which is okay by me.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by travisb

It comes down to size, proportions and looks.
I prefer the size of the AK but prefer the clean dial, simple good looks and history of the Exp. Exp > AK for me.

I’m right there with you brother

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

I fail to see how any of that is relevant, but apparently it's important to you, which is okay by me.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

It’s all relevant with regard to deciding between an AK and Explorer. I mean I like that my sub, a u series has the same lines as the sub from 1959. It means that Rolex does not change things. One of the things that separates Rolex from other brands. Consider what iwc is doing with the mark series it’s like a whole new watch every 2 years, with changes all the time. Or what breitling has done with the chronomat. The sameness lays the groundwork for an icon to grow and had Rolex changed things so dramatically with the sub and gmt, they may not be what they are today.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by Chester01

It’s all relevant with regard to deciding between an AK and Explorer. I mean I like that my sub, a u series has the same lines as the sub from 1959. It means that Rolex does not change things. One of the things that separates Rolex from other brands. Consider what iwc is doing with the mark series it’s like a whole new watch every 2 years, with changes all the time. Or what breitling has done with the chronomat. The sameness lays the groundwork for an icon to grow and had Rolex changed things so dramatically with the sub and gmt, they may not be what they are today.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, we can agree on the IWC brand, that's for sure. I think the Mark XV was the last of the classics in their pilot lines.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by Chester01

It’s all relevant with regard to deciding between an AK and Explorer. I mean I like that my sub, a u series has the same lines as the sub from 1959. It means that Rolex does not change things. One of the things that separates Rolex from other brands. Consider what iwc is doing with the mark series it’s like a whole new watch every 2 years, with changes all the time. Or what breitling has done with the chronomat. The sameness lays the groundwork for an icon to grow and had Rolex changed things so dramatically with the sub and gmt, they may not be what they are today.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I mean, it's all a matter of degrees... The GMT of today hardly bears resemblance to the original (even the earliest crown guard examples). It's bigger, thicker, and shinier with only one "original" bezel offering. While the size has increased, I'd say today's Sub is more true to the original. And, on that note, neither your U nor today's, look anything like the "original" which was just over 36mm, without crown guards, and only 100m WR.

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

Well, we can agree on the IWC brand, that's for sure. I think the Mark XV was the last of the classics in their pilot lines.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

Yea. It's sad that the current descendant of the RAF icon now has a Luftwaffe transport engraved on its case back .

[RyanJ]

If we are going by legacy, the simple OP pretty much blows everything else out of the water. The OP is the foundational watch that Rolex was built upon.

I prefer the Explorer over the Air King but I have started to really like the AK.

[zengineer]

Originally Posted by Thuilln

With the added bonus of an ugly dial.

Pass.

Accept no substitute. Find a full size Explorer.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by dannyp

I mean, it's all a matter of degrees... The GMT of today hardly bears resemblance to the original (even the earliest crown guard examples). It's bigger, thicker, and shinier with only one "original" bezel offering. While the size has increased, I'd say today's Sub is more true to the original. And, on that note, neither your U nor today's, look anything like the "original" which was just over 36mm, without crown guards, and only 100m WR.

Sorry, I disagree with that 36mm issue. When you look at the data, the 40mm was the standard for decades and 99% here on this form came of age and that was the standard. Rolex made a few tweaks to the sub and gmt early on, and then that’s where they stayed. That’s not a debate, it’s based on how long Rolex held the line with the case shape, proportions and dial size.

When the public thinks sub, it’s the 4/5 digits that built the brand and the one the public thinks when it thinks sub. The early almost prototypes did not stick around and it’s the 4/5 digits that were in the wrist of those doing history and in combat. Not the early 50’s versions and sure as hell not the 6 digits.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kwcross]

I have the new AK and I think it is fantastic; the Ex36 is too, but it's just a little smaller than I like. Here is a side-by-side with a friend's 124270. Good luck with your decision; there is no wrong answer here!

[LA_LEC]

Originally Posted by zengineer

Accept no substitute. Find a full size Explorer.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Right on

[CedCraig]

I just got the new Air-King and love it. I tried on the latest Explorer, 36 mm, and disliked it. The Explorer felt tiny on my wrist, which isn’t all that big at 7.25”. The bracelet tapered down to what seemed like close to dental tape size. I’d always liked the Explorer but was shocked at how awful it looked on me in the metal.

Oddly, the 36 mm OP wore significantly larger, though for an OP I’d go 41 mm.

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by CedCraig

I just got the new Air-King and love it. I tried on the latest Explorer, 36 mm, and disliked it. The Explorer felt tiny on my wrist, which isn’t all that big at 7.25”. The bracelet tapered down to what seemed like close to dental tape size. I’d always liked the Explorer but was shocked at how awful it looked on me in the metal.

Oddly, the 36 mm OP wore significantly larger, though for an OP I’d go 41 mm.

OP36 has a 20mm inter-lug width and the bracelet tapers less. And if you tried the silver, it wears 2-3mm bigger than others, IMO.