New Explorer thoughts

[warrior]

I'm contemplating a new Explorer and will try one on at an AD again. Everyone talks about the hands....I'm pretty indifferent to the hands at this point.

However, what do owners think of the silver numerals? From pics, it seems that the silver numerals throw the watch out of balance in that they just about disappear from the dial. From pics, it almost looks as if there's nothing where the 3,6,9 markers are in place. Does this bother anyone? Owners' thoughts?

I saw one briefly at an AD, but was more focused on the hands than anything else, though I do remember thinking there was too much blank space on the dial.

Thanks

[hndsmed]

I have a Datejust Gold/Stainless/ Midnight Blue and a GMT 11 Gold/Stainless Black. My next Roles will be the Explorere Stainless/White. I need to free up some cash to get it. How much have you been quoted for the Explorer, I have seen them at about 6,000, is that still valid. Thanks!

[rolexertion]

Truthfully, I think the 3-6-9 numerals look fine, better in person than in photos, and in fact better than the non-lume white ones on the older Exp. As for the hands, I used to be one of the naysayers about the short hands, but after seeing the new Exp last week at an AD, I no longer think it's important enough to get stuck on. I'm actually very impressed with the overall look of the new Explorer, perhaps enough to buy one. I'm almost sure I can find one at a great price.

[warrior]

I haven't been quoted anything. As mentioned, I'm concerned about the fact that there "appears" to be nothing at the 3,6, 9 hour spaces. I have to go and look again.

Originally Posted by hndsmed

I have a Datejust Gold/Stainless/ Midnight Blue and a GMT 11 Gold/Stainless Black. My next Roles will be the Explorere Stainless/White. I need to free up some cash to get it. How much have you been quoted for the Explorer, I have seen them at about 6,000, is that still valid. Thanks!

[Capstone]

Check out this thread for my thoughts. The numerals look classy in person...many photos make the numerals look blacked out.

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthrea...light=capstone

[gregmoeck]

in person the numbers look excellent. The size of the hands are blown out of proportion. The watch is balanced perfectly on your wrist. It has blue lume and looks great.

[Dan2010]

It's an awesome watch. The only updated Rolex that stayed true to it's original roots if you ask me.

[PHDX2]

I prefer the new model. Go for it!

[SCD]

I agree that the hands are less of an issue in person than in pictures. But for me, it's still an issue...maybe not a deal-breaker, but still...I don't like it. The solid 369, along with the dark gray matte dial together have the effect of taking a lot of the contrast out of the appearance of the watch. It makes it look a little bit dull next to the 36, which has the white-surround 369 and a jet-black gloss dial, and looks more bold and sporty. The "ROLEX" written on the dial is a bit too large for me...over-branded...not quite tasteful imo.

I got to look at them next to each other at an AD, and I walked out with the 36. Still, this is all just relative, and in my lone subjective opinion. Of course the 39 is a real nice watch.

[warrior]

This is what I was also getting at...I'm gonna try to get to an AD this weekend. It's obviously a very nice watch.

Originally Posted by SCD

I agree that the hands are less of an issue in person than in pictures. But for me, it's still an issue...maybe not a deal-breaker, but still...I don't like it. The solid 369, along with the dark gray matte dial together have the effect of taking a lot of the contrast out of the appearance of the watch. It makes it look a little bit dull next to the 36, which has the white-surround 369 and a jet-black gloss dial, and looks more bold and sporty. The "ROLEX" written on the dial is a bit too large for me...over-branded...not quite tasteful imo.

I got to look at them next to each other at an AD, and I walked out with the 36. Still, this is all just relative, and in my lone subjective opinion. Of course the 39 is a real nice watch.

[petespendthrift]

The 36mm Explorer had a similar dial size to the 40mm sports models (Subs etc) and was only smaller because of it's narrow bezel.

The new version is just far too big - too much dial area. It looks empty and bland and seems to have lost that balance that gave the old ones their understated class.

In fact all the new style models seem to have lost a lot of their character.

[Dr.Brian]

Like you, I prefer the proportions of the classic model. I'm not afraid to wear a 36mm watch. I don't find them too small at all, and I don't have a tiny wrist either. I have several 36 and 38mm watches.
YMMV.
Good luck with your decision.

[simplymod]

I have the 36mm and love it (small wrist guy here). I was not expecting to care for the 39, but when I saw it at the AD, I was pleasantly surprised. It has a very nice presence...better in person then most pics I have seen and the bracelet is welcome improvement. That said, I would not trade my 36mm for it.

[Deyn Man]

only saw this in person the other day... prior to that, just in pictures... like many, i thought the hands were too small... but i was really blown when i tried it out.... the hands didn't bother me at all!!!!
i haven't seen the sub-c up close yet... but for now, i WANT the new exp!!!!!!

[Explorer 2011]

I the think the numbers only go missing in photos. They look great on my watch always bold even in dim light. Go For It you won't be sorry.

[Explorer 2011]

Originally Posted by Capstone

Check out this thread for my thoughts. The numerals look classy in person...many photos make the numerals look blacked out.

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthrea...light=capstone

I agree this thread has some great shots too...