ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
25 October 2012, 05:34 PM | #31 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Real Name: Clive
Location: Exoplanet
Watch: spring-driven
Posts: 38,856
|
Unless you specifically need a smaller/lighter watch I would get the 216570
You get all of the latest updates, and it's not really that big imho. 42 mm is pretty much a standard size these days. I've owned both and prefer the new one by far
__________________
|
25 October 2012, 06:04 PM | #32 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Thailand
Watch: 116610 LN
Posts: 33
|
|
25 October 2012, 06:13 PM | #33 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Real Name: Travis
Location: FL / NYC
Watch: Yes..
Posts: 33,493
|
216570.
Everything about it tops the previous gen in my opinion. |
25 October 2012, 07:12 PM | #34 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Down Under
Watch: 16570
Posts: 484
|
16570. Beautifully understated.
|
25 October 2012, 10:15 PM | #35 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Real Name: JH
Location: London - UK
Watch: SSD/GMT2C/LVC/DJ2
Posts: 103
|
"Pulled the trigger"
Many thanks for all your advice. Having been wearing the 16570 for a day or two I exchanged it today for the 216570 and there is nothing as pleasing as knowing that you have made the right decision. For all the great attributes of the 15670, the new model feels like a big improvement in all its features. Also, the size is a better balance for the brushed steel bezel finish - i.e. more presence, but not too much.
|
25 October 2012, 10:18 PM | #36 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Detroit
Posts: 484
|
They are both great however I prefer the red 24 hour hand and the slimmer hands. That said, I prefer the clasp of the 216570. All things considered, I acquired the 16570 and am very happy with the decision.
__________________
GMT IIc, Exp II, Speedy Pro If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up too much space. |
25 October 2012, 10:38 PM | #37 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Fl.
Posts: 521
|
I tried both. End up with this.
|
25 October 2012, 10:56 PM | #38 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Texas, US
Posts: 271
|
The new version is beautiful, particularly the 24hr hand, but gawd its too big. As is the trend lately, bigger is apparently better and fat cushion oysters are the rage. Rolex was built on a tradition of being timelessly classic, not trendy...go for the 16570.
__________________
"As long as there are explorers, Rolex will continue to travel to the ends of the Earth, and back." |
25 October 2012, 11:08 PM | #39 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Real Name: JH
Location: London - UK
Watch: SSD/GMT2C/LVC/DJ2
Posts: 103
|
Agreed, but even Rolex need to evolve. Bracelets aside, which I think we all agree have been recently improved across all models (not before time), there is a tricky balance to ensure they are classic (i.e. consistent with previous models) but not dated.
|
25 October 2012, 11:58 PM | #40 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Real Name: Ron
Location: Arizona, USA
Watch: 116233
Posts: 3,180
|
Congrats! Enjoy your new EXP!!
|
26 October 2012, 01:57 AM | #41 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Real Name: Brendan
Location: NJ
Watch: Pepsi/LVC/DJII
Posts: 446
|
Of the two i would go 42mm. The older explorer never did it for me, but the white dialed 42mm version is really growing on me
|
26 October 2012, 02:15 AM | #42 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Real Name: paul
Location: surabaya
Posts: 321
|
I have the polar 42 and can definitely see the charm of the older 40 polar.., but well, my choice is clear on this.
I also have the black exp42, after having it, to my own surprise, i found out its as every bit as nice as the iconic sub c. Since i have to choose either one to keep. Hence i let go of the 116610ln. Maybe someday i will revisit the sub with the 114060. Congrats for the OP for the decision made. WeAr it in good health. Cheers |
26 October 2012, 02:18 AM | #43 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Real Name: Steve
Location: Harrogate
Watch: OUT !!!!
Posts: 829
|
enjoy!!!
__________________
Current rotation; AP15500ST grey, White Daytona 116500, WG Black/Red Daytona 116509, White and Black EXP 42, GMT2C.... too many previous it makes my head hurt thinking about them. |
26 October 2012, 03:20 AM | #44 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Real Name: Trevor
Location: Canada
Watch: Polar Explorer II
Posts: 1,231
|
Mine is a 216570 polar. Love the larger hands that are more easily seen! And it's very bright in low light conditions. I'd go with the 216570 due to the larger hands and the better bracelet. Oddly though, the longer I have the watch the more I would forego the orange hand; though it's beautiful, I find I really don't use it much & the large arrow design can be a little confusing with the hour hand at night.
Either way you've got a pleasant decision ahead of you. |
26 October 2012, 03:29 AM | #45 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Socal
Posts: 4,964
|
I kinda have to agree on this
though for me is the 16750 in white ONLY ...
__________________
135 ├┼┼╕ 246 R |
26 October 2012, 06:03 AM | #46 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 148
|
16570 for me. I love the proportion of the watch but I'm not a fan of big watches any more. Nothing over 40mm for me ever again!
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.