Flip your "stubby" Explorer I?

[sea-dweller]

- yes sir, Grady!

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

Likewise.

The 114270 is the apotheosis of the Explorer.

[chillwill120]

Originally Posted by Boothroyd

It's been bugging me all day, I will admit. But I agree with the post above--I really do NOT want lumed 3-6-9. It may have worked on 114270, but it's a distraction on the 214270 as it's slightly larger--if you think of it as a potential dress watch. And that's one thing I love about the watch..it's flexibility. I think it is somewhat less flexible now--sports all the way, as you mentioned.

When I got my Tudor BBB, I really had to get used to how LONG the hands were. It was a slight negative to me, compared to the 214270, as the minute hand covered the marker when setting. So the hands have never been an issue for me on the 214270. If anything, I think the new hands are a bit thick---again, making it a sports watch, not as flexible when trying to use it in dress mode.

Keeping it forever.

The 114270 did not have lume on the 3,6 and 9.

[captain_NEMO]

Originally Posted by latitudeqd

Anyone who owns a old 214270, I really curious to know what is your plan after Rolex just dropped this "correct" version

I just purchased mine in February, to be honest, the short hand doesn't really bother me. But I am really attempted by the all lumed numbers. Not too sure if I want to flip mine for the new one, god knows how long the waiting list at AD will be.

Got mine as well end of February, and I am completely satisfied with my purchase. I was in the market for a dressier watch with a sportier side and the non-lumed 39mm fit the bill to the T.

Sure, the redux version is still freakin awesome. But after wearing mine nonstop since purchase, I've grown attached to the WG 3/6/9 and the slimmer hands. Much more refined and dressy, IMHO. The merc hour hand and the oyster gives it the hint of rough that I was looking for. The 3/6/9 being un-lumed on mine and the over talked about short minute hand are nonissue.

New version is a tad too sporty for me, with the beefier hands and bigger indices. Although a great version, I already have a couple of divers to scratch that itch.

[Gray1730]

Originally Posted by WatchWatchers

I really dislike all the apparent hate for my new 2015 214270. I agree hands could be slightly larger but I have a hard time even seeing the difference. What I love about mine however is the none lume numbers. The white gold is brilliant and will age much better. Lume fads, gold is forever :). I plan on keeping mine forever, so small incremental updates don't bother me. Of the new watched I hope people want to sell their old daytonas. I love the old stainless, new ceramic is too much. Too each their own!

Thanks for your thoughts.
I've only had my new 2016 214270 for less than a week now.
I too really like the white gold none lume numbers and don't see a problem with the hands. However, all this talk is making me wonder if I should return it and wait. One AD over the phone today said it could be August before stock of the 'dumpy hour hand' version arrives.
I am 99% sure I want to keep it.
Cheers