Wanting an Exp ll...

[Ragu]

After owning my Exp ll polar for over 10 yrs and still my daily wearer I'm leaning on buying a Black Exp ll also.
I'm undecided on a 40mm or 42mm Black however.
Does anyone own both the 40mm and 42mm Exp ll and if so your thoughts on the difference in size/fit on your wrist. I don't have a small wrist.
Thanks

[Juantxo]

If you don't mind the 42mm case, then buy it. I believe the Explorer II (and the Explorer) is one of the very best watches Rolex has to offer. And the new model is fantastic in all respects.

[yunach]

Can I suggest waiting a month until Basel to see if a new ceramic explorer 2 is introduced? The rumoured images look stunning.

[Ragu]

yunach,
I too saw the images and after owning/wearing my Exp ll for ten+ years I'm in no hurry.
I've seen some good pre-owned prices on the Black Exp ll.
Ever since buying the Polar I also wanted a Black one
Thanks

[Exploradori]

I like the 40mm more. It has better proportions


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[scarlet knight]

I like my 42 mm Polar 2 with the orange arrow.

[Gerardus]

I like the 5 digit (owned several white and black pieces in the past)
From the 42mm serie I like only the white one, the black one does not work for me.
Just my 2cts

[toomuchtalk]

Hi,

I have both the 40mm and 42mm black dial explorer 2.

The 40mm is far the better size.

The 42mm dial is really clear to read.

Depends wether you want an older piece with old bracelet and clasp etc. Or want the newer version.

Both do the job well.

If you want a pure tool watch then in reality the 40mm is better. It's smaller profile makes it less prone to knocks, it fits better on the wrist to.

[Stevec14]

I have the 42mm black and love it. Personally, I wasn't that keen on the ceramic photos. If you can get one at a good price, then I think you would like it.

[yunach]

Originally Posted by Ragu

yunach,
I too saw the images and after owning/wearing my Exp ll for ten+ years I'm in no hurry.
I've seen some good pre-owned prices on the Black Exp ll.
Ever since buying the Polar I also wanted a Black one
Thanks

And what are your thoughts on the images?
The new black one is really nice, love how the orange pops.
But then again, it is just a concept.
If you know you like the black one as is and arent keen on the new concept, go for it!
I would personally go after the 42mm.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by yunach

And what are your thoughts on the images?
The new black one is really nice, love how the orange pops.
But then again, it is just a concept.
If you know you like the black one as is and arent keen on the new concept, go for it!
I would personally go after the 42mm.

I see no reason why Rolex would replace a brushed steel bezel with a more brittle ceramic bezel on the Explorer II, which is all about durability.

[sea-dweller]

I have a small wrist, so the 16570 is better for me.

[Quailhunter]

Do the Explorer and the GMT share the same movement.

[azguy]

I don't like the 42mm case, very square and blocky IMHO

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by toomuchtalk

Hi,

I have both the 40mm and 42mm black dial explorer 2.

The 40mm is far the better size.

The 42mm dial is really clear to read.

Depends wether you want an older piece with old bracelet and clasp etc. Or want the newer version.

Both do the job well.

If you want a pure tool watch then in reality the 40mm is better. It's smaller profile makes it less prone to knocks, it fits better on the wrist to.

I think this is an excellent description between the two. The reason I wear my 216570 is because it's so easy to read.

[natosub]

As far as the ceramic concepts go, the white is nice but not sure I like the black. Prefer the black dial with stainless bezel.

[emersm]

I have a black 5 digit and a polar 6 digit. They both sit comfortably on my wrist, however, the 42mm polar is by far the easiest to read watch that I own.

[AF_Rob]

I own the 40 mm polar and I love it... however, I have tried on the modern black piece. Even at 42 mm, with the flatter case, it says very well on the wrist. With the more robust bracelet, it balances very well. Plus, it is very different than the legacy model. So, it would not seem like you are not doubling up on the same watch.

[911Turbo]

New member here and my first post! I just picked up a new Explorer II and extremely happy with it. I have a ceramic bezel Sub and found that a LOT of people have that watch. It's a beautiful watch and I understand why, but Sometimes I wear it and feel like a "me too." I just wanted something a little different.

[capote]

Originally Posted by yunach

Can I suggest waiting a month until Basel to see if a new ceramic explorer 2 is introduced? The rumoured images look stunning.

Its not a rumour, just a fanboy mock-up.

On topic: I like the look of black 42 mm but is wears alot larger IMO.

[Psmith]

Had both, much prefer the 216570 (42mm)

[watchwatcher]

Love the 42...never had the older version, though, so can't give you a comparison.

[varkom]

I much prefer the 42mm. Pretty much the only reason I'd go for the 40mm is if you have smaller wrists and simply can't pull off the 42mm

[sheldonsmith]

Originally Posted by Quailhunter

Do the Explorer and the GMT share the same movement.

With the new versions (ref 216570 and 116710) Technically no, but functionally yes. The Explorer II is a 3187 movement, whereas the GMT is a 3186 movement. The only difference between the two is the Exp II 3187's main plate is 2 mm larger diameter with a correspondingly larger diameter date wheel. Other than that, they are the same.

The older 16750 and 16710's shared the same movement.

-Sheldon

[karmatp]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

I see no reason why Rolex would replace a brushed steel bezel with a more brittle ceramic bezel on the Explorer II, which is all about durability.

Exactly. After owned a few ceramic subs, I will not buy another. Way to much shine and way to fragile for the tool watch that I want on my wrist. Rolex will completely ruin the Explorer II if they put a silly ceramic bezel on it.

[Quailhunter]

Thanks to sheldonsmith for the informative answer.

[sheldonsmith]

Originally Posted by Quailhunter

Thanks to sheldonsmith for the informative answer.

I forgot to mention that the Exp II 216570 with 3187 also has the the proprietary Rolex Paraflex balance staff protection which is different than the traditional KIF system.