Explorer II (40mm) for Explorer II (42mm)-- Would you do it?

[toomuchtalk]

Interesting.
I have the old red hand explorers-
And the new versions.
I think they are totally different watches.
The red hand polar version is the definitive explorer 2- not counting the original orange hand- that's the benchmark.
The better watch for expeditions is the new orange hand white dial. And that's the point: for expeditions. The dial is amazing for viewing in low light- better movement- better clasp.
The black dial is better for all round daily use- it's a dressier watch.
The red hand versions are gorgeous and will do the job they are designed for. But you can't read the time at 4am in the morning inside a tent. You can with the new version.

So, if you want the best watch for use on an expedition- and that's what the explorer is meant to do!
Get the new explorer 2. White .

If you don't do expeditions- but love a GMT function and a robust watch get the black.

If you love the vintage feel keep the one you have: because it is better proportioned and looks better on the wrist.
Just my take on it.

[MrSimba]

I'd trade a 40mm for the 42mm in either Black or White dial in an instant.

The size, awesome legibility of the polars dial or the 'floating' hands of the black dial, & the orange hand... simply stunning!

It's just my favourite Rolex & I intend to buy the black dial to complement my polar in 2015 & at some point a vintage Steve McQueen is my grail :)

[ZeKe]

Go for it!

[Limey-]

Nope...

[Im Lauf der Zeit]

$3K is a lot to add to swap your Explorer 2 for the newer, over-sized one. Besides if you don't like your current Ex2 chances are you you won't like the bigger one either--this design may just not be for you, why pay three grand to confirm what you already intuitively know...

[Al1969]

I did it. I say got for it. I felt the 40mm wore 'small'.

[sea-dweller]

I would not, for that amount of cash.

[Daytonaman799]

yes. i think one of the best in the modern line up. that along with the new sd and pepsi are the three best new rolexes in the last few years. worth the trade in my opinion.

[Baco Noir]

Originally Posted by jbsmith

42mm polar is my favorite exp 2. One of my favorite watches period.

Nice revival of a 5 month old thread! I wonder if the OP ever made a decision?


Sent from my iPad Air 2 using Tapatalk (so I blame autocorrect for the spellin' errs)

[esdeezy]

Originally Posted by Im Lauf der Zeit

$3K is a lot to add to swap your Explorer 2 for the newer, over-sized one. Besides if you don't like your current Ex2 chances are you you won't like the bigger one either--this design may just not be for you, why pay three grand to confirm what you already intuitively know...

Exactly what I was gonna say. Especially he has other 40mm size he wears, so size is not the problem.

[jbsmith]

Originally Posted by Baco Noir

Nice revival of a 5 month old thread! I wonder if the OP ever made a decision?


Sent from my iPad Air 2 using Tapatalk (so I blame autocorrect for the spellin' errs)

Sorry about that. Tapatalk indicated new thread and I trusted it was without looking at last post date. Maybe the op will chime in on his decision. :)

[Explorador]

Since we are still at it, I find the 5 digit EXII way more elegant.

[Majin Buu]

Hi!
Yes I would!
The E2 has basically the latest from rolex in terms of movement...
Plus 42mm is the top end of how large would I go...

Cheers

MB

[josephvman]

I had the 40mm polar, now have the 42mm polar. I'm a big fan of the original orange hand Explorer II, so the new 42mm polar really pushes my buttons. The large dial makes it look much bigger than it wears, but it wears small and feels little different on the wrist than a SubC or GMT IIc. My girlfriend, who has had my 5513 Sub on her wrist for most of the last year, tells me she loves the 42mm polar on my wrist, and the only comments she makes about my watches is that they all look the same to her.

The improvements are numerous; better shock protection, lume, and especially the bracelet.

If you really love your 40mm however, you might want to expand your collection with something else for $3k. If you don't have a chrono, a Tudor Heritage isn't much more than $3k and it's probably my favorite recent addition.

[FiftyTwoEighty]

Originally Posted by toomuchtalk

Interesting.
The better watch for expeditions is the new orange hand white dial. And that's the point: for expeditions. The dial is amazing for viewing in low light- better movement- better clasp.

So, if you want the best watch for use on an expedition- and that's what the explorer is meant to do!
Get the new explorer 2. White .

Just my take on it.

^The Gospel from our resident Explorer...

I picked up my 216570 for your exact reasons. Much easier to read in low light in the tent and much easier to read in very bright light on snow.

I also wish they gave us a glidelock bracelet...so you can wear it over a thumb gusseted base layer. Bare skin + wind chill + altitude = no fun.

[ferrissteve11]

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I always felt the hands on the 216570 were a tad on the larger size. I had it for about 6 weeks and traded it off. That said I think its a great watch on its own merit and would say the upgrade from the earlier model is worth it. It just wasn't the watch that 'sang' for me. YMMV

[GTC]

When I first responded to this thread in June, my Exp II 42mm not too old bought new from an AD. I looked at the previous iteration at Swiss Watch Expo in Atlanta back then without knowing all the history, and for someone looking for an all around tool, I felt I had struck gold. Well, really nice stainless steel anyway.

Now, six months later it was still a great decision. Whether speaking in a dark suit with cuff links as I recently did in West Africa, competing in USPSA, or my part time gig in law-enforcement, the watch has been perfect, loses less than a second a day, and virtually never comes off. Mine is a black dial, recently bought my son a barely used white dial 42mm Exp II (his preference). I am particularly impressed by the watches ability to shrug off shock as it has been on the receiving end of thousands of incidents of recoil in training and competition.

Originally Posted by toomuchtalk

The red hand polar version is the definitive explorer 2- not counting the original orange hand- that's the benchmark.
If you love the vintage feel keep the one you have: because it is better proportioned and looks better on the wrist.
Just my take on it.

I'm going to respectfully disagree. The original is the definitive Explorer 2 not the subsequent interpretation(s). And the new 42mm easily harkens back more strongly to the original look and ethos while simultaneously landing in the 21st Century. Better proportioned to the wrist? Don't know, partially depending on the wearer's size and one's perception of appropriate watch size these days.

Picture Legend: 2 LE tools, using the time zone function in West Africa, the joys of getting tased in training - and the longest 5 seconds of one's life (me in white pants), and the near original standard.

[subtona]

Originally Posted by toomuchtalk

Interesting.
I have the old red hand explorers-
And the new versions.
I think they are totally different watches.
The red hand polar version is the definitive explorer 2- not counting the original orange hand- that's the benchmark.
The better watch for expeditions is the new orange hand white dial. And that's the point: for expeditions. The dial is amazing for viewing in low light- better movement- better clasp.
The black dial is better for all round daily use- it's a dressier watch.
The red hand versions are gorgeous and will do the job they are designed for. But you can't read the time at 4am in the morning inside a tent. You can with the new version.

So, if you want the best watch for use on an expedition- and that's what the explorer is meant to do!
Get the new explorer 2. White .

If you don't do expeditions- but love a GMT function and a robust watch get the black.

If you love the vintage feel keep the one you have: because it is better proportioned and looks better on the wrist.
Just my take on it.

There you have it

For me I actually went from the 42mm polar to the 40mm polar.
As above it helps if you apply your expected use to the decision. My intent was to travel with it and I know I would find myself in areas where the watch may be a target for some, so I went for the older cheaper model.


Ps. I know someone is thinking it, so I'll answer here : G shock is not an option for me.

Pps.
FYI the polar 40mm hands are slightly wider and more legible in the dark than the black dial version.

[JayAK]

Yes!

[sickened1]

Whichever floats your boat.. they're both great watches. I prefer the 40mm myself.

[toomuchtalk]

Originally Posted by FiftyTwoEighty

^The Gospel from our resident Explorer...

I picked up my 216570 for your exact reasons. Much easier to read in low light in the tent and much easier to read in very bright light on snow.

I also wish they gave us a glidelock bracelet...so you can wear it over a thumb gusseted base layer. Bare skin + wind chill + altitude = no fun.

I agree with your clasp point.
I have actually enquired at the AD to see if I can get this done..no joy.

[toomuchtalk]

Originally Posted by subtona

There you have it

For me I actually went from the 42mm polar to the 40mm polar.
As above it helps if you apply your expected use to the decision. My intent was to travel with it and I know I would find myself in areas where the watch may be a target for some, so I went for the older cheaper model.


Ps. I know someone is thinking it, so I'll answer here : G shock is not an option for me.

Pps.
FYI the polar 40mm hands are slightly wider and more legible in the dark than the black dial version.

Agree with you on the G shock. As at the end of the day, you have to travel in style!

[toomuchtalk]

Originally Posted by GTC

When I first responded to this thread in June, my Exp II 42mm not too old bought new from an AD. I looked at the previous iteration at Swiss Watch Expo in Atlanta back then without knowing all the history, and for someone looking for an all around tool, I felt I had struck gold. Well, really nice stainless steel anyway.

Now, six months later it was still a great decision. Whether speaking in a dark suit with cuff links as I recently did in West Africa, competing in USPSA, or my part time gig in law-enforcement, the watch has been perfect, loses less than a second a day, and virtually never comes off. Mine is a black dial, recently bought my son a barely used white dial 42mm Exp II (his preference). I am particularly impressed by the watches ability to shrug off shock as it has been on the receiving end of thousands of incidents of recoil in training and competition.


Did say the original was the benchmark!

I'm going to respectfully disagree. The original is the definitive Explorer 2 not the subsequent interpretation(s). And the new 42mm easily harkens back more strongly to the original look and ethos while simultaneously landing in the 21st Century. Better proportioned to the wrist? Don't know, partially depending on the wearer's size and one's perception of appropriate watch size these days.

Picture Legend: 2 LE tools, using the time zone function in West Africa, the joys of getting tased in training - and the longest 5 seconds of one's life (me in white pants), and the near original standard.

Did say the original is the benchmark..

[Silvio Mosiello]

I prefer the size of the original and the legibility of the 42mm.
Both are winners


Sent from my Motorola Razor

[jelizalde]

I Have the 40mm... I prefer the more subtle classic look. It can go anywhere and not draw too much attention. It can be casual or dress it up a bit. The 42mm iis super sporty and if that's what ur looking for, go for it. Agree 3k is a bit much. 2500 max... Js. Good luck. Enjoy!

[BMess]

You should definitely trade for the 42mm!

[BoyhoodDreamDaytona]

Great post/question.

I love both styles but have VERY slim risks so deeply regret not buying a Polar 10yrs ago.

I still want one and will continue to look out for a black faced one (just purely because I have a white faced watch).

Just one question - but I think I know the answer....... can you get an older, 40mm Polar 2 with the new styled clasp?

I'm guessing not but for me the new styled clasp would be a good excuse to upgrade.

[porschedude]

If your not enjoying the one you have now then go for it!

[sheldonsmith]

Originally Posted by toomuchtalk

I agree with your clasp point.
I have actually enquired at the AD to see if I can get this done..no joy.

Occasionally there are Glidelocks in the sales forum. I purchased two there with no regrets. I have one clasp in my Explorer II 216570 as yes, the Glidelock should have been included on the Explorer II.

(Fwiw, I have more at http://www.minus4plus6.com/glidelock.htm )

[toneafficianado]

42!!
I have one. Perfect size and very comfortable to wear. They sell for about $2k or so more than the 40 mm but there is more demand so you will need to go closer to $3k if you want it. I recommend it highly!