Underlying design principles Explorer?

[PaulChronometer]

Looking for clues.. I have been wondering what the underlying design principles might have been for the current Explorer, in particular the relatively short hands.

I am aware that some say the hands were leftovers from the previous Explorer reference, but I have my doubts about that hypothesis. My guess is that Rolex knew what it was doing, and that the design was based on some esthetic principles, even though they may have been less widely accepted, and the design got some criticism on forums.

(I should add that I like the current reference a lot, and I am not sure if the new version will be an improvement, since the hour hand seems to be wider than the minute hand, which I find a bit odd.)

Any ideas about the underlying design principles?

[Dyim]

I am thinking they used smaller hands for smaller case. Now they realized it is too short and fixed it.

[warrior]

The beloved Omega Seamaster Blue Bond ( old version) seems to have the same design principles as the current Explorer.....and I don't recall anyone people complaining about the short hands. In fact, my sense is the newer version of the Blue Bond with longer hands is LESS popular.

https://www.google.com/search?q=omeg...L0a5T0TVvuM%3A

[fskywalker]

Originally Posted by dyim

i am thinking they used smaller hands for smaller case. Now they realized it is too short and fixed it.

x2

[Dubarzy]

As others have noted, the lume on the minute hand does not overlap the lume on the hour indices. I'm not at all suggesting this drove the design, but I do like the look.

[rollerballer]

Originally Posted by warrior

The beloved Omega Seamaster Blue Bond ( old version) seems to have the same design principles as the current Explorer.....and I don't recall anyone people complaining about the short hands. In fact, my sense is the newer version of the Blue Bond with longer hands is LESS popular.

https://www.google.com/search?q=omeg...L0a5T0TVvuM%3A

Oh wow! I have been wearing it in rotation for 13+ years and only today I read and realize about the minute hand on my Bond SMP!

[Ru4scuba]

I'm a fan! Of the 2531.80 anyway...

[watchwatcher]

I don't know...nor does anyone else when it comes to why Rolex does the things they do...it's all just speculation.

I will say though, that they do seem to be dialed into what their fan base is saying...and their were a lot of comments when the 39 mm version was introduced that the hands were too short. Now, I'm not saying I like one or the other, but you have to admit, there were a lot of comments about it.

[capote]

The design just felt lazy without any thought behind it. I'm glad it has been taken care of.

[mfer]

I felt it was a miss. They did make the second hand longer, just not the minute and hour. I did a post on it some time ago.

[rollerballer]

Originally Posted by capote

The design just felt lazy without any thought behind it....

I don't think it was lazy. They changed the case, put in a new movement ,re-layout the dial, shifted the position of the word "EXPLORER", put in the WG 3-6-9 marker and apparently made an effort to align the lume of the minute hand with the markers... I think that's a big deal versus merely face-lifting the 114270.

[Jack T]

I seriously doubt Rolex intended to use leftover hands from the used parts bin. And they probably did several mock ups of the 39mm Explorer before settling on a final design, so the hands were surely noticed. If Rolex was all that responsive to the forums (in which 99% of the noise comes from 1% of the customers) they would not have waited three of four years to make a change. And I don't think the lume on the new model is worth the trade off of the white gold numerals. But hey, that's just me, I happen to own the perfect watch !

[soundserious]

How long was it in production?

[eonflux]

It's hard to believe that the 39mm Exp had deliberately short hands.
The hands used were exactly the same as those of the smaller Exp.
If the hands were unique to the model, then I could buy it.
If such a look was intentional, why would the 39 Exp be the only newer Rolex with such short hands relative to the case?

As for lume, the lume of the minute hands doesn't cross most of the dial markers, but only the 12, 6, and 9 markers.

As for parts sharing which is probably due to cost savings, other examples:
- Same calendar wheel and date placement on the SD and DSSD as with the Sub, even though a larger calendar wheel with bigger numbers, and a date window placed further out on the dial would be more legible and work better
- Same width of removable links and many clasp parts on the DSSD as with the Sub and SD, but wider components would better match size of case and wider lugs

Agree with those that think Rolex is simply doing what they should have done in the first place with the larger Exp. Kudos to them for that.
If the Exp short hands were intentional, why make a change now? There are plenty of other Rolex models with longer hands.
Why go to the trouble of creating unique hands just for the Exp?

The 42mm ExpII is a good example of having created appropriately sized hands from the beginning.

[RG1825]

God damn it ... This thread has persuaded me to hold on for the long wait to get a second hand 2016 model instead of a current one this week :/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DCheeta]

Originally Posted by RG1825

God damn it ... This thread has persuaded me to hold on for the long wait to get a second hand 2016 model instead of a current one this week :/

Damn forum...

People here point out things that I would never notice, and then I can't stop noticing them!

[warrior]

Well...that's the point isn't it?! I prefer the old Blue Bond to the newer long hand version-- for a number of reasons. The watch forum community/internet tends to overblow things and make people see things they normally wouldn't see. I certainly agree that the minute hand could have been longer on the current EXP version. But, I actually think the shorter minute hand gives the watch a retro vibe like the old Blue Bond--more unique if you will!

In the Reviews Section of TRF, here's what Rolexiva wrote in his review of the current EXP 214270...

"From a distance, especially when worn when passing a full length mirror—say, in a gym—the minute marker does look distinctively short, but to be longer would make the watch look like any other plain faced watch, maybe even a pilot’s watch (yikes). The short minute hand keeps the look swift, sufficient, and compact, keeping linkages to its 36mm predecessor. My theory for your consideration. "

I kind of agree with the above statement.

Originally Posted by rollerballer

Oh wow! I have been wearing it in rotation for 13+ years and only today I read and realize about the minute hand on my Bond SMP!

[captain_NEMO]

Originally Posted by Dubarzy

As others have noted, the lume on the minute hand does not overlap the lume on the hour indices. I'm not at all suggesting this drove the design, but I do like the look.

Agreed. It's very streamlined and clean. I don't believe for one second that THAT aspect of the design was overlooked by Rolex and fell into coincidence. Thought was definitely put into it and carried out as planned.

Ya just can't please everyone.

[RG1825]

Reckon it will be possible to ask for a change of dial and hands during a service, if they get on my nerves too much?

I agree - I think for it to have been out for this length of time and not have been corrected straight away, as happened with the Datejust II (now DJ41), implies that it was by design as opposed to laziness.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Wesley Crusher]

Aesthetically, the new 214270 is more in line with the classic (e.g., 6610, 1016) Explorers than the outgoing 214270. The lumed 3,6,9 and minute hand overlapping the hour markers were features of the older watches. I don't have anything against the outgoing 214270, but I do think that the new updates make the watch more visually interesting (not to mention more practical).

[Snow-Dweller]

Originally Posted by eonflux

It's hard to believe that the 39mm Exp had deliberately short hands.
The hands used were exactly the same as those of the smaller Exp.
If the hands were unique to the model, then I could buy it.
If such a look was intentional, why would the 39 Exp be the only newer Rolex with such short hands relative to the case?

As for lume, the lume of the minute hands doesn't cross most of the dial markers, but only the 12, 6, and 9 markers.

As for parts sharing which is probably due to cost savings, other examples:
- Same calendar wheel and date placement on the SD and DSSD as with the Sub, even though a larger calendar wheel with bigger numbers, and a date window placed further out on the dial would be more legible and work better
- Same width of removable links and many clasp parts on the DSSD as with the Sub and SD, but wider components would better match size of case and wider lugs

Agree with those that think Rolex is simply doing what they should have done in the first place with the larger Exp. Kudos to them for that.
If the Exp short hands were intentional, why make a change now? There are plenty of other Rolex models with longer hands.
Why go to the trouble of creating unique hands just for the Exp?

The 42mm ExpII is a good example of having created appropriately sized hands from the beginning.

Well said.

[HogwldFLTR]

Originally Posted by rollerballer

Oh wow! I have been wearing it in rotation for 13+ years and only today I read and realize about the minute hand on my Bond SMP!

For me the lume on my SMP Bond is exceptional; the watch is a joy in the dark. The hands in no way limit the watches functionality. The only negative about the watch is perhaps how common they are. I believe the hand design is well thought out to maximize legibility in the dark.

[PaulChronometer]

Interesting viewpoints, thank you all for your thoughts. We'll never know for sure..

Interesting theory by Rolexiva as quoted by warrior: "The short minute hand keeps the look swift, sufficient, and compact, keeping linkages to its 36mm predecessor."

And as captain NEMO wrote: "It's very streamlined and clean." I agree with that.

The longer minute hand will also look good though, without a doubt.

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by eonflux

It's hard to believe that the 39mm Exp had deliberately short hands.
The hands used were exactly the same as those of the smaller Exp.

This is false. The hands, while small for the dial, were larger than the hands on the 114270.

[eonflux]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

This is false. The hands, while small for the dial, were larger than the hands on the 114270.

They looked the same to me when I held a 36 and 39 side-by-side, but I could have been mistaken.
Had contemplated getting one for a sister, and either case size would have suited her.
But I was disappointed in the short hands of the 39.

Didn't take any pics, found the ones below online.

Not easy to assess in these pics due to one watch being closer to the camera than the other (can look dramatically different at macro shot ranges), lighting a bit different on one vs the other, angle of dial to the camera different between the 2, etc, all factors that can create differences in appearance.
But on balance, hard for me to discern a clear difference between hands on the 36 or 39 in these pics, which was consistent with my experience at an AD.

Not to say that Rolex hasn't done things that seem minor, such as slightly wider lugs on the SubC vs GMTC, but the hands on the 36 and 39 just don't look different to me from my direct examination and in pics.

Perhaps someone who owns both can measure the hands?

[eonflux]

Originally Posted by eonflux

Didn't take any pics, found the ones below online.

Found a few more pics...

[Jaycnyp]

Originally Posted by jack t

i seriously doubt rolex intended to use leftover hands from the used parts bin. And they probably did several mock ups of the 39mm explorer before settling on a final design, so the hands were surely noticed. If rolex was all that responsive to the forums (in which 99% of the noise comes from 1% of the customers) they would not have waited three of four years to make a change. And i don't think the lume on the new model is worth the trade off of the white gold numerals. But hey, that's just me, i happen to own the perfect watch !

x2

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by watchwatcher

I don't know...nor does anyone else when it comes to why Rolex does the things they do...it's all just speculation.

I will say though, that they do seem to be dialed into what their fan base is saying...and their were a lot of comments when the 39 mm version was introduced that the hands were too short. Now, I'm not saying I like one or the other, but you have to admit, there were a lot of comments about it.

I agree Larry, well said

[rollerballer]

I though it was a good idea if Rolex actually uses the hands of the 1016, 14270 or 114270 on the 214270 and making an effort to size everything else to fit the original hand set. I see it as the 214270 symbolically inheriting something from its forefathers.

[tomchicago]

The shorter hands are a more elegant and refined look. The current reference is the most elegant and sophisticated Explorer ever made imo. Rolex, by covering those great white gold numerals with yet more lume has taken the Explorer back to strictly a sport watch. Big hands, more lume.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk