Would you give up your 214270 for a 124270

[MountEverest]

Hello,

I would like your opinion.

I currently own a 214270. After seeing the 124270 in person, I am really thinking about replacing my 214270 with the 124270 Rolex Explorer I.

For the owner's of the 214270, would you make this trade?

I appreciate any insight you can provide.

[edslee327]

up to you, why are you considering it?

124270 is a "better" watch in it's updated movement, classic explorer 1 size, but has a slightly daintier bracelet than predecessors. black dial is also more intense "jet" black, than the 214270 which is more "matte-ish" and less intense. sapphire crystal i believe also has an antireflective coating on the new 124270.

if you have less than a 6.5" wrist, proportionally, you could probably still wear a 124270, if your wrist is larger, it may look slightly off, but if smaller watches are your thing, then it's preference.

value wise, they're more or less the same, though since the 39mm is discontinued, i'd assume they go up slowly over time, whereas the 124270 just came out, and theres plenty of other 36mm explorer iterations out there at lower price points, so my gut is that they stay relatively flat, maybe go up little by little too, for those who want the latest and greatest.

[Jster]

Funny, I’m in the same situation as you. I haven’t tried on the 124270 yet. I like the proportions better from the photos I’ve seen but I think it might look too small for me.

Also, just wondering if it would be a straight trade. They are both going for around the same price on the secondary market.

[Rocky Hockey]

With a 6.75” wrist I faced a similar conundrum. I like the 124270, but not enough to give up my 214270 and not enough to own both. I chose a different route and picked up a 14270 to scratch my 36mm itch. Glad I did!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mr. K]

I would not. I might add it but not trade for it.

However, I still have my 5 digit 36 mm explorer to wear.

[SaddleSC]

Yes sir...I did exactly that! I added the 124270 first (before selling the 214270) just to make sure it wasn't a mistake and after the 124270 arrived...I never wore the 39mm again. The dial proportions of the new 36mm are absolute perfection and it fits my 6.75" wrist much better. It is the perfect Rolex daily wearer IMO!

[septantrionalis]

I absolutely would not.

[shaunylw]

I found the 124270 to be incredibly small. I would not give up the 39mm 214270.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[TimeAZ]

Keep the 39. It's sportier and looks great on your wrist.

The 124270, or the Explorer 35 as I like to call it, is just too small. I have a small wrist (6.5 inch) and when trying it on, I kept getting a nagging voice in the back of my head, "Looks a bit small". It's even smaller than my OP36.

Lots of arguments posted here that it's more proportional... frankly I never thought the 39 was out of proportion. When you look down at your wrist, of course the watch (and by extension, dial) looks a little bigger. It's called fish-eye effect. But at a distance, the 39mm has the exact right amount of presence, whereas the 35mm explorer is just small. The bracelet and clasp play a role in this too, 19mm tapering to 14 is really over the top, the clasp is incredibly dainty too. Just doesn't feel robust. I don't get the same feeling that it's a robust tool or sports piece.

Personally, I would have loved a 37mm Explorer, lug-to-lug of 46 and with the same 20mm bracelet/clasp that came with the 214270. That would have been perfect. It could have still been called "Explorer 36". Instead the new Explorer 36 has a 35mm case, lug-to-lug of 43, and 19mm bracelet tapering to 14. On paper there is no doubt this is a unisex option in the line up. It has its place in the catalog.

[GGGMT]

I was in exactly the same spot. I held onto 214270 and got the 124270. Thought id wait it out and see which one. I love them both and will now keep both. 36mm better dial. Gorgeous. But 39mm better size. Cooler. Discontinued.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TRS1]

I would have to add the new one and T and E before I made that decision. But as I just bought my 214270 39, and absolutely love it, I would not make the swap.

I’ve wanted this watch for a while and very glad I jumped before the new year. I just love watching that big lollipop second hand make it’s clean sweep of the uncluttered dial. Magnificent.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by SaddleSC

Yes sir...I did exactly that! I added the 124270 first (before selling the 214270) just to make sure it wasn't a mistake and after the 124270 arrived...

That’s the way to do it. Buy first sell later

[Santiago32]

New isn’t always better. I’d keep the 39mm.

[MJ EXPLORER]

Originally Posted by SaddleSC

Yes sir...I did exactly that! I added the 124270 first (before selling the 214270) just to make sure it wasn't a mistake and after the 124270 arrived...I never wore the 39mm again. The dial proportions of the new 36mm are absolute perfection and it fits my 6.75" wrist much better. It is the perfect Rolex daily wearer IMO!

This is your answer right here! I didn't do this and should have. I sold my 214270, had a bit of a gap, then picked up the 124270. It worked out just fine as I prefer the 36mm size. But honestly they are both fantastic. Doing the above, you'll know pretty quickly which one you prefer.

[Chadridv]

At 36mm it’s my opinion that the proportions are better. But it all comes down to wrist size. 39-40mm is a real sweet spot for me, so I’d never want to go from 39 to 36.

[glamorama]

Please, could someone with the 36 post a picture from more afar to see how it looks without the fish-eye effect? Would be great :))

(and do mention wrist size)

[MountEverest]

Originally Posted by Jster

Funny, I’m in the same situation as you. I haven’t tried on the 124270 yet. I like the proportions better from the photos I’ve seen but I think it might look too small for me.

Also, just wondering if it would be a straight trade. They are both going for around the same price on the secondary market.

Yes, it would be a straight trade. A friend of mine wants to buy my watch and I am next on the waiting list of my AD for the Explorer 1. Thank you for your thoughts

[chro.nic]

No, I wouldn't.

.nic

[MountEverest]

Thank you everyone for your input. I am going to keep my 214270. Have a great day!!

[214270Explorer]

Never
No
Nada
Nyet
Uh-uh
Not gonna happen
Fowgeddabowdit
When pigs fly

[mgsooner]

I've toyed with this idea but beyond size considerations I just find myself left feeling a bit cold when I see pictures of the dial of the 124270. One of my favorite things about my 214270 is the matte dial - a feature that was lost with the newest version.

[Chute]

I never believed there was such a thing as a perfect watch until I bought my 214270.
If I knew 10 years ago what I know now, I would have bought the 214270 and been done with watches. So I wouldn’t do that trade unless the 39 looks huge on your wrist and the 36 looks and feels normal.

[perry mason]

Yes I would

Perfect size for that design

[knighty88]

Nope… the 214270 to me is perfection, and the only one that will never leave my collection

[Dr. T]

Both are awesome!

I think the size, case, bracelet on the 39 is absolutely amazing. Maybe my favourite case size/shape from Rolex. The proportions of the dial aren't perfect, but it has its own charm. Overall a 10/10 watch!

Dial on the 36 is incredible, but overview it is a small watch by today's standards.

I own the 39mm and would love to add the 36 but cant be bothered with the AD games. Might get a 36mm datejust instead (easier to get at retail).

Good luck!

[MJ EXPLORER]

Originally Posted by glamorama

Please, could someone with the 36 post a picture from more afar to see how it looks without the fish-eye effect? Would be great :))

(and do mention wrist size)

Ask and you shall receive…6 3/4” wrist.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MJ EXPLORER]

Originally Posted by Chute

I never believed there was such a thing as a perfect watch until I bought my 214270.
If I knew 10 years ago what I know now, I would have bought the 214270 and been done with watches. So I wouldn’t do that trade unless the 39 looks huge on your wrist and the 36 looks and feels normal.

I totally get what you’re saying/agree. I’ve shuffled through nearly every model in the catalog. Started with an Explorer and have two in my small gathering (joke from another thread) today. I couldn’t be happier.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[zengineer]

It's not a dress watch, so I really wouldn't want an Explorer smaller than my 39mm.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

[Cru Jones]

There is no right or wrong answer.

I like the balance of the rows of dial text better on the 39. I also prefer how there’s more room on the dial to let everything “breathe” (compared to the congested feel of the 36, IMO). But I also see the appeal of the heritage of the 36. Both seem well-proportioned to me.

[digitalR]

Originally Posted by knighty88

nope… the 214270 to me is perfection, and the only one that will never leave my collection

^ this