The Explorer is the only current model in the Rolex portfolio worth buying
By The Prodigal Fool, published on 26 April 2010
We’ve been concerned about Rolex for a while and haven’t been shy about saying it. The venerable brand that we have admired for so long is being slowly eroded by a series of vulgar styling decisions. Simply put: they desperately need to tone down the bling.
We’ve already reported on Rolex’s announcements from this year’s Baselworld show but it wasn’t until just now that it hit us: with the recent changes to the Submariner and GMT-Master II models, the Explorer is now the only Rolex we’d even consider slamming our hard-earned cash down for. And that, coming from prodigal fools like us, is a damning indictment of the state of Rolex’s current model range.
You think we’re exaggerating? Let’s have a closer look at the main models in the line-up.
The Submariner? Close. But the new squared-case really doesn’t work for us and the polished centre-links on the bracelet together with the unpleasant new blue / green bezel and face combinations have robbed this mythical watch of its rightful appeal.
The Milgauss? The original 1950s model is an oddity that has slowly earned its classic status. The current version? To our eyes, it’s nothing more than a cynical and rather vulgar attempt to wring some money out of Rolex’s history. Again, the polished centre-links are a problem but the green crystal and orange markings certainly don’t help.
The Yacht-Master? Yeah, we’ll pretend you didn’t ask. This monstrosity belongs in the back streets of Bangkok, not adorning the window of an authorised dealer. The one thing we’ll say about it is at least it’s not destroying the good memories of a previously great model. The Yacht-Master has been a tacky looking mongrel since it was born in 1992. Horrible.
The Deepsea? Good Lord, don’t get us started on this grotesque Leviathan again. We think we’ve covered in detail back in July 2008.
The GMT-Master II? Close. Very close. The new ceramic bezel is gorgeous, the new dial an evolution we can live with, and we could just about forgive the new green second time zone hand. But the polished centre-links and oversized case just tip it into the vulgar camp for us. We own and love a previous generation GMT-Master II (The Coke not the Pepsi if you’re wondering) and that model exudes relaxed style in a way the shiny, gauche new one can only aspire to. What a shame.
The Daytona? Look, we’re not going to lie, the Daytona is a tough watch to rubbish. It’s got huge appeal even in its current guise. The problem though is the enormous following it has developed and the impact that’s had on prices and fellow wearers. In many ways, it’s a victim of its own success. So, to our eyes , the Daytona has been too flashy and too expensive for some time now. Oh sure, offer us a 6263 or 6265 from the 1970s we’d bite your arm off for it any day but the current models just don’t have that discrete appeal any more. They’re all flash. And, unfortunately, they’re also the de facto choice for anyone with more money than watch knowledge. No, regretfully, not for us.
So, that leaves us with the new Explorer. And what a watch it is.
We’ve coveted an Explorer for years now. What self-respecting watch fan hasn’t? After all, this is perhaps the most important model in Rolex’s back-catalogue, the quintessential Rolex. It has all the ‘tool watch’ qualities without any of the bling. Nowadays, it’s the Daytona and the Submariner that get the bulk of the attention. But, lest we forget, it was the Explorer that scaled Everest. And it was the Explorer that was on Ian Fleming’s wrist as he knocked out 007′s adventures from his typewriter at Goldeneye. So, in many ways, it’s the only real Bond watch.
The Explorer is the Rolex tool watch par excellence. Nothing flashy, nothing more than pure utilitarian purpose to its looks. We absolutely love this watch.
The only problem has been the size of it. At 36 mm, it was just a little two small for our oafish wrists.
Not any more.
The new model has been up-scaled to 39 mm and that makes all the difference. Other slight changes include a matte face and the omission of any Chromolite on the numerals. This gives the latest Explorer a similar look to the famous ‘blacked-out’ models of the past. Very pleasing. The new model also gets an Oysterlock clasp with the Easylink comfort extension link.
Under the hood, a new COSC certified Calibre 3132 movement, with a Parachrom hairspring with Breguet overcoil and Paraflex shock absorbers. We don’t know what any of that means but it sounds serious.
Perhaps the best bit about the new Explorer though is what Rolex didn’t do. No crazy oversized case. No polished centre-links. No ludicrous colour combinations. No maxi-dial. The core values that first made us fall in love with Rolex sports watches are preserved: quiet purposeful restraint. We love it.
Of course we’re not forgetting that the Explorer has a younger brother, the Explorer II which is still in the portfolio as well. We sincerely hope that Rolex leaves it there untouched. Because, for different reasons, it too is a lovely watch. We’ll be posting about it tomorrow. Stay tuned.
In the meantime, no doubt about it, the new Explorer is a stunner. And we don’t say that lightly. Let’s put it another way: last week we called our authorised dealer and put our name down for a new Explorer when they come in, some time in Q4. There is no other model in Rolex’s current portfolio that would make us part with our own money.
The Explorer is the only current model in the Rolex portfolio worth buying
We’ve been concerned about Rolex for a while and haven’t been shy about saying it. The venerable brand that we have admired for so long is being slowly eroded by a series of vulgar styling decisions. Simply put: they desperately need to tone down the bling. We’ve already reported on Rolex’s announcements from this year’s [...]
This section is supported by the patronage of:
29 Responses to “The Explorer is the only current model in the Rolex portfolio worth buying”
-
Funny I agree the only Rolex models I am really interested in purchasing are the Explorer (II) and maybe the basic Datejust.
In a desperate attempt to to update the image, I think the product management gurus inside Rolex damaged the look of a lot of classic models by “blinging them up”. People don’t buy a Rolex because they are cutting edge, they want a high quality timepiece that will last a lifetime.
I can see why the vintage Rolex market is extremely healthy.
-
Thanks for the comment Bill.
You’re right about the vintage market and I suspect that when the current models hit that vintage market, they’re going to be dragging average prices down with them. They’re just not design classics the way their predecessors were.
If you like the Explorer II, please stay tuned. Straight-Six will be posting about it tomorrow. We’re big fans too.
-
-
It’s certainly a timeless model. I would love a GMT-IIc one day, one of few watches that I think could be worn in just about every setting from black tie to SCUBA diving.
-
snabbmakaron
26 April 2010
But the new SS Sub does not have polished centre-links. Only the blue WG version pictured in your article does.
-
Yes, you’re right about the Submariner. My mistake. Apologies.
Having said that, if precedent is anything to go by, I would expect Rolex to harmonise the Submariner range fairly soon – and that means giving every version the polished centre links…
-
-
Straight-Six
27 April 2010
As a former owner of an Explorer, I couldn’t agree more with my esteemed fellow inmate.
Few, if any, Rolexes on sale today can lay claim to being genuinely beguiling. The Explorer genuinely can. While The Prodigal Fool has rightfully focused on the tool-like qualities and discretion of the Explorer, I found that it was its incredible aesthetic balance of size, discretion, twinkle and richness that really set it apart.
Yes, I do regret parting with my Explorer, despite the lovely vintage dames that took its place. And I remain very intrigued by the new version, certain that it’s larger size won’t pose a problem but slightly hesitant about the new matte gray dial perhaps taking away some of the delicious depth its predecessor so ably flaunted.
Guess we’ll find out when The Prodigal Fool takes delivery of his!
-
[...] So there it is: The Rolex Explorer is the only model in the entire current Rolex line-up we’d slap our hard earned cash (um, [...]
-
jennifer
28 April 2010
rubbish. i personally love the new line up. i own DSSD YMII GMTIIC SUB (116618) and DDII.
-
Straight-Six
29 April 2010
Congratulations, Jennifer: you’re a poster girl for Rolex’s current marketing and design departments. And trust you got a discount for the bulk-buy…:)
We, however, would have to wear shades when being exposed to that dazzling watch collection of yours.
-
jennifer
30 April 2010
no special discount here in singapore because rolex specially those new models sells like hot cake! the most discount i got was 15% for the DDII. btw i love big watches. however, i do keep my expI&II and my daytonas and they are not for sale. those are classic and are real keepers just like my patekssss.
-
Straight-Six
30 April 2010
Jennifer,
Do you feel that Rolex’s newer designs are aimed for a different kind of buyer than the previous offerings?
In other words, have “global” tastes in watches changed in your opinion, and if so, why?
BTW: it does sound as if you own the entire Rolex line-up! Quite a feat. Which Patek do you own then? And which Daytona model?
-
-
-
-
jennifer
30 April 2010
more details on my collection.. my husband and i owns pp5107, pp5140, pp5124, pp3730 and the most recent purchase pp5960 which i do wear from time to time. as for daytona i have 116520 both white and black dial plus a 116528. we together have eight pcs of GG and a couple of DRoth. some back dated to the late 80′s and 90′s.. frankly our collection is nothing compared to some of my friends who collect RDubis HWinstons RMille and i know some ONLY collect grand complications like the world famous singaporean collector Dr Bernard Cheong, his collections worth millionsss of dollar!
personally i think rolex needs to evolve with the market demands. if rolex relies only on those die hard traditional buyers, then it can no longer survived because its original target market are aging rapidly and so it needs to evolve to accommodate the new target groups of consumer. the original written article presented here is very narrow minded and the choice of words used by the writer is a tad too harsh and unforgiving. i think he fails to look at rolex’s position in the world market and thus he cannot see why rolex need to change. i personally welcome all the changes rolex had made to its line up. it is a breath of fresh air for its loyal customers like myself. i at one stage has lost interest in rolex few years back till rolex introduce its all new GMTIIc has bring me back to rolex.
so well done rolex!!
cheers! – Dr Jennifer.
-
Straight-Six
30 April 2010
Jennifer,
You sound like quite the collector! I would love to talk further with you about all of this, and perhaps your sharing your views with all our readers in a more structured fashion. The reality is there isn’t anywhere near enough discussion and exchange between what I would loosely call “Western” and “Eastern” watch-lovers. Maybe we can change that…
If you’re interested, please send a mail with your address to: TheProdigalGuide@me.com
Hope you’ll be in touch.
All the best,
Straight-Six
-
-
Straight-Six
30 April 2010
Folks,
In the spirit of openness and dialogue we posted a blend of the two Explorer posts on http://www.timezone.com in their Rolex – Modern forum:
http://forums.timezone.com/index.php?t=msg&th=1467032&start=0&rid=11145
It generated a rather large number of responses which we have in turn responded to. This said, http://www.timezone.com doesn’t permit posts which link to external websites – much to our disbelief.
But we here at The Prodigal Guide believe that a full conversation is an open one into which all are welcome, hence the link.
But if you don’t try really, really hard to guide them back to The Prodigal Guide, well, we’re gonna come looking for you..:))
-
Anon
19 November 2010
Explorer is the worst watch in the line up imho. It’s so plain-jane. It’s simply another black faced watch. Oh and polished center links are awesome. Haters gonna hate.
-
Definitely don’t agree!!
The new Explorer isn’t in balance at all. Just take one look at the hands!!! They are way too small. The best rolex is the Explorer II with a white dial. It is also the most comfortable watch to wear duo the thinnest case.
-
Bidle, dear chap, I have a new Explorer and I can assure you that the hands look absolutely fine. No problems there. Now, the case shape, lugs and bracelet on the other hand…well, to some eyes, they aren’t balanced as successfully as on the previous gen.
If you haven’t already seen it, I suggest you check out the episode of Talking Hands when we specifically address this whole issue.
As for your comments about the Explorer II, I can only agree. I think perhaps you hadn’t read our next post when you left your comment. If so, enjoy.
-
-
Keith
19 May 2011
Dear Fool and Straight,
I really can’t comprehend all the kerfuffle about the new Explorer’s (214270) hands! As an owner of the 214270, I can say with absolute confidence that any comments regarding the shortness of the hands is utter malarkey. The hands in no way detract from my ability to read time off the watch.
I had previously posted a comment on your Talking Hands episode of the Explorer, describing my intent to purchase a sober and comfortable wearing watch for Mon – Thur. I am glad to report, Sirs, that I am proper pleased with my acquisition. The watch runs tickity-boo and has exactly the right balance of comfort, size and reserve. Yes, the lugs could be slimmer but that is the only criticism I will offer.
I have no idea how I ignored the Explorer family for so long. It is now my intention to purchase a Explorer II (16570). Together with my Daytona and Explorer 1 I will have the 3 very comfortable Rolex watches. If I did want to purchase an earlier model of the Explorer 1 for collecting, should I be setting my sights on a 14270 or 114270?
Regards,
Keith -
Tim
21 May 2011
The Explorer is a true classic and alongside the sub, daytona and datejust always will be. However their attempts to update the range fail spectacularly and are more aimed at fashion market in my opinion. Like they say if it aint broke dont try and fix it! Rolex need to look at a brand such as Jaeger le coultre who make the most elegant watches and whose attempts to update and innovate are always a success – reverso duo, 1931 etc.
-
Lord Hackers
29 June 2011
For years I mulled over which Rolex watch to buy. Afterall, this is a major investment. I have previously settled for a blue/black face Daytona circa 2000 and a 2008 Submariner. The size of these watches seems to suit my wrist better. However, the current trend in garish designs has led me to the much overlooked Explorer. It has all the characteristics of a watch that I look for: brushed stainless steel finish (two tone? no thanks!); black face; simplicity in design and discretion. At 39mm I still think it might be just a little too small but I think I can live with that!
-
M’Lord, I salute your exquisite taste. I myself have taken the liberty of purchasing a Explorer from the Rolex watch company. I must say, I love it more each day. Your humble servant, The Fool.
-
-
Lord Hackers
29 June 2011
Dear PF, one tries one’s best! It’s unfortunate Rolex have taken the position they have done on ‘modern’ designs. What happened to the old adage “if if ain’t broke don’t fix it”?! The 2011 model Explorer is fabulous but what is a little off-putting is the lasered ‘Rolex’ to the inside face. Is this really necessary? My favorite Rolex to date was a 1973 Oysterdate with the light champagne dial. It was too small and a manual wind – but I loved it! Such timeless simplicity! Despite being a diehard Rolex afficionado, I’m now finding myself leaning to other brands such as IWC, Patek etc. I don’t want to do this! Time will tell but I truely hope Rolex will see the light and return to their roots. Yours ever, LH
-
steppxxxz
4 July 2011
I said in my other posting that the new Explorer 2 is a disaster. I think the 39mm Explorer doesnt work either, for complex and sometimes subtle reasons. But it doesnt. I love the previous explorer. Its just pure elegance without being a dress watch. I think only the markxx Breguet aeronavale is as good. I hate IWC watches, they’re all sort of pretend “taste” and I find them mostly just ugly. Omega is a snooze to my mind, and i loathe Audemars Piguet and that yacht culture (or shaq cuture..sic) it appeals to. I mean i wouldnt turn down a dual date to be sure however. But they are just soooo overpriced. Patek is what it is, and Id love one, but again the price is crazy. There are a few german watches, high end, that one cant deny are beautiful, but thats another category altogether. Ulysse Nardin makes a very nice chronogrpah and I want one of those, too….but…. I think the explorer is rolex’s best watch and the ex 2 (until 2011…or whenever the new one comes out) are simply great design, and make a perfect statement.
-
Khairul
27 October 2011
The new Explorer with a case size of 39mm without date window is perfect, don’t touch it anymore. A very close alternative would be the Omega SM Aqua Terra in mid-size 28.5mm for a guy with a wimpy 6.5″ wrist.
-
If a wimpy wrist is what you’re stuck with (like me) then I would argue the previous gen. Explorer at 36 mm is perfection incarnate. The 39mm suffers from Rolex-bloat syndrome…
-
-
Hi Straight & Fool,
First of all, many congrats on a fine website. I really do enjoy reading your posts and check back often to see if there are any updates. The Talking Hands features are pure class.
I have a dilemma presently and while I appreciate you can’t make the decision for me, I sure would value your input as you have been Rolex admirers and enthusiasts a lot longer then I have. Actually, strictly speaking that’s not true, but I always seem to love the watches that don’t seem to be worth much on the second hand market, and that’s part of my dilemma. The Cellini range for example, love them. That’s because I love classic watches, Roman numerals etc, white or back dials, no date window (or Cyclops as Rolex call it) – just a lovely, simply beautifully designed classic watch, that reflects my taste pretty much.
That said, I have recently started to broaden my horizons and this has led me to the sports range. I bought my second ever Rolex watch (my first, which I had for only a week, bought in Australia in 1992, was stolen by Aborigines whilst backpacking! True!) in December last year. I had my heart set on the Milgauss white dial version. Really loved it. The second hand was a great feature to my mind and the white face was lush; my only reservation was, like so many post on here it seems, the polished centre links. They just didn’t float my boat. Regardless, off I travelled to the store with the intention of getting that watch. When I got there, I saw a green bezel green dial Submariner which had just come in. It was love it at first sight which amazed me because I didn’t think Submariners did anything for me (big, bulky, date window etc) but would you believe it, I tried it on, loved it and bought it on the spot! That was £5,350 ago! To my absolute delight I can see they are selling for more than that 12 months later on the second-hand market, so its great to know I made the right choice both in terms of what I like wearing, and as an investment.
This leads me on to my main question, which I am sure you have guessed already. I am now looking at buying a second (or third!) Rolex model. This time round, my heart was set on the new Explorer II. I loved the pictures and couldn’t wait to see it in the flesh. That day came today at my local AD and I am genuinely sad (gutted to me more precise!) to say that I had 2 hopes of getting away with wearing it – Bob Hope, and No Hope! Guys, seriously, this watch is HUGE. OK, I don’t have the biggest wrists in the world but my green Sub looks fine, lovely in fact. I thought (and from what I have read on various forum posts) that the Explorer II at only 2mm larger would be fine, but it really wasn’t. I desperately wanted it to look right because I like the watch so much, but the fit was awful. The AD agreed when I asked for his honest opinion.
I left the shop on a bit of a downer because like the two of you have mentioned in your other posts, there is not ‘really’ (without a push) a Rolex watch in the current range that I like. I did love the Explorer 1 – the older version, before it updated to 39mm but its difficult to source one of those now. If I could, I think I would buy one, in fact I am sure of it. I am hesitant with the new 39mm Explorer I model, although it just about fits my wrist OK there is something just not right about it. I can’t put my finger on it though. It’s certainly not the length of the hands, I have no problem with that. In fact, my instincts tell me that very fact might make it rather collectable fin the future as I am sure they will update that again soon, so the first models will be the ones to get. This makes me lean towards getting one, but is it the right reason? Do you agree that it might become a collectable model for this reason too?
I know you both love the older Explorer II and I must admit when I tried that on today it was perfect in every way a watch can be. I really loved it. It was the white dial version I tried. My issue here is that looking at second-hand prices for these across all the websites, and in shops, they just seem to have dropped more than other models, so this tells me from an investment viewpoint it is not a good choice. These recent models go for less than £3000 on some sites and they are £4,500 new. I am not prepared to accept that kind of loss. The answer is to buy that model second-hand, and perhaps I will.
So then, what is the model I should buy new? It doesn’t have to be a sports model as I like the Datejusts, some of the Air kings (not the recent one’s mind!) and even the Sub non-date is appealing, but I already have a Submariner so it wouldn’t really feel like a different watch to me that one.
I feel you understand my predicament well enough to pass comment so its over to you guys. Would really appreciate your thoughts on this matter. It’s a tricky one for sure. What are your thoughts on buying the new Explorer II just for an investment? I could live with that, although it would seem a bit weird just looking at a purchase of that amount sitting in a box every day collecting dust! To give you an idea of the size problem, the shoulders of the watch actually extended further than the sides of my wrist! Not good. Well at least I don’t think so. Could I grow into it? I am 42, not much growing left! I know the new trend is for larger watches, but has anyone (particularly Rolex) offered any suggestions on how to wear them and carry it off? I do think this is borderline madness to be honest with you. Mind you, I also know other people have larger wrists than I do, so in their cases I am sure it’s fine. I am jealous of them!
Cheers to you both and a very happy Christmas indeed. Would of course welcome everyone else’s thoughts too. Looking to buy around February/March. Perhaps I should wait for Baselworld 2012 just to see if something different arrives for me?
Best wishes,
Simon. -
Simon,
That was a post in its own right! But delighted you bothered to take the time to ask us for our opinion.
Here are my thoughts:
1. I wouldn’t buy any modern Rolex as an “investment” i.e. it will accrue in value over the years. What buying a Rolex will ensure is a solid resale price should you ever need, or want, to put it on the market. I bought a previous gen., end-of-line Exp II with a 3186 movement because it is unusual, perhaps rare. But mostly, I love my Polar. That should be your guiding light: buy what you love. I also found the new Exp II to be too big and bloated for my wrist.
2. If you care about investment value, buy vintage pieces. Even then, you’ll need to study carefully before making the jump. And to be clear: Rolex’s current strategy has no place for vintage watches or indeed their own heritage. They want to sell new watches. End of.
3. I see no reason you can’t buy a previous gen. Exp II or Explorer at whatever price point suits your budget and perception of fair value. And why not take a look at Cellinis on the second-hand market?
4. Also, you may want to consider other brands outside of Rolex. We adore Jaeger-LeCoultre, are fascinated by Bremont, stunned by Schofield, intrigued by Frederique Constant and Baume & Mercier and….well, you get the picture.Good luck, Simon and thanks for popping by!
Straight-Six
-
Simon
26 December 2011
Hi Straight,
Thanks for your prompt response. Went to another dealer today in a different city and tried on a number of Rolex watches; was quite lucky as they had a huge selection in stock. It boiled down to the same watches as previously mentioned. Of those it then came down to the Milgaus or the Explorer I, both of which I like. It was then between the white Milguass or the green saphire one, and this is where my main decision lies as I am 99.9% sure I am going to buy the Milgauss model now. What do you and your esteemed colleague think about the GV model? Do you like the look of it? Do the colours work – the green, orange, white and black – or is it a little too over the top? Is the white rather like the old Explorer II in that it is rather minimalist yet still makes a strong statement? Why do we see so many Milgauss models in shop windows, are they not selling? If not, why not?
You mentioned other brands but did not mention Omega, is there a reason for this? How about the De Ville models at the same price range?
A few questions there then!! Hope you are having a good Christmas
All the best,
Simon.
Perpetuelle reports on the Rolex Deep Sea Special « The Prodigal Guide
26 April 2010
[...] We’ve been hard on Rolex today. That’s mostly because we have so much respect for the brand’s past. As a result, it [...]