View Single Post
Old 7 May 2024, 09:04 AM   #8
RolexPete
"TRF" Member
 
RolexPete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Real Name: Peter
Location: Massachusetts
Watch: 214270 Mk2
Posts: 1,963
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptT View Post
Congrats (in advance!).

I wouldn’t sweat 39 or 40 vs the Omega, but that’s just me. The considerations in my mind for the Explorer are:

- the 214270 (39) has a matte dial, and the new Explorer 224270 (40) has a glossy dial
- the movement in the 214270 (3132) is likely to perform better over the long haul relative to the new Explorer (3230 movement). See various threads about the reported 32xx issues. The 31xx movements have stood the test of time, and is highly regarded.

You mentioned a preference for the mk1, but maybe worth taking a look at the mk2 214270 as prices have come down considerably, and the slight premium over the mk1 could be worth it in light of the “enhancements” (longer hands, lumed 3/6/9).

Either way, good luck.

Excellent advice. If I wasn't so lazy, it would have been my response. [emoji23][emoji1303]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________

2016 Explorer 214270 Mk2 - 1996 Submariner 14060* - 1972 Datejust 1601
1972 Oyster Perpetual 1002 - 1978 Oysterquartz 17000
Omega Seamaster 2265.80 - Omega Seamaster 300 166.0324
*RIP PAL 1942-2015
RolexPete is offline   Reply With Quote