Rolex Explorer Ref.114270 Owners - is the watch as great as everyone says?

[Spartyfan6262]

Hello All -

After obtaining one grail watch, it's time to set my sights on another. So far, the top contender is the Ref. 114270. But before I decide on that, and before falling pray to a watch that shows up a fair bit on social media, I thought I would ask people that actually own it a few questions:

-Are you still happy with it?
-Does the old model bracelet and clasp bother you?
-How often do you wear it?

Thank you to all owners who provide any and all feedback, even if it something different than my questions above.

[christian-h]

Try on 14270, 114270 and the new 124270 and go for the one you like the most. It’s all about the right vibe. For you.

I wear my 36 mm Explorer 1 (14270) as my daily watch and I can understand why many people argue that it’s the only watch you’ll ever need.

[Spartyfan6262]

Thank you, Christian. I really appreciate neo-vintage Rolex, so those references may be perfect.

[subtona]

it only shows up on social media because you asked it to.

that said it is a great watch, currently have mine on a leather strap and find it to be perfect this way.

I wouldn't mind an older version with lug holes.

[anodyne13]

Definitely try the 39mm version if you’re not set on 36mm. I have a mark i and it’s a dream. Works with any outfit from tux to trunks and a great size.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Spartyfan6262

Hello All -

After obtaining one grail watch, it's time to set my sights on another. So far, the top contender is the Ref. 114270. But before I decide on that, and before falling pray to a watch that shows up a fair bit on social media, I thought I would ask people that actually own it a few questions:

-Are you still happy with it?
-Does the old model bracelet and clasp bother you?
-How often do you wear it?

Thank you to all owners who provide any and all feedback, even if it something different than my questions above.

Hi. I've owned an DJ, SubDate, Explorer II, a couple of vintage Tudors, some Omegas, and about a zillion other watches...and they're now all sold (except for an heirloom piece,) because I wear a 114270 24/7. I sleep, shower, hike, golf, drum, swim, play tennis, do construction projects, go to dinner, workout...literally do everything with this watch on, so I guess you could say I think it's perfect. This watch essentially killed the hobby for me.

I'm 6'2" 190lbs, so I'm not a tiny guy wearing a 36mm watch. 36mm is perfect if you actually want something unobtrusive to wear constantly. The watch only weighs about 100 grams, and it's never in the way or bulky feeling.

Also, this is my favorite bracelet/clasp combo of any watch I've owned. The SELs cut down on the rattle, but the hollow center links allow it to still be lightweight, and there's no better clasp. It's small, thin, durable, has the safety latch, and has a several micro-adjustment holes.

Framing a window:

[Yellow5]

I have a couple pieces, the 39mm Explorer and a modern Rootbeer two tone. I like both, but so rarely decide to wear the Rootbeer because the Explorer has the height of Marry Poppins, practically perfect in every way. It is sort of amusing, knowing that I have the best watch, and that additional purchases (Rootbeer was 2nd) will likely play second fiddle. Just my 2c.

[Spartyfan6262]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

Hi. I've owned an DJ, SubDate, Explorer II, a couple of vintage Tudors, some Omegas, and about a zillion other watches...and they're now all sold (except for an heirloom piece,) because I wear a 114270 24/7. I sleep, shower, hike, golf, drum, swim, play tennis, do construction projects, go to dinner, workout...literally do everything with this watch on, so I guess you could say I think it's perfect. This watch essentially killed the hobby for me.

Also, I'm 6'2" 190lbs, so I'm not a tiny guy wearing a 36mm watch. 36mm is perfect if you actually want something unobtrusive to wear constantly. The watch only weighs about 100 grams, and it's never in the way or bulky feeling.

Also, this is my favorite bracelet/clasp combo of any watch I've owned. The SELs cut down on the rattle, but the hollow center links allow it to still be lightweight, and there's no better clasp. It's small, thin, durable, has the safety latch, and has a several micro-adjustment holes.

Framing a window:

Thanks, John, for the full and complete response. This is extremely helpful. I'm looking for a watch to put on and almost never take off.

[Spartyfan6262]

Thank you, Yellow. My current rotation is a Blancpain Fifty Fathoms, Pelagos and BB58. I expect that the Explorer will dethrone them all. I hadn't considered the 39mm yet, but now it looks like I need to try one on.

[Chewbacca]

There isn’t a bad Exp. I’d imagine this one’s a keeper too.

[Arid]

114270 is on rotation with my 5 digit dj. All my 6 digits are taking a backseat (except my 3235 sub that’s with RSC). Either the Explorer or the dj can be my one and only and the bracelet is the best wearing of the bunch.

[Thuilln]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

Hi. I've owned an DJ, SubDate, Explorer II, a couple of vintage Tudors, some Omegas, and about a zillion other watches...and they're now all sold (except for an heirloom piece,) because I wear a 114270 24/7. I sleep, shower, hike, golf, drum, swim, play tennis, do construction projects, go to dinner, workout...literally do everything with this watch on, so I guess you could say I think it's perfect. This watch essentially killed the hobby for me.

I'm 6'2" 190lbs, so I'm not a tiny guy wearing a 36mm watch. 36mm is perfect if you actually want something unobtrusive to wear constantly. The watch only weighs about 100 grams, and it's never in the way or bulky feeling.

Also, this is my favorite bracelet/clasp combo of any watch I've owned. The SELs cut down on the rattle, but the hollow center links allow it to still be lightweight, and there's no better clasp. It's small, thin, durable, has the safety latch, and has a several micro-adjustment holes.

Framing a window:

OP, you couldn’t get a more complete answer. I agree 100% with what is written above.
I’ll be off for a month and that’s going to be the watch that will be on my wrist.

[Lonehiker]

Why not go with the current 36mm 124270. It’s the perfectly evolved one watch that truly covers all bases.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Thuilln

OP, you couldn’t get a more complete answer. I agree 100% with what is written above.
I’ll be off for a month and that’s going to be the watch that will be on my wrist.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Lonehiker

Why not go with the current 36mm 124270. It’s the perfectly evolved one watch that truly covers all bases.

FWIW, the main reasons I bought a 114270 over the 124270 were the classic Rolex proportions (36mm case/20mm bracelet,) the less maxi dial, and the 3130 movement. I also like tuna-can clasp bracelets more, but I could have maybe dealt with that.

The things I like a little more about the 124270 are the full lume and the AR crystal, but my 114270 actually got an AR crystal when serviced, so technically just the lume. It's also cool you can get the 124270 brand new, but not enough to push me over the edge.

[Josunese1975]

I've owned it all...14270, 114270, 124270 and 214270. Currently have 124270 only. Sold the rest. Modern oyster bracelet is great because it has only 3 permanent links on the 6 o'clock side versus 4 permanent links on the older ones. Because of that I could never get the clasp to sit centered on my underside of the wrist. The clasp and hinge would be off center and poking out to the 12 o''clock side whereas my 124270 (and 214270) bracelet would sit right in the middle. This problem may be due to having 6.75 inch wrist. I'm sure large wrists don't have this issue. Other than that it is a nice watch....

[S.Explorer]

Originally Posted by Lonehiker

Why not go with the current 36mm 124270. It’s the perfectly evolved one watch that truly covers all bases.

My thoughts exactly - you'll get a new watch and it will be better value if you can wait for one from the AD.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by S.Explorer

My thoughts exactly - you'll get a new watch and it will be better value if you can wait for one from the AD.

FWIW, the 114270 is showing up in the $5-6k range, now.

[Spartyfan6262]

Originally Posted by S.Explorer

My thoughts exactly - you'll get a new watch and it will be better value if you can wait for one from the AD.

I would definitely go for the new one, but I suspect that I will be waiting at least a year to get it and, when it comes to watches, I'm very impatient. That's why I would opt for an older version instead.

[Spartyfan6262]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

FWIW, the 114270 is showing up in the $5-6k range, now.

Thank you, Douglas. I've been watching their prices on Chrono24 very closely and think that this price is pretty good for the neo-vintage pieces. I don't think prices will go much lower than that even in a recession.

[Daniel23456]

Had 114270 for 3 years, replaced it with a 124270. Had both for a few months… can’t tell which one I liked more and still can’t… a matter of preference. My favorite watch that I have ever had though.

[Daniel23456]

Had 114270 for 3 years, replaced it with a 124270. Had both for a few months… can’t tell which one I liked more and still can’t… a matter of preference. My favorite watch that I have ever had though.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Spartyfan6262

Thank you, Douglas. I've been watching their prices on Chrono24 very closely and think that this price is pretty good for the neo-vintage pieces. I don't think prices will go much lower than that even in a recession.

Just make sure to buy the seller.

[bin31z]

I had a 114270 and it just felt a little chintzy and light for a watch that trades around 5k-6k. I got the 124273 and it is night and day in term of quality and solidity. Back in the day, 114270 used to trade under 3k and if the choice was 7000 for a new 124270, I guess I'd go vintage but even secondary on the 124270 has come down to around 8500 and its hard to justify the 114270 at those prices.

[Jack T]

I’ve had a 39mm Mk1, the proverbial short hands model, for 10 years. It was my third Rolex, had it been my first, it might have been my only.

[Jack T]

I’ve had a 39mm Mk1, the proverbial short hands model, for 10 years. It was my third Rolex, had it been my first, it might have been my only.

[matthew P]

Originally Posted by Spartyfan6262

I would definitely go for the new one, but I suspect that I will be waiting at least a year to get it and, when it comes to watches, I'm very impatient. That's why I would opt for an older version instead.

Prices are falling as demand is slowing.

The 36mm size limits the market size and most of us who were clamoring for this watch at release have managed to track one down I suspect.

I’d visit as many ADs as you could and express interest.
You might be pleasantly surprised at how soon you are offered a watch.

I waited 5 months a year ago with no purchase history FWIW ….. no regrets



If this is a “life time purchase “ then a wait now will be well worth it in the long run if you prefer the modern version….. they present / wear rather differently on wrist.

….Save the drama - I’m just here for the photos….

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by bin31z

I had a 114270 and it just felt a little chintzy and light for a watch that trades around 5k-6k. I got the 124273 and it is night and day in term of quality and solidity. Back in the day, 114270 used to trade under 3k and if the choice was 7000 for a new 124270, I guess I'd go vintage but even secondary on the 124270 has come down to around 8500 and its hard to justify the 114270 at those prices.

Being lighter weight is one of the main reasons why the older Rolex watches are better, not worse. Plus, the older clasps are arguably more durable than the spot welded, modern clasps. Add in the problems with 32xx movements, and you see why some of us prefer the older models even at the same price.

[BDII]

Yes. It’s phenomenal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Giovannibravo]

I don't have either models. In my experience the six digit clasp is much nicer than the five digit references.