The Explorer II Enigma. Historical Thread

[Dylan Wade]

Originally Posted by ibramr

I agree with the friends here that the market for Rolex Explorer II is softer when compared with the almost indetical GMT (among others). Is it possible that this observation is explained by the attraction of the Explorer II as a second, or third, Rolex watch rather than the first? The hypothesis is... Once an entrant to the Rolex realm is attracted to the icons like the Sub and the GMT, expanding the collection would then find the Explorer II as a natural option. However, with second options, multi-watch owners may exhibit several series of bying and selling, different price senstivity levels, different income senstitivy levels..all leading to softer markets. Rolex Explorer II (lovely as it is) seems to serve a sub-market in Rolex, and this market is "those who have more than one Rolex watch".

Albeit to a lesser degree, the same could be saind about 14060 (although the date vs. no date argument comes strongly here as a fator). Any how, just a thought.

Interesting opinion for sure but I actually know a lot of single Rolex/watch owners who picked out the EXP II as their 1st choice and the comparitively minor savings vs say a Sub or GMT etc was simply a bonus not a factor. At the same time I agree that the EXP (more so the white dial) fills the niche you mention for multiple Rolex/watch owners too...just that I'm sure most Rolex owners just and will comtinue to have just one IMO.

[DSJ]

Originally Posted by Dylan Wade

Interesting opinion for sure but I actually know a lot of single Rolex/watch owners who picked out the EXP II as their 1st choice and the comparitively minor savings vs say a Sub or GMT etc was simply a bonus not a factor. At the same time I agree that the EXP (more so the white dial) fills the niche you mention for multiple Rolex/watch owners too...just that I'm sure most Rolex owners just and will comtinue to have just one IMO.

Well said.

[Changmaisausage]

Originally Posted by Dylan Wade

Interesting opinion for sure but I actually know a lot of single Rolex/watch owners who picked out the EXP II as their 1st choice and the comparitively minor savings vs say a Sub or GMT etc was simply a bonus not a factor. At the same time I agree that the EXP (more so the white dial) fills the niche you mention for multiple Rolex/watch owners too...just that I'm sure most Rolex owners just and will comtinue to have just one IMO.

I bought mine last week (white face) I love the feel of the watch on my wrist or should that be lack of feel. For me is ticks all of my requirements it has a date unlike my Daytona, it has good lume so I can read it easily at night in bed, it does not have any polished parts unlike my YM and I can wear it with a suit/jeans and when travelling overseas as it does not leap out shouting ROLEX ROLEX unlike my DJII I bought recently.

I think you can safely say I will be keeping this one......

[bosshog104]

Originally Posted by ibramr

I agree with the friends here that the market for Rolex Explorer II is softer when compared with the almost indetical GMT (among others). Is it possible that this observation is explained by the attraction of the Explorer II as a second, or third, Rolex watch rather than the first? The hypothesis is... Once an entrant to the Rolex realm is attracted to the icons like the Sub and the GMT, expanding the collection would then find the Explorer II as a natural option. However, with second options, multi-watch owners may exhibit several series of bying and selling, different price senstivity levels, different income senstitivy levels..all leading to softer markets. Rolex Explorer II (lovely as it is) seems to serve a sub-market in Rolex, and this market is "those who have more than one Rolex watch".



Albeit to a lesser degree, the same could be saind about 14060 (although the date vs. no date argument comes strongly here as a fator). Any how, just a thought.

Just going back and reading, there seems to be a lot of truth in this thinking. I just don't see someone celebrating a milestone...new to a Rolex, walking into an AD with all the shiny, blingy, and awesome sports models, and settling on the explorer ii. (Not like you can even find sports currently to view)

Its my opinion it is gorgeous in its own way, but hard to see it in that environment. Those familiar with the brand and looking for the most utilitarian, and arguably the most comfortable daily wear, with the convenience of dual time, see the diamond in the ruff it is.

It's a smart buy, and it's hidden potential overt time is spine tingling. I feel the same way about my Tudor northflag by the way.

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

[MacBookAir]

hey all, I m a female watch lover. I have been enjoy reading this forum for a while but never thought of posting anything. But as a super Explorer II white dial fans, think i should share my view here to support it!!
i own many watches like PP Golden Ellipse, JLC Reverso, Portfino IWC, Speedmaster Omega and a small black sub and explorer II (yes, all man's model). yet the explorer II is by far my favorite that i wear almost every next day.

It is my first Rolex. i didnt know much about Rolex when i got it. I had my speedmaster and IWC on black dial so i thought getting a watch in white dial is good. Then i started my watch searching and i fell in love with this beautiful watch at the first sight. i changed my impression on Rolex after I got this lovely watch and I started to read more and more about Rolex. (sorry folks, as a kid i was given the impression that Rolex is a brand for rich gangsters. well, this was a very common impression say 20 years ago in this part of the world). and more i learn, i respect the brand more and bought also more.

so why i love my Explorer II so much? first, i love the name. ok, i know that the explorer who reached the top of Everest didnt wear an Explorer, but i like the spirit of it. I have to have an explorer-mind all the time. second, a more practical reason, it goes well with my daily wears! i work in office but very active in weekends for sports and the white dial is just prefect match for my outfit's colour tone, black, white and blue.

opps, sorry for my long writing, last thing i wanna share with you guys. i am very glad to hear so many ppl here support the white dial. White dial Rolex is less popular in this part of the world. and there is a price difference of about US$200 - 300 for Explorer and more for Daytona. wanna guess why??

[Jolu]

Originally Posted by MacBookAir

White dial Rolex is less popular in this part of the world. and there is a price difference of about US$200 - 300 for Explorer and more for Daytona. wanna guess why??

Something to do with the color white being associated with death in parts of Asia, I suppose.

[Duck9000]

I love my polar Explorer II. Many years of diving, camping, travelling and counting

[terrenceterrence]

Originally Posted by Jolu

Something to do with the color white being associated with death in parts of Asia, I suppose.

No, it's because to the Cantonese speaking Chinese community "white Rolex" sounds phonetically quite similar to "work for nothing"

And "blue Rolexes" sounds like "hardship" so to a old timer businessmen who are superstitious, they would not buy this 2 options when there are so many design permutations to choose from.

[abrush32]

My first Rolex was a black face Explorer II. The first thing I noticed when I bought my mine was how light and comfortable it is. For someone with a skinny wrist like I have, it's perfect.

[mgpdragon64]

I love my ExpyII 40MM!!! this is my 2nd polar 16570 in 5 years as I flipped the first one. I missed the subdued style, understated bling, and ruggedly handsome looks.
I was very dissapointed in the new 42mm with its bloated hands. It just did not sing to me so I decided to get back to the classic Polar White "old school" ExplorerII.
[IMG]

[alanc]

I think for a lot of people the Exp II is an alternate for a Sub, and the more common. safe choice is the Sub. I bought a "plain" Exp because a wanted a more stealthy look for my first Rolex, and I couldn't see the need for the non-rotating bezel with military time.

It's a desirable watch; I think it is simply less desirable to more people, hench the discounting.

[drsg1964]

I love mine, I chose the black face to be stealth.

[petenyc]

Love the EXP II

[ericwanch]

Best watch in my collection so far. Been my daily wearer since I got it.

[IT Nerd]

This is my first Rolex. I recently acquired a (mint) V-serial 16570 - went with the black face out of personal preference but primarily for it's stealth qualities. This piece was chosen for a few reasons, mainly I found it to be a perfect fit for both my work and personal lifestyle.

In terms of work, I spent a number of years as a hands on, senior-level systems engineer and I now run my own consulting company in the IT realm. When I spent time searching for my next timepiece (I had been an Omega guy up until now), I knew that I wanted (1) a Rolex with (2) fixed, second time zone tracking feature. This was an important functional requirement, since most of the systems I deal with use UTC time, and it's a royal PITA having to do the mental math for time conversion, as it leaves room for (human) error. I ruled out rotating bezels so that when I actually look down at my watch, it's a no brainer in seeing the current time in UTC without having to possibly rotate the bezel back in position (call it adult A.D.D. mitigation).

When it comes to my personal life, I "try" to get out as much as possible. Living in the Pacific Northwest affords me the ability to load up the family, drive 20 minutes out of the city and be in the back-country. We are a family of explorers, so once again the 16570 is a great match

The last point, and to further elaborate on why the "stealth" component is important to me: being a business owner of a pro-service oriented company, I didn't want a daily driver with a lot of bling; a blingy watch probably wouldn't help procure contracts with clients where I have to justify high service costs.

In any case, I'm very happy to join the Explorer family as I have chosen a piece that I appreciate both inside and out.

[bluerolex]

the original question from the OP is why the EXp II is less desirable than a GMT. Especially the black.

I think other have said it.

But I will say it again. I The Explorer II is essentially the same as the GMT except for the rotating bezel if we are talking about the old 40mm ones.

Well it is simple if you are going to get an explorer II does not have the rotating bezel.

If you are going to get a black explorer and it is the same price as the GMT. Then why not get the GMT. It is essentially the same watch but the GMT have a rotating bezel. Now if you are going to get a polar Explorer maybe you can say I sacrificing to bezel to get a different dial. Other than that it makes no sense to me to get a black explorer if it is the same price as the GMT.

my $.02

[Brian Page]

Originally Posted by bluerolex

the original question from the OP is why the EXp II is less desirable than a GMT. Especially the black.

I think other have said it.

But I will say it again. I The Explorer II is essentially the same as the GMT except for the rotating bezel if we are talking about the old 40mm ones.

Well it is simple if you are going to get an explorer II does not have the rotating bezel.

If you are going to get a black explorer and it is the same price as the GMT. Then why not get the GMT. It is essentially the same watch but the GMT have a rotating bezel. Now if you are going to get a polar Explorer maybe you can say I sacrificing to bezel to get a different dial. Other than that it makes no sense to me to get a black explorer if it is the same price as the GMT.

my $.02

I just secured a new Explorer II today and have a GMT as well. I think it still fits in the equation because it's 42mm and I opted for the Polar dial - no frills GMT work horse, can't wait to get it!

[lorsban]

Originally Posted by bluerolex

the original question from the OP is why the EXp II is less desirable than a GMT. Especially the black.

I think other have said it.

But I will say it again. I The Explorer II is essentially the same as the GMT except for the rotating bezel if we are talking about the old 40mm ones.

Well it is simple if you are going to get an explorer II does not have the rotating bezel.

If you are going to get a black explorer and it is the same price as the GMT. Then why not get the GMT. It is essentially the same watch but the GMT have a rotating bezel. Now if you are going to get a polar Explorer maybe you can say I sacrificing to bezel to get a different dial. Other than that it makes no sense to me to get a black explorer if it is the same price as the GMT.

my $.02

That's true. That's probably why black Exp 2 sell for $3,500-3,800.

If they were priced equal to GMT2, I'd get a GMT2 especially with non-polished center links.

Still tho, the fact that it has a steel (instead of black) bezel, makes it look classier or less sporty. Like a daytona. For me, that is the appeal.

The GMT looks very sporty. It's only the PCL that adds flash and sets it apart from the Submariner look.

[wolffram]

Bought the 216570 'Polar' 12 months ago. Decided to flip it to buy the black dial. It was very hard to sell, and I took a big hit on the price. Of course being in AUS you are pitching to a small audience. On the other hand my Sub C which I bought new from an AD 14 months ago is selling regularly here for up to 1k more than I bought mine for! Just shows the difference in the desirability of the two models.

[RGAmos]

In my opinion the Explorer II with white dial looks too plain. There is no zip with it. A ceramic bezel, whether rotating or stationary, would improve the watch's appearance.

[HeartRolex]

Originally Posted by RGAmos

In my opinion the Explorer II with white dial looks too plain. There is no zip with it. A ceramic bezel, whether rotating or stationary, would improve the watch's appearance.

x2

[capote]

Originally Posted by RGAmos

In my opinion the Explorer II with white dial looks too plain. There is no zip with it. A ceramic bezel, whether rotating or stationary, would improve the watch's appearance.

The Explorer II always had an SS bezel and I prefer it to a more brittle ceramic one.

[kelv_w]

Picked mine up last week. Love it.

[pa30crewchief]

Originally Posted by RGAmos

In my opinion the Explorer II with white dial looks too plain. There is no zip with it. A ceramic bezel, whether rotating or stationary, would improve the watch's appearance.

It's "plainness" means it's my most versatile Rolex with a useful complication and it is my go to watch when I don't have the time to fuss with the watch box.

On leather it looks like a white dial dress watch and fits easily into a room full of suits. On grey NATO it fits right in with a backpack and boots. On its bracelet it's sporty in jeans without drawing attention.

Its not my favorite Rolex (root beer 16713 with that delicious brown dial is my favorite) but it is my most worn.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Nikrnic]

I'm also in total agreement on the EXPII and a fan of the black dial. I never understood why it's such a sleeper but thats good for the buyer. If I go for a GMT that's the one I always think of especially since the 42m came out.

[Rogue884]

I love mine

[DSJ]

I just don't understand why it has such a limited (albeit loyal) following... I've got Bluesy on now, and while I love it, it's a lot heftier and less comfortable, at the end of the day...

[RyanJ]

Originally Posted by DSJ

I just don't understand why it has such a limited (albeit loyal) following... I've got Bluesy on now, and while I love it, it's a lot heftier and less comfortable, at the end of the day...

Because it is not a hype watch. Despite what many say, they want their Rolex watches to be recognized. An Exp II looks like a lot of other watches.

[Jedi]

Mine has settled down to +3.2/day after the table whacking incident, and it's performing admirably. Been shifting marble slabs and tiles the last two days and it's been dinged but not a single scratch or gouge.

Limited means more time and space for us Expy II afficionados.

[sea-dweller]

I'm contemplating the purchase of one.