Jump to content
Trap Door

Explorer 1 observation

Recommended Posts

Trap Door

I have seen several Explorer Gens in the wild. I have coveted them from a far. I finally bought a mediocre rep the other day. I am underwhelmed and its not the quality of the Rep I think the watch is blah. I am really glad I waded in with a rep before buying Gen. Defiinitely saved me from myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Diver Dave

Yeah... even when they were the current watch and not terribly expensive, I never understood them.

 

And I understand the Explorer II even less.

 

 

 

Just a >insert yawn here< watch. Both of them.

 

If I had a gen, I'd sell it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
porschespeedster

y'all are crazy. the vintage EXP 1 is a beautiful thing, especially on bracelet.

it's the gentleman's Sub :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ShovelnTC

I love them but sold mine on as I just didn't get the urge to were it very often and I don't keep box queens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NCRich

Thanks for sharing. I might think you are an idiot, but don't let that stop you. The explorer is a very classy and understated watch. The space dweller in particular is very nice.

 

iR3N9aB.jpg?1

 

And even in 34mm the gilt dial is very nice. But I'm sure your cheap rep gave you a very good idea of what they were like.

 

FWo4BIW.jpg?1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GC
Yeah... even when they were the current watch and not terribly expensive, I never understood them.

 

And I understand the Explorer II even less.

 

 

 

Just a >insert yawn here< watch. Both of them.

 

If I had a gen, I'd sell it.

 

Really...? This is an explorer ii

6113730D-6ADA-4F2C-AA77-FF05179F8E91_zps7tzlfzov.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kleen™
y'all are crazy. the vintage EXP 1 is a beautiful thing, especially on bracelet.

it's the gentleman's Sub :)

 

+1

 

Makes any sub, 'sept for the 5517 (imo) look positively mundane. But there's room for all tastes....even the bad ones...;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thelittleprince
Thanks for sharing. I might think you are an idiot, but don't let that stop you. The explorer is a very classy and understated watch. The space dweller in particular is very nice.

 

iR3N9aB.jpg?1

 

And even in 34mm the gilt dial is very nice. But I'm sure your cheap rep gave you a very good idea of what they were like.

 

FWo4BIW.jpg?1

 

 

Well said, if i didn't read this i would have said the same.

 

You paid what less than 350$? Maybe a cheapie for under 250? Or maybe just maybe you got it from dhgate under 100$

 

 

Sure the Chinese promise A+ quality but come on! Common sense has to kick in someday.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kleen™

Note: My teenage son picked the very minimalistic Exp 1 over any other watch in my watchbox(es): He opted for an Admiralty Grey Nato instead of the bracelet...later to be exchanged and circulating on a Bond and Olive Drab. I think he has really good taste for a 14 year old.

OP?: Not so much...but you just might grow up to it...;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thelittleprince
Yeah... even when they were the current watch and not terribly expensive, I never understood them.

 

And I understand the Explorer II even less.

 

 

 

Just a &gt;insert yawn here&lt; watch. Both of them.

 

If I had a gen, I'd sell it.

 

Really...? This is an explorer ii

6113730D-6ADA-4F2C-AA77-FF05179F8E91_zps7tzlfzov.jpg

 

 

Eww!! Oh gosh, throw it away! Or better just send it to me ill just keep it so i can save you the embarrassment of being seen with that thing :P

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Really tho, Stunning watch mate!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Diver Dave
Yeah... even when they were the current watch and not terribly expensive, I never understood them.

 

And I understand the Explorer II even less.

 

 

 

Just a >insert yawn here< watch. Both of them.

 

If I had a gen, I'd sell it.

 

Really...? This is an explorer ii

6113730D-6ADA-4F2C-AA77-FF05179F8E91_zps7tzlfzov.jpg

 

 

 

I *know* what an Explorer II is.

 

Quiz Time:

 

What could be more useless?

 

A: Tits on a Bull.

 

or

 

B: A watch with a 24 hour hand and no rotating bezel.

 

 

It's a castrated GMT Master >yawn<... I'll take mine with balls, thanks all the same.

 

 

IE "I don't get it".

 

 

Your actual mileage may vary.

 

 

 

 

Dave

 

.

Edited by Diver Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Genius

 

Quiz Time:

 

What could be more useless?

 

A: Tits on a Bull.

 

or

 

B: A watch with a 24 hour hand and no rotating bezel.

 

 

It's a castrated GMT Master >yawn<... I'll take mine with balls, thanks all the same.

 

 

IE "I don't get it".

 

 

Your actual mileage may vary.

 

 

 

 

Dave

 

.

 

Its perfectly usable if you want to check 2 time zones at the same time, one with the 24 hour hand and one with the normal hour hand I guess you can do 3 on the GMT but not a function I've ever needed in fact 2 timezones is often more than I need. Similar I suppose to the Tudor Heritage Chrono which had the rotating GMT bezel but no 24 hour hand you can still check 2 time zones at once.

 

I can see for people regularly flying across multiple time zones that being able to simultaneously track 3 could be a benefit but for the vast majority of people being able to track 2 at once is plenty. If it aint I'll stick on a G shock and track them all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GC
Yeah... even when they were the current watch and not terribly expensive, I never understood them.

 

And I understand the Explorer II even less.

 

 

 

Just a &gt;insert yawn here&lt; watch. Both of them.

 

If I had a gen, I'd sell it.

 

Really...? This is an explorer ii

6113730D-6ADA-4F2C-AA77-FF05179F8E91_zps7tzlfzov.jpg

 

 

 

I *know* what an Explorer II is.

 

Quiz Time:

 

What could be more useless?

 

A: Tits on a Bull.

 

or

 

B: A watch with a 24 hour hand and no rotating bezel.

 

 

It's a castrated GMT Master >yawn<... I'll take mine with balls, thanks all the same.

 

 

IE "I don't get it".

 

 

Your actual mileage may vary.

 

 

 

 

Dave

 

.

 

ha! Balls on a watch! Tits on a bull and castration... are we taking watches?

 

So be it... "you don't get it"

 

My condolences

 

Gae

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Diver Dave
Yeah... even when they were the current watch and not terribly expensive, I never understood them.

 

And I understand the Explorer II even less.

 

 

 

Just a >insert yawn here< watch. Both of them.

 

If I had a gen, I'd sell it.

 

Really...? This is an explorer ii

6113730D-6ADA-4F2C-AA77-FF05179F8E91_zps7tzlfzov.jpg

 

 

 

I *know* what an Explorer II is.

 

Quiz Time:

 

What could be more useless?

 

A: Tits on a Bull.

 

or

 

B: A watch with a 24 hour hand and no rotating bezel.

 

 

It's a castrated GMT Master >yawn<... I'll take mine with balls, thanks all the same.

 

 

IE "I don't get it".

 

 

Your actual mileage may vary.

 

 

 

 

Dave

 

.

 

ha! Balls on a watch! Tits on a bull and castration... are we taking watches?

 

So be it... "you don't get it"

 

My condolences

 

Gae

 

 

I do get it... and have a GMT Master.

 

To me, both the Explorer I and the Explorer II are for the guy who walked into the store for a Sub or a GMT Master and "just couldn't afford what he wanted" and bought the price-sensitive buyers option instead. Both are just basically a model of a watch with one feature removed. I can't imagine anyone who could afford the next model up *really* wanting to buy one out of preference. When the Exporer I was the only Explorer, I would have bought a Tudor Sub to save a buck rather than an Explorer. And guess what? Now, used, the Tudor Sub would be worth more, so my gut-instinct as to what a more desirable watch choice is has been validated by the wisdom of the marketplace.

 

The funny thing is that many years ago I popped off the bezel of my Sea Dweller by accident and didn't find it for a week. The watch, without bezel, looked pretty much like an Explorer I. It was OK... but I was happier when the bezel reappeared.

 

As I said before, actual mileage may vary. As long as YOU like it, who cares what others think.

Edited by Diver Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GC
Yeah... even when they were the current watch and not terribly expensive, I never understood them.

 

And I understand the Explorer II even less.

 

 

 

Just a &gt;insert yawn here&lt; watch. Both of them.

 

If I had a gen, I'd sell it.

 

Really...? This is an explorer ii

6113730D-6ADA-4F2C-AA77-FF05179F8E91_zps7tzlfzov.jpg

 

 

 

I *know* what an Explorer II is.

 

Quiz Time:

 

What could be more useless?

 

A: Tits on a Bull.

 

or

 

B: A watch with a 24 hour hand and no rotating bezel.

 

 

It's a castrated GMT Master &gt;yawn&lt;... I'll take mine with balls, thanks all the same.

 

 

IE &quot;I don't get it&quot;.

 

 

Your actual mileage may vary.

 

 

 

 

Dave

 

.

 

ha! Balls on a watch! Tits on a bull and castration... are we taking watches?

 

So be it... "you don't get it"

 

My condolences

 

Gae

 

 

I do get it... and have a GMT Master.

 

To me, both the Explorer I and the Explorer II are for the guy who walked into the store for a Sub or a GMT Master and "just couldn't afford what he wanted" and bought the price-sensitive buyers option instead. Both are just basically a model of a watch with one feature removed. I can't imagine anyone who could afford the next model up *really* wanting to buy one out of preference. When the Exporer I was the only Explorer, I would have bought a Tudor Sub to save a buck rather than an Explorer. And guess what? Now, used, the Tudor Sub would be worth more, so my gut-instinct as to what a more desirable watch choice is has been validated by the wisdom of the marketplace.

 

The funny thing is that many years ago I popped off the bezel of my Sea Dweller by accident and didn't find it for a week. The watch, without bezel, looked pretty much like an Explorer I. It was OK... but I was happier when the bezel reappeared.

 

As I said before, actual mileage may vary. As long as YOU like it, who cares what others think.

 

All my watches are toy watches. I don't really dissect all the ins and outs of what a buyer would have gone through during his gen purchase, I just like them for the esthetics. None of my "toy watches" are true tool watches, so all they really have going for them is looks.

 

Anyway, I'm good with you not liking whatever it is that you don't wanna like. Each to their own

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hinclimincli

I too know what an Explorer I is:

 

A hell of a watch!

8503999448_c0eecfa949_b.jpg

 

rolex-explorer-1016-jbw007-20100201v1680x1050.jpg

 

Btw, an Explorer 1016 is the watch Ian Fleming had, and the one that obviously inspired him to put a Rolex in Bond's wrist (in the novels). So one would say the explorer is the first Bond Rolex!)

 

Edit: to add the Bond reference

Edited by m0rf0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Diver Dave

I too know what an Explorer I is:

 

A hell of a watch!

 

Btw, an Explorer 1016 is the watch Ian Fleming had, and the one that obviously inspired him to put a Rolex in Bond's wrist (in the novels). So one would say the explorer is the first Bond Rolex!)

 

Edit: to add the Bond reference

 

 

He wore a Bubbleback Explorer, a beautiful watch actually... the first "Explorers" were just the large case Bubblebacks with a plain bezel and a more legible dial.

 

I admit it: All of the Explorers are handsome things.

 

Which brings to mind a question: No rep of the Bubblebacks? They were the first self-winding Rolex watches and are really interesting, and getting scarcer. As noted above, the first Explorers were just the "Big Bub" (6352) with a legible font dial.

 

 

Dave

Edited by Diver Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
niceandcivilized

I have seen several Explorer Gens in the wild. I have coveted them from a far. I finally bought a mediocre rep the other day. I am underwhelmed and its not the quality of the Rep I think the watch is blah. I am really glad I waded in with a rep before buying Gen. Defiinitely saved me from myself.

 

Are you looking to sell this piece? Either way, would love to see pics. Maybe you bought a not-so-good iteration!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gallox
Thanks for sharing. I might think you are an idiot, but don't let that stop you. The explorer is a very classy and understated watch. The space dweller in particular is very nice.

 

iR3N9aB.jpg?1

 

And even in 34mm the gilt dial is very nice. But I'm sure your cheap rep gave you a very good idea of what they were like.

 

FWo4BIW.jpg?1

 

This Rolex loooks soooo beautiful. It's one of my favourites.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moondustesp

Can't wait until my 5500 explorer franken is finished then maybe I can change your mind OP ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GT86

Well, not sure why all the explorer snobbery here?! I'v got on one on the way. Hard to argue that thy aren't elegant tool watches surely? Although Rich's Space Dweller kicks the 'cool' up a few notches!

 

Cant wait for mine to arrive!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
junbug5150

Check out the honeycomb 6350. Grail...

 

UCoWUzOl.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
porschespeedster

I think it may also have to do with age and brand perception.

I was born in the 80s + raised in the 90s' - oughts.

 

For me, a new Submariner is a gauche, new-money accessory. It's never been anything else.

I wasn't alive when the 'diving craze' was big, nor was I alive when real adventurers wore Rolex.

 

Thankfully, I've learned to appreciate the old Subs, SDs, and vintage chronographs.

For me, the more basic and utilitarian a design is, the better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kleen™
I think it may also have to do with age and brand perception.

I was born in the 80s + raised in the 90s' - oughts.

 

For me, a new Submariner is a gauche, new-money accessory. It's never been anything else.

I wasn't alive when the 'diving craze' was big, nor was I alive when real adventurers wore Rolex.

 

Thankfully, I've learned to appreciate the old Subs, SDs, and vintage chronographs.

For me, the more basic and utilitarian a design is, the better.

 

...and exactly how does that fit in with complimenting your RR with a a (rep) Vertu...;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Diver Dave

I think it may also have to do with age and brand perception.

I was born in the 80s + raised in the 90s' - oughts.

 

For me, a new Submariner is a gauche, new-money accessory. It's never been anything else.

I wasn't alive when the 'diving craze' was big, nor was I alive when real adventurers wore Rolex.

 

 

You *are* alive when real adventurers wear Rolex. It's just that we're all old farts now.

 

Come to an Explorers Club function sometime in NYC (I'll bring you as a guest).

You'll see more old Rolex watches than you can count. On guys who have climbed the seven summits, walked across Greenland, etc etc. The real-deal Explorers still count on them as tools.

 

Come out on a serious diving expedition, to someplace like wreck diving the Andrea Doria, Brittanic, or USS Monitor.You'll see Subs by the score.

 

 

To me, my snobbishness (which I gladly admit to) is that if you're wearing an acrylic crystal Sub you're my experience-peer and if you're wearing sapphire you're a newbie. So yes, your average desk-diver with his gauche Submariner is something to be smiled at and patted on the head... even more so the Deep Sea, which is (A) Ugly as shit (who wants Rolex advertising engraved on the rehaut?), and only applicable as a tool to about 100 people worldwide.

 

:suck:

 

 

It's all a matter of where you hang your hat, I guess.

 

 

Dave

 

.

Edited by Diver Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×