Watch_This
551
I think it is a GREAT looking watch...
But I agree about a 42mm Rolex wearing bigger than its size. My wrist measures just over 7"... so relatively average. I have a Milgauss and a YM 16622, which are both 40mm. They are perfect size for my wrist, but I can't imagine going bigger. I have tried on other 40mm watches that don't seem as big. So, a 42mm Rolex would be too big for me. But as far as aesthetics of the Explorer, I really like it. But I would think one would need a 7.5"+ wrist, or just like really big clunky watches to pull this off.
Cheers
Drew
I'm forever on the fence with the 216570.
On one hand I love the functionality of the movement, the super crisp legibility, and touch of oddball funkiness. On the other hand the proportions very seem very off to me and wears much larger than the 42mm would suggest. What's your take? Is it a Yay👍,...
I know what you mean about proportions..
And I ask myself, save for the lugs on the ceramic sub, which is its main polarizing feature, why is it that the maxi treatment on subs and even on the GMTs seem to work better than on this one? Does it have anything to do with maxi proportions on a 40mm ...
It's very strange
I agree with you the Maxi dials dont seem to carry over as successfully over to the 42mm pieces vs. the 40mm.
I have to disagree...
My favorite modern (tool) Rolex. Because of proportions. Sits perfectly on my wrist, on strap or bracelet. Submariner, gmt master II - too thick for their diameter. Same for deep sea. Sea dweller, maybe more balanced but not for everyone ... In the vintag...
And I dont necessarily disagree with you!
I'm admittedly not a Rolex guy, but of the modern tool watches in their catalog, this would be 'the one' if there was one. Still not thoroughly convinced, but it's the frontrunner if I had to choose. Thanks for your answer.
i think it is a very good value proposition & if one has the wrist - Big Yes.
for my wrist i would have prefered it to be 40mm or less. Best, mahesh.,
They need to remake the 1655 especially the hands
The Sub/GMT dials don't work on the Exp II for me.
Nay for me
To me the dial is "unfinished" or the white is to white... i dont know what it is, but clearly a NAY
Nay here 😫
It was going to be my first Rolex until I did the 'wrist test'. The proportions doesn't work for me.
I think it is a GREAT looking watch...
But I agree about a 42mm Rolex wearing bigger than its size. My wrist measures just over 7"... so relatively average. I have a Milgauss and a YM 16622, which are both 40mm. They are perfect size for my wrist, but I can't imagine going bigger. I have tried...
Thanks Drew
I LOVE the watch in photos, it is a great looking watch! In person however I remain on the fence
That is very fair...
I have yet to see it in the metal, so can only offer my opinion based on photos I have seen. Seeing it in person is the only way to truly know. Good luck with your decision.
I think women have an advantage.
From a fashion standpoint. It is common for women to wear wide loose bracelets ( I’m sure there is a name fore them) . Big watches on women can achieve the same look. Visually it works. Maybe because I am accustomed to seeing the loose Wonder Woman style ...
It's a great look
I think the older cases look nicer on leather which is my preference as well ...
I still love it... though
I could have every version of the Ex I and Ex II and be perfectly happy. When those proportions really get to you, let me know... I'm a buyer!
EX2 216570 is quirky and stunning at the same time. Try it on before judging.
I have tried on my friend’s piece in person and it looks slim and well proportion on my 17cm wrist. I have tried 16750 as well, it is nice too but the quality is questionable especially the bracelet is older than my granny. The orange GMT is totally one a...