7 of 10, told me I have a ‘’Small Rolex’’! The 124270 size controversy.

[@jameshoward9700]

Great discussion! 7 out of 10 people don't know what they're talking about! A classic, classy, understated, subtle, versatile tool! I regularly wear 40, 41, 42, and 45mm watches (and a 52 Tuna every so often!), but the 36 Explorer is my GADA go to. The perfect watch. That said, it did take me about two weeks to get used to wearing a smaller watch... But once you get your eye in, you can happily change back and forth with eg Speedy Pro, Reverso, Sub. Just persevere for a bit - the reward is worth it!

[@BraveBeaters]

James, exactly! this is what happened to me, after a couple of days on the wrist I totally got used to it! Now it's my first choice, because it is very, very comfy! thanks for your thoughts :)

[@ph69jbl]

What Tuna do you have James? :)

[@michaelriera6277]

The 124270 is a classic size and wears perfect. It is fantastic!

[@TacBlades]

Of course 7 out of 10 know what they are talking about because its just personal choice nothing more. Its like judging people that don't like picasso. There is no right or wrong only subjective preference which can't be wrong.

[@michaelriera6277]

Always prefer to zig when most zag.

[@RamiSbeiti]

I picked up the 124270 from my AD and with a 6.5 inch wrist, this is not a women's watch. It's the quintessential Rolex for a confident man.

[@BraveBeaters]

Wise words and I totally agree! Enjoy that explorer! :)

[@dhunter1133]

I am glad you mentioned your wrist size because - for you - it is within your golden ratio. For others - like me - it isn't. And I'm beyond bored with the "Your great grandfather wore a 28mm watch on Normandy beach" argument that all men should wear the same size watch, regardless of wrist real estate.

[@augustojoseramonpinochetug5235]

Same, got it from my AD 6 months ago, my wrist is 7" btw

[@DadCoreDane]

You don’t have small Rolex Explorer. You have the correct Rolex Explorer.

[@denbo74]

What’s the “correct” size for the Sub and Explorer 2? Why does no one ever say this about other models? Just repeating stuff because it sounds like you are “in the know”

[@rousseau327]

@@denbo74 40mm and 40mm. And people saying the Exp 2 is too large all the time. They also lamented the change from 40mm to 41mm on the sub, until they realized Rolex just rounded up.

[@skrads]

I have the correct Rolex Explorer at 39 mm. Don’t you know ?

[@dhunter1133]

It's still too big. Genghis Khan wore a 26mm watch. Goliath wore a 22mm when he fought David. I dare you to question the masculinity of either of these men. So put your behemoth 34.9mm Rolex away and wear a proper man's watch.

[@DougRobison-s5e]

One point that is rarely raised in discussing the 36 Explorer is that the original mountaineers who this watch was aimed at actually preferred a smaller case that could be tucked under thick clothing and not catch on anything. Thus, there was a functional reason for it to be smaller.

[@grahamwarner8731]

I’m happy to see the trend towards more classic sized watches. A watch should complement your wrist not dominant it. The Explorer 36 is a great acquisition!

[@seba0079]

I have the OP 36 and love it

[@Bisley1]

I love my 36mm watches. They’re comfortable and more elegant than big watches. My wrists would be fine up to 42mm, larger seems odd.

[@Bisley1]

Let us hope so. I feel like it’s only us watch nerds that want smaller watches, while the manufacturers aren’t really going smaller - Rolex certainly isn’t. But maybe they will in a few years, after Tudor have been hauling it in with their 54, 58 and Pelagos 39🤞🏻

[@jeffjenco8009]

The dial of the 36 mm Explorer 124270 is about the same size as the dial of the 41 mm sub 126610.

[@heathwoodruff6975]

Thanks for sharing this fact with people

[@lhgross48]

What is the actual dial size?

[@jeffjenco8009]

@@lhgross48 The crystal of the Explorer 36 is 30.3 mm and the 41 Sub is 29.9 mm.

[@rafaeloliva6425]

It might have the same size dial, but the 36mm explorer is a dainty watch, in comparison to the very masculine 41mm Submariner. So that is a reach and irrelevant.

[@visiblemode]

@@rafaeloliva6425I disagree. I have a 7 inch wrist and I was teetering between both trying them on. The dial size is definitely one reason the 36 mm looks right. I ended up preferring the 36mm which really surprised me. Both are nice, and if I had 6.5 inch wrists there is zero chance I’d choose the 40mm.

[@saucyseek4137]

I think it’s as simple as you wear the watch that fits you. Too often people get caught up in the numbers, like “anything bigger than 42mm is unwearable” or “36 mm is the perfect size”. Well turns out if you have a 7.5” wrist you can pull off a 44mm watch well. Furthermore if you have that 7.5” wrist a lot of people are gonna think your 36mm watch looks too dainty on your wrist, which it will, but if you like that look then rock it anyways. On the other hand if you have a 6.5” wrist 36mm will look great on you, while 44mm will look like a dinner plate.

[@BraveBeaters]

Dinner is served :D Thanks for your thoughts, you are right! I should make an episode and discuss in depth cases, sizes and trends

[@saucyseek4137]

@@BraveBeaters yeah I think that’d be a great video! I remember when I got my first watch it was a 42mm, but I have a 6.25” inch wrist and didn’t know what I was doing when I first got into the hobby. Suffice to say it wears a bit…big (the dreaded slight lug overhang).

[@marcheezy.]

@@BraveBeaters The key dimensions people neglect when assessing watch size are: 1 lug to lug height, 2 dial size. 3 is not a dimension but perspective. Best to step a couple feet away from the mirror to see how the watch looks on you from other's perspective. Wrist shots make watches look much bigger.

[@Bisley1]

True, though even with a big wrist, while bigger watches work better i still feel smaller ones are more elegant. They just have to be worn with confidence. I just saw a casually but well dressed ~50yo in italy last week wearing a vintage watch that seemed smaller than 34, perhaps 32mm and it looked great. He just pulled it off. I’m not sure I would, but it suited him well. And James Gandolfini is a big guy and wore a 36DD as Tony Soprano too even if his wrist might be fit form a Deepsea Dweller. A small Cartier Tank or JLC Reverso can still look great on a man’s wrist although they might be considered feminine by some. But yeah, it doesn’t go both ways unfortunately. Someone where I used to work wore a 40mm maxi case Bluesy Sub that would overhang his wrist and form big gap between the lugs and wrist and I thought it looked just gaudy- especially being such a “loud” watch. Something more subtle but still big might have been better. Anyway, I digress

[@sumalways]

It also depends on the dial color, chapter rings, the lug to lug measurement and also if you have a flat wrist or rounded one.😊

[@khairulhelmihashim2510]

it's only a mind game. I have a 7" wrist and can comfortably and confidently wear 33-44mm sized watch depending to style/mood/activity. My general preference are below 38mm for dress, and above 36mm for sports/casual watches. In case of Rolex Explorer, 36mm is the practical compromise between understated dressiness, and functional sports aesthetic.

[@Max__apex]

Girls watch. Transgender has got to Rolex men. Jordon Patterson is needed for these men 😂

[@rafaeloliva6425]

The explorer is not a dress watch. Times change 36mm is relegated to a unisex watch. It's not 80s.

[@rafaeloliva6425]

The 36mm explorer is a dainty watch, when compared to any other 36mm in Rolex line. That is not a mind game. It just wears much smaller than a 36mm Datejust or Daydate. It will look small on any man with any kind of size to him.

[@ranhong5243]

I also own the 124270, its been my daily since May/2021, love the size, before this my daily was either bb58 or a sub. Now I appreciate it even more after having almost dailyed this watch for more than a year, I am surprised it is still not easy to pinpoint exactly what makes the new explorer 1 so appealing; it is extremely comfortable to wear, it kind of just 'melts' on your wrist, the dial is legible, symmetrical, handsome, the lume is great, bracelet and clasp are top notch. 19mm lug width is just icing on the cake for this watch. The entire package makes this watch eerily close to perfection.

[@Rodolfoguerra12]

Hi. I am also planning on buying an explorer, and just as you I wear a bb58 daily nowadays, I’m hesitating about the explorer because of being it too small for me, I have a 7 inch wrist, what are you thoughts on the explorer now? Has anything changed? Thanks!

[@ranhong5243]

@@Rodolfoguerra12 no nothing has changed, the 124270 is still my daily, the funny thing is my every other watch is bigger, although i do have a smaller 6.25-6.5 inch wrist. It did take a few days of wear for me to get used to that size, but once it did, it became 'addictive'. Hope this help and good luck

[@Rodolfoguerra12]

@@ranhong5243 thank you for the feedback. Enjoy your Explorer in good health. Cheers.

[@Bisley1]

Not to mention the AR coated crystal that previous models didn’t have. Love it!

[@Sebastian85]

I own the 124270 too. I have to say, it felt a bit too small at the beginning especially compared to my Pelagos. But since I own the Explorer it is the watch I wear most from all my watches. It is so comfortable and good looking. With time it just feels like it is a part of your wrist and not a watch on your wrist. I love it. Cheers

[@svenshruufx7380]

good to know! I also have a Pelagos and considering to buy the Explorer 36, since the 40 mm version just feels too clumsy and with a lot of empty space.

[@whereisvanuatu]

The first time I tried a 36 I shrieked in horor. I left it on the wrist for a whole day though and then trying one of my 42s I felt like a potato farmer.

[@BraveBeaters]

Haha! True, exactly the same happened to me!

[@vonbon954]

Arguing about the size of watches is as absurd as arguing about the size of shoes, clothes, cars, or aeroplanes. You choose the size that suits your particular needs at any given time.

[@andrpers14]

Haha, same. Never use my gmt any longer. Always the explorer. Looks great ln the wrist but baby next to the 40 cases 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@Mysteryboy0007]

so are you still wearing a 36?

[@whereisvanuatu]

@@Mysteryboy0007, haha, no! It took me a full year to understand that both 38 and 42 are really pushing it and for my 20 cm wrist I shouldn’t go beyond these landmarks. Which is painful, due to how many great watches you can find only on 36…

[@johnt2694]

I tried on an exhibition case and it does look small (6.5”) from my perspective. But when I look at it from a mirror, it looks like a great fit!!

[@tiagodvt]

I'm totally ok with either 36 or 39 for the Explorer. Guess I would have to try both, if I was planning on buying. I used to prefer smaller watches and was totally "afraid" of going bigger on certain styles of watches. But then I bought a 39mm field watch and a 40mm PRX and everything changed. I was totally convinced I would love the 35mm PRX - then I tried it and absolutely hated how it wore on my wrist (keep in mind I regularly use 36mm dress watches). After that I bought a Powermatic in 40mm and I absolutely loved it on my 17cm wrist. For the Explorer, I guess I would prefer the 39mm, since it is a GADA watch on a bracelet. I would go with 36 with a dressier option, on a leather strap. BUT then again, I'm fine with both. And experiencing them on wrist could change my opinion - never had the chance to try them.

[@BraveBeaters]

I think the genta style, yes, fits better on a 40 mm size for 17 cm. As for the explorer, I would wear the 36 Mm on a bracelet and the 39 on leather :D

[@ditmerk]

Agreed. It about how it wears. Comming from someone who owns and loves a Cartier Santos and a Seiko MM300

[@mariog7213]

I’d definitely get a 36mm dress watch but for a gada watch, considering my personal style and lifestyle, 39-42 is my sweet spot

[@Bisley1]

Either is a good choice, but the proportions of the 36mm Explorer are better than the 39/40. Same goes for the Datejust 36 vs 41. The proportions are in my opinion objectively better and if you were to look at them on a photo scaled to the same size without a wrist or anything else in the photo, I think most people would agree. The dial to bezel ratio is different somehow.

[@Bisley1]

@@BraveBeaters i’m currently wearing the 36mm on leather and it looks gorgeous! It makes for a pretty elegant watch but requires thin / delicate straps because there isn’t a lot of clearance between the case and lug holes and because the 19mm width and lug shape looks off with a thick strap (i have one that just looks bad). The old 36mm Explorer with 20mm lugs and the 39/40mm Explorers are more forgiving in that department.

[@maxpeters2613]

I have a 7.25 in. wrist. I used to have the 36mm Explorer, but sold it because my wife wore it more than I did. It just looked too small on me. I now have the 39mm Oyster Perpetual, and prefer that to the 36mm. I find that anything around 40mm looks best on my wrist. To me anyway. And that's what matters. I can go up to 43mm, but 38mm is as small as I feel comfortable with. Again, 39mm feels perfect.

[@perudolux]

My problem is that since I got used to my explorer, all my other watches feel too big. I think my next watch will be a cartier tank!

[@BraveBeaters]

haha! same here!

[@nicholaschavez6245]

An Explorer and a Tank, and I can happily exit this hobby satisfied.

[@natusMCMII]

exactly, I realized that 36 is so comfortable on the wrist.

[@StruanRobertson29]

@@natusMCMII indeed

[@joeschlicht]

Yup!

[@stephenso3]

I recently got the 36. Not gonna lie, it felt small but since I have quite a few watches in the 38-40 mm, thought it would be a nice change to own something smaller plus I do have a small 6.25 wrist. It's been more than a week now and I have not taken this off my wrist. I love the classic size and very understated elegance.

[@BraveBeaters]

A beauty, enjoy it :)

[@XENONEZZ2]

Also another factor to think about when considering the correct size of a watch is how large someone's hands are...not only their wrists......for me with 6.25 inch wrists and fairly small hands....36mm is perfect. The Explorer is not a show off watch either so the smaller size lets it fly nicely under the radar.

[@phmwu7368]

4:38 the Rolex model used on the 1953 British Mt Everest expedition didn't not have Arrow markers: cream dial Rolex 6098 Oyster Perpetual wrist watches. Already on 26th January 1953, Rolex had the Swiss patent for the name "Explorer" registered as they had been sponsoring Himalayan expeditions since 1933 ...

[@larsfillmore4765]

And, Hilary wore a Smiths

[@nathankay]

I have the 39mm Explorer. I rotate with my Seiko SKX and my Laco Augsburg. The Explorer feels (and is) small compared to the others. It does not feel big at all. I have 7.5inch, flat wrists. The 39mm Explorer is bigger than the 36mm, but it's not a "big watch." it's nowhere near a Sub/GMT - those are BFW's. Ultimately, it really depends on your wrist size.

[@whereRbearsTeeth]

The vast majority of people saying that the 39 is too big have never even had one on their wrist, that much I can guarantee.

[@sg8475]

I picked up the Explorer 40 yesterday. It wears smaller than all my other watches

[@jeremybodeker9841]

Nowadays it no longer matters what size watch you wear. I was recently at an event where I saw women with Daytonas and GMTs. It's about what suits you. If you want big and flashy, go to sizes 41+. If you like classic, then go for sizes 34 to 40. If we look at celebrities, you also saw several people with smaller sizes, such as Charlie Sheen with a 35mm Yachtmaster and Ryan Gosling with a 34mm Air King.

[@rafaeloliva6425]

I disagree with your assumption bigger doesn't mean flashier, it means more masculine. You're welcome to wear whichever size you prefer, but 36mm and below are relegated to unisex staus. 36mm is so 90s.

[@yaowong6892]

I thought I wanted a 39mm explorer but compared to the new 36mm with the tapered case design, the new reference look better to me. We wear watches for 1 person, not the 7/10 or the 3/10 people. Thanks for making the video and I love your sketches. Did you find that the case of the 124270 rubbed to close against the NATO strap?

[@BraveBeaters]

I fully agree Yao! Thank you! yes the space between the sping bar and the case it's tight. so only thin nato's can fit.

[@yaowong6892]

@@BraveBeaters how thin are your NATO's?

[@JohnDoe-vt6zm]

Well said

[@Bisley1]

@@yaowong6892 i tried different ones. Not all work. I chopped the second strap off of some because the watch just seems too small for all that fabric.

[@outtagoodnamesdangit]

Fun video! I actually own this model and _did_ purchase from the AD (was on their list for less than a year, which was nice). I originally wanted the 39 mm before they discontinued it, but having worn the 36 for several months now, I am honestly fine with it. I think the classic sizing of it lends to its understated appeal. It's not feminine, it's just a short king.

[@natusMCMII]

That's rare, someone that wanted the 39 and got the 36! Glad that you enjoy it, it's a stunner in a classic size, I love it!

This "Big watches are better" is utter bullshit. This 36 mm is totally perfect and I MUST HAVE IT!

[@rafaeloliva6425]

Yeah, the perfect chicks watch!

[@marvinberwart]

There is no such thing as a perfect size for a watch. It's more like "if you like it, wear it" type of situation. I wear from 34 to 43mm, works for me.

[@BraveBeaters]

Thanks for your thoughts, Marvin! yup, you are totally right. I should do an episode to discuss the wristsizing secret :D

[@antonhallergren588]

I have 34 mm gold dress watches and 54 mm g shocks I've got 8 inch wrists for reference

[@michaelriera6277]

One of the best review of the 124270. It is perfection on the wrist. It is also has a beautiful deep black dial with newer more prominent numerals. It is pure class.

[@BraveBeaters]

Agreed Michael! Thanks :)

[@natusMCMII]

I have very small wrists, so the 124270 is the perfect watch in my eyes, such a stunner! I also love that it flies under the radar and doesn't scream *ROLEX* like a sub or a GMT for example. Also 36mm is just a classic men's watch size, people that call it way too small and say that a man has to "wear at least 40mm" are just poisoned by the "huge-watch-trend" of the last decade. Great video by the way, enjoy your Explorer!

[@classicalmusicvideos1276]

usually people who say that can't afford either.

[@natusMCMII]

@@classicalmusicvideos1276 what does that have to do with anything? Honestly, ask yourself why you had to comment that lmao, are you someone that really likes the submariner and can’t handle it when people online say that they like another watch better than the sub or gmt? It’s just a tiny bit too big for my wrist, not my wallet, that’s why the diver in my collection is the Tudor Pelagos 39 since it fit’s me better and my overall favorite watch in my collection is the Explorer 36, simple as that. Anyways, I don’t think I have to prove my watch budget to someone in the KZbin comments who‘s probably just projecting his own issues on other people…

[@classicalmusicvideos1276]

@@natusMCMIIWas referring to the "a man should wear at least 40mm comment" I own a 14270........ Get outside dude

[@natusMCMII]

@@classicalmusicvideos1276 I‘m outside right now.. :,( In all seriousness though, sorry for getting offensive, I obviously thought your previous comment referred to me saying that I like the understated Explorer more than the Sub or GMT, just a simple misunderstanding, all good bro.

[@joeschlicht]

The explorer actually measure 35.3mm in diameter, so if it were actually 36mm I think that would be much better. I've compared the new Explorer directly with a 36mm OP and the OP wore slightly larger and not just because of the wider lug width. The case is slightly larger and probably measures to an actual 36mm. That being said, the deep lacquered dial on the Explorer is way better than the the sun ray brushed finish of the OP. In reality, I do wish the Explorer was 37mm and not a mm more. 38 would be too much, but 36.5 - 37 would be ideal.

[@SteveDion]

Had the 36mm and traded up to the 40mm. I just found the 36mm didn’t pop enough off my wrist (7 inch). Was a little too understated. Super comfortable though.

[@BraveBeaters]

I feel you, I might ''upgrade'' mine for a 40mm one as well.

[@ChrisJohnson-yw2ky]

When I got into watches, I started with a 40mm diver. Comfortable enough. Then I went up to a 42mm diver. Too heavy. Then I bought a vintage 35mm watch. It was super comfortable. From then on, I was a bit more in tune with the comfort of a watch instead of the style. After that, I ended up with a 38mm quartz. Now the larger diameter watches seemed a bit too big and bulky. I settled on a 36mm and wear that to this day.

[@BraveBeaters]

Congrats Chris, It's important that you got the right one after many tryouts.

[@chrispurzer9461]

Great purchase, perfect size for the dial layout. Tudor Ranger mimics the Explorer but at 38 or whatever mm size it is wastes space. Explorer layout is optimized at 36 mm regardless if worn by a man or a woman. 😀

[@BraveBeaters]

Fully agree with you, Chris! Thank you! :)

[@kubodrdul]

I have white op 36 and it’s a great size. Nobody said to me that it looks like a ladies watch. I’ve read somewhere that R. Gosling wears op in 34.

[@jamisonjamison1]

I have a 7 3/4" wrist and wear my 124270 most days. My favorite watch ever, and when i eventually get a day date it will also be a 36.

[@pth8888]

Case size is relative to individual wrist size and preference. Some like to wear large while others prefer small. For me having a 7” wrist size, I prefer the 36mm case. I tried the 39mm case when it was introduced and the dial just don’t feel right.

[@BraveBeaters]

Yes, the 39 mm version, can be too big, indeed.

[@marcheezy.]

Perhaps the Mk2 39mm dial would suit you better? I own the Mk1 and the small T-Rex hands are off although they bother me. My wrist is a flat 6.7" (wider surface than a round wrist) and the watch sits on me fine so I'm pretty confident the size would be perfect on you.

[@pth8888]

@@marcheezy. I did tried the Mk2 dial as well. Actually what I discovered is the issue is not the case size. Rather it is the larger dial on the 39mm case somehow loose its proportion. The 36mm case dial looks better IMO.

[@marcheezy.]

@@pth8888 Just saw your reply. Great feedback. I also find the dial size combined with the thin bezel make it look almost like a tiny plate on the wrist. I would have preferred a 37-38mm Explorer.

[@Bisley1]

@@pth8888100% agree with this. The proportions of the bigger Explorers 39/40 and DJ 41 are objectively not as good. The ratio between dial and bezel just aren’t as good.

[@jeonglee657]

Lovely video as always. I am going to London next month, and keen to get a Certina as its not available here in Singapore. Which AD would u recommend?

[@vikaskapoor9343]

Bought the 36 mm Explorer today and couldn’t be happier. It’s perfect!

[@Halfmoon67]

Fantastic video ! Very impressed by the quality of the editing! Many thanks for all the efforts you put in! You just got yourself a new subscriber !

[@BraveBeaters]

Haha! thank you very much & Welcome aboard! :)

[@russellseah2347]

Ive no issue with 36mm case size. I own a 36 datejust. Beautiful symmetry from case to bracelet. Just perfect. The problem wth the current Explorer is the aggressive taper from the lugs to the bracelet n clasp. It makes it look clownishly dainty. Wears very much smaller. What a waste. Certainly more suited for woman wrist. (It looks very small on your wrist). Thats why i bought the 36mm datejust instead

[@russellseah2347]

The 114270 was the perfect Explorer in symmetry and fit.

[@BraveBeaters]

The datejust wears bigger indeed, the lug width is bigger as well

[@LaDariusNorris]

I have a 7.5 inch wrist and my most worn watch is a 34mm watch on beads of rice. This Explorer I is MORE THAN ADEQUATE.

[@rafaeloliva6425]

A 28mm ladies datejust is adequate, but there is no denying it's dainty!

[@StruanRobertson29]

All about personal preference here. My day watch during the week is a 35mm omega geneve and my weekend watch is this explorer. I like the traditional size of both, and they are very comfortable. I wouldnt want anything larger than 38mm...its just not me. Its a shame that he cant really give the watch the same appreciation that I can...but each to their own.

[@JohnnyJohnJon83]

I used to wear 40-44mm but now as I get older I’m leaning more towards the 36-38mm . I have the 114270 and it’s perfect .

[@Valera_Scotland]

I'm saving for my grail. DateJust 36mm, silver dial... this size is the perfect watch size... the DJ on jubilee has just the right amount of wrist presence too, compared to the new Explorer bracelet which is a little dainty (but still amazing).... any thoughts about the DJ? ( fluted bezel )

[@BraveBeaters]

Dj on flutted with jubilee is a classic ageless killer watch! It's iconic and in my view is the sole symbol of rolley! I would buy one :)

[@Valera_Scotland]

@@BraveBeaters thank you so much... that's really nice to hear... and I really love your videos. Keep up the great work man 👍🌳

[@mxvera1]

I previously had the 39mm Explorer, but sold it once I got the 36mm Explorer. The Exp 124270 is soooo comfortable, especially on a NATO strap. According to my scale, the 124270 weight on NATO is 53 grams. It simply disappears on the wrist. 36mm size is classic versatile and SUPER comfortable. I will not go back to larger watches. I also have a DJ 36 126200 that is super comfortable, but my Explorer remains my default, go-to watch. Truly a GADA watch.

[@Valera_Scotland]

@@mxvera1 funny how things changed. I ended up with an IWC Mark XVI... on a bulang and sons leather strap. Gorgeous. 39mm is a little big, but this watch is a stunner and was "only" half the price of the Explorer P.s. the weight on the Iwc is 67grams on the leather strap. It's not bad I'm curious about this new 39mm Tudor Pelagos but they need to twist a matte version (in blue?), for me to really add it to the list. However that won't be for several years. I LOVE this IWC and it's a perfect all rounder (although I definitely won't be swimming in it)

[@denbo74]

People can try to convince themselves all they want but reality is that the 36 just is way too small for many men. I just picked up a 40 and compared to other watches I own it looks smallish itself on my 7.3” wrist. Then people say “it’s the original size”….but they never say such things about other watches…like the Sub or Explorer II.

[@jerryglasses2229]

Wear what fits your wrist. i think steel sports watches can be a bit bigger than a dressier watch on leather. My sweet spot is 38mm for field or dress and 40 for diver but own from 37mm to 42. I do prefer 36 with a 20mm lug width over 18mm. I do think a 36mm with 18 lug width looks a bit dainty on my 6.875 in wrist

[@angelos6817]

I'm in my 50's and 36mm has always been the classic size for a mans watch. any watch bigger was big for a specific reason, such as pilots and divers watches are bigger because they need to be highly legible for those extreme conditions. Many young people want everything big just like their balls i.e big cars, houses and of course watches.

[@thedriver08]

Truth be told a smaller case diameter will always be the more classy and elegant choice. The 36mm Explorer, in my humble opinion at least, is just spot on. It's these perfect proportions of that particular timepiece. You can't really go wrong with it. And besides, 36mm is of course the original size. I wear a 34mm Air King reference 114200 as my daily watch. I do everything with it and it never felt out of place or even dainty. Yet that's just my take on the whole discussion, other people will naturally feel different about it. By the way, I just discovered your channel and really appreciate your content, keep it up 👍.

[@tbprofile1295]

I have a 114200 black dial OP 34mm. The new Explorer is actually 35.3mm though is advertised as 36mm. I'm thinking of getting it. Do you find that the 34mm and the 36mm Explorer wear similarly, and is your wrist 6-6.5" if I may ask? Thanks

[@thedriver08]

@@tbprofile1295 That's funny, I also own a 114200. It's always nice to come across people who also appreciate the smaller cases 👍. Regarding your question. Luckily, I actually have some hands-on experience with the Explorer. I've tried it a few times at my local AD and compared it to my Airking. They wear pretty similar, the 124270 maybe looks a bit bigger or beefier. The only thing I will say is that the Explorer is a sportier watch overall. And of course you get the new 3230 movement. I don't know my exact wrist size. But it's definitely quite slender. A 34mm oystercase for example sits perfectly fine on my wrist. Doesn't look to big doesn't look to small.

[@tbprofile1295]

@@thedriver08 thanks for the response.

[@thedriver08]

@@tbprofile1295 sure, no problem 😎

[@sumalways]

Alot of it depends on Lug to lug length, color of dial, bezel thickness, lug width, case height, strap or bracelet....two watches with same case diameter can look totally different on wrist

[@hunterphan5506]

Interesting. I have a 6.25-in wrist (at 2-in width). What people comment about the size has no impact on how I feel about the watch I’m wearing. I switch regularly (every 2 or 3 days) among 36mm, 40mm, 43mm and 45mm. And none of the watches feels too big or too small for me. They all are very wearable and looks good to me.

[@jeremydahm2124]

Tried on the 36 the other day. Even next to an OP36 ( they had both!) it feels small. It's a very good looking little watch though and it's a totally different experience from the 39. You could definitely own both. I love my 214270 but it wears like a 40.

[@heathwoodruff6975]

small dial? It has the same size dial as the current itteration of the 41mm Sub. Fact. Not a small dial on the 36. Great video. Thanks for taking time to make it. : )

[@BraveBeaters]

Thank you :)

[@johnt2694]

If you compare the sub vs the explorer, the sub looks gigantic. But what I didn’t know was the dial on both models are essentially the same size.

[@BraveBeaters]

Correct! :)

[@joshuaodyssey]

Mike Tyson wears a lot of 34-36mm watches... Ask him if those were ladies watces 🤣 In all reality we seem to forget the time when people were actually "active". When you are actively hiking and doing activities you want something light, out of the way and to do its job without weighing on your wrist. This is the job for the explorer and the reason for its design language.

[@BraveBeaters]

Tyson with 36 mm watches, o_O unexpected

[@harkonen1000000]

@@BraveBeaters Not so much. Smaller watches will draw attention towards muscles, rather than distract.

[@dvirshany]

I am sorry but I don’t get people who say that the 124270 looks even smaller because of the 19mm lug width. I have had various 19mm watches, speedmaster (straight case), GS 44gs, SBGA453, etc… all of them wear true to their size. I had a 114270 for 3 years before I upgraded to the 124270 and then had them together for a few months. The 124270 (newer one) by far looks bigger. I wore OPs, DJ in 36mm and non of them look bigger than the Explorer because of the 20mm. The only thing that might give it a bigger look is the chunkier case of the OP or the fluted bezel of the DJ. I have pretty big flat wrists and the 124270 wears perfectly along side my Dweller, Sub and GS.

[@kylesalisbury6789]

I won't judge in general on if it is too small or just right, but for me personally I find it too small. In pictures I always loved this watch and it was a big time grail. I was able to land a 39mm used model and I don't regret it, but I did not love how it looked on the wrist. In my watch box, laying on my desk, pure beauty and yet on my wrist I was not happy... This is neither here nor there, but I think we each know what looks good on our wrist to us and should gauge by that. Obviously before anyone shells out the money for a 36, they should try on a like sized watch somewhere or even buy a cheap watch online to test. I love your videos and content. Keep it up!

[@_sr]

The most classy explorer in the perfect OG size. And it is not for ladies. Yes ladies can wear them, but it is NOT FOR ladies. Ladies wearing 40-41 mm watches these days.. It is a classic and classy size. Contemporary watches growing bigger is just an ugly trend to be reversed. 7 inch wrist here wearing 36 mm explorer just fine. It is a pitty to even discuss the original explorer’s “right” size.. Wear it, get used to it and you will see❤

[@Arquelius]

Probably it’s too thick for 36mm, I have 1 watch with 37mm diameter, it’s very slim and the thickness fits organically its diameter. Thus it’s very comfortable to wear it

[@govtfunded]

8" wrist and wear 33mm-36mm regularly, just like the men who came before me.

[@GeorgeVisekruna-ym1yt]

36mm is a perfect size watch for any wrist. Anything bigger is like wearing a dinner plate on your wrist. The reason why many people are buying ridiculous sized watches is because of fashion but fail to realise how ludicrous they look.

[@fabiansuarez523]

5:43” the answer to all complains or doubts. It fits perfect 👍🏻 What a beautiful icon, and as you mentioned remains with the date just their origins. Don’t sell it but if you decide to get rid of the Explorer I’m in your list 😉

[@Casiian_]

I actually like the classy smaller sized watches. I'm not a fan of the big watch trend. 36-38 is a good range for most people.

[@Swayndo]

I have one. I only wear it on a strap. The taper on the bracelet makes it too small for my smaller than average (185mm) male wrist. What was wrong with 20-15.5mm on previous 36mm versions.

[@Swayndo]

Update, months later I have it back on the bracelet and it seems right now.

[@layne-davison]

My favorite watch in my modest collection. The purest in me loves that this watch is a modern tool Rolex with vintage proportions. It is a true luxury tool, not a status symbol. Can’t say that for most of the current catalogue.

[@jongoodman7563]

Everybody running around looking like Flava Flave with clocks on their wrist, saying 36mm is too small when they should be dissing on the gargantuan 41mm, XXL Day Dates and look-at-me subs.

[@BraveBeaters]

Haha! Nice one! True. The bigger the logo, the better :)

[@bigboiganiga8356]

Luxury brands are weird to me. They can release same watches every year with different variations of their existing lineups and still has fanbase salivating. Every year, different measurements Submariner anyone?

[@macaocan]

When you own larger and more expensive watches, and then take the 36 Expl just out of curiosity to try it, you realize how revolutionary and perfect that size 36 is, clearly present on the wrist despite its size, sporty, elegant, comfortable, exceptionally well made, a piece of watchmaking history, and you realize it could be your only watch, because you wear the others less and less. An iconic and definitive watch.

[@94jmbottaro]

My sweetspot is usually 39/40mm although 36mm can be true perfection if well executed like this rolex is

[@HRM.H]

I personally wear anything from 34 to 40mm so i think the 36mm is just perfectly classic.

[@BraveBeaters]

Agreed! :)

[@manuelpintodasilva6130]

Same

[@whereRbearsTeeth]

It’s not 36mm

[@HRM.H]

@@whereRbearsTeeth its literally the topic of the video. 😂

[@truesf345]

Unfortunately I’m 6’1 230 lbs smallest Watch I own is a Vaer 38mm diver that appears to be a 36 or smaller on my wrist I just don’t like the look of anything smaller than 40 mm on my wrist , but that lume color is stunning what a beautiful timepiece.

[@ToolwatchBoutique]

I decided to buy the 39mm 214270 and it was the perfect decision. My wrists are 7“ though…

[@BraveBeaters]

Yup, for 7' it should be right size

[@66ott7]

greatest watch of all time.... you don't need a bezel, a date, a day, a gmt hand, A VALVE RELEASE!, a chrono (most useless complication). This watch checks every box and it tells the time which is all you need. If you are obese, lose weight. Been wearing this every day and i get the most compliments and looks in a crowded room full of flash.

[@vavoo4971]

The reason I have the 40mm explorer (which according to my calipers is a 39mm), is because I already have a 36mm Oyster perpetual. I love both sizes.

[@ANTONIO-dv9cq]

36 mm is the original size, no matter what people say. Most of people know nothing about watches and they are influenced by the current tendences where people like to wear wall clocks on the wrist to tell the time to the astronauts in the International Space Station...

[@wristfulthings9676]

Think it’s the perfect size and I wear up to 44 occasionally. That being said, I think the new Explorer II wears too big on me.

[@BraveBeaters]

It's big, yes :) wears like a 44 ish

[@marcheezy.]

@@BraveBeaters It's the lug to lug height, ie maxi case. Omega has shorter lugs so their 43mm watches would wear similarly to 41mm Rolex steel stunners.

[@pityipalko]

Whether a watch with a particular size fits a person or not, depends on the wrist size of the respective person. On my 8 inch (20cm) wrist any watch which is smaller than 38mm looks to small.

[@arthurlichtman9919]

Well done. Fine analysis of the watch physically and historically. Am on the AD list , but not confident that means much. I think my smallish wrist is perfect for this watch. Have the 39 and it always seemed a bit big.

[@BraveBeaters]

Means that the explorer will sit very well on your wrist, hope it happens soon :)

[@maxfaberg128]

the watch is 35,2mm in diameter, that's why they trimmed the lugs down to 19mm. So maybe that's the reason why many you asked said it's a woman's watch

[@BraveBeaters]

Yup, you are right!

[@caffeine_remedy]

How does explorer 1 do with a formal attire (suit)? It just seems a tad too casual. Thoughts?

[@fyicary]

I agree the Explorer does look great, maybe even better with a strap. So are you putting a 20mm strap on the Explorer's 19mm lug width?

[@tomlabarb2640]

Whats interesting is when side by side with a 36mm the new 36 explorer looks smaller..

[@BraveBeaters]

yes. depends on the case shape and the lug width.

[@zachhall624]

I'd say certainly 36mm being men's size. However that being said I think for the most part the idea of men's and women's watches is kinda silly... If it fits and looks good and you like it, wear it. Frankly I think it fits quite well on your wrist

[@masudashizue777]

I am wondering whether to go with the 36mm or the 39mm. Since I have a 170mm wrist, a 36mm watch would be perfect and I would appreciate the reduction in weight since my current daily wearer is a 44mm and I do feel the weight, especially after a long day at work.

[@TheAcolossus]

i bought hamilton khaki 36mm - looked like a women's watch on my 6.5 inch wrist - returned it

[@BraveBeaters]

Yup, in essence, the shape of the khaki is very ladies'ish. Very thin and discreet.

[@marcheezy.]

I think the bracelet width makes it look even more dainty. 19mm lug vs 20mm for the114270. 5.26% sounds like nothing, but it seemed visually off for some reason then I discovered the 1mm difference. I would also have preferred this at 37-38mm. I find the 39mm Mk1 a touch too big, and the 36mm Oysterquartz a touch too small. Also if people are generally bigger today than 65-70 years ago then the watch should grow proportionately to have the same visual effect when worn. As for the topic of small watches, I am becoming a fan in general. I have been thinking of replacing the BLNR with a YM37 and would have already replaced the 42mm Explorer 2 with a 40mm Polar if it didn't have that hideous stamped clasp. People can say all they want about the old clasp, I have both and modern is my preference all the way. I would actually love if every single other person preferred stamped clasps. More modern clasps for me at cheaper prices.

[@whereRbearsTeeth]

Wait a second, huh?? Trading a Batman for a 37mm yachtmaster?? You have got to be kidding, right???

[@marcheezy.]

@@whereRbearsTeeth Just saw your reply. Thanks for the feedback. Hahaha not a joke. The BLNR never really slapped me that hard. Even less the last few years, pre covid included. No regrets taking it below retail in 2016 from a friend's friend. Oh, the good old days. Why YM37? Simply for the experience, though I'm sure it's too small even for my 6.7" wrist. 18mm bracelet would make it that much daintier, lol. Would only do it if I could get it via the AD or near retail and use the profits from the BLNR.

[@Bisley1]

I have bothe, the 114270 and the current 36mm Explorer and in the beginning i really preferred the old one especially because i didn’t like the small bracelet, extreme taper to 14mm and skinny clasp. But overall the pros outweigh the cons and i love wearing it and just accept the fact that the bracelet isn’t perfect because when i look down at the watch, i can’t see the underside and the watch looks perfect. It also looks great on a leather strap. As for the old bracelets and clasps. I never understood how Rolex could still make something that dated in the 2000s while Omega and co had solid, milled bracelet. But owning both now, I actually prefer the comfort of wearing the old ones😄 i like that they aren’t as rigid and contour better and that the clasps are flatter and while they don’t have easy link, they do have quick microadjustment holes in the clasp that i can change with a toothpick while on holiday😎

[@SoCalWatchReviews]

Another amazing video brother 👏 36mm is the perfect size IMHO congrats on the new watch! BTW those straps look incredible for the price.

[@BraveBeaters]

Thanks M! for sure the size will fit you better :) As for the straps, I will talk with Andrei from Armilla ;)

[@SoCalWatchReviews]

@@BraveBeaters man 36mm is my sweet spot and thank you brother ❤️

[@jameshaury2716]

If a watch seems too small I put it on a cuff strap. Ok I misunderstood. I have a 7 inch wrist. I love my 36 mm ALPHA Explorer. It is an homage with a MIYOTA movement.

[@HarveyMushman]

The 36mm Explorer felt to small on my wrist. I think it has to do with the small lug size. With 20mm lugs it would be great.

[@Bisley1]

I love the drawings you add to the videos, thank you!!

[@chasekemp4982]

Sounds like 7/10 of your fan base are on the younger size (under 30). If you’re doing a lot of physical activity you really don’t want a big bulky/heavy watch. Especially if you have multiple layers on. Keep in mind back in the day 36mm was considered on the larger size for a mens watch. I hope to one day pick up an explorer 1 as I find my sub 16610 a little on the larger size from time to time and that’s on a 7” wrist.

[@Tanukifuji]

Dial size is identical to the submariner! This is just more tasteful, than the big sports models. Less is more.

[@russellalfonso2962]

I collect vintage, 34-36, I follow the past, 1940s to 1960s. Watch old Hollywood movies and television, look what the actors wear. I prefer old school style, fits better my subjective preferences

[@biohazard99]

The original Datejust was also 36mm. It’s a men’s dress watch and the classic size. The preference for larger watches created the 41mm. I prefer the 36mm with fluted bezel and jubilee bracelet, as it’s more refined and comfortable to wear.

[@whereRbearsTeeth]

The 36mm datejust and the “36” mm Explorer are NOT the same size. If you compare the two, the Explorer is noticeably smaller. Rolex really ruined arguably its most classic design. The 36mm 114270 is a beautiful watch. The new Explorer looks terrible

[@b_altmann]

The font that Rolex uses for most watches is Eurostile. -It's really about the strength of someone's character, not about the size of their...

[@rafaeloliva6425]

That's psycobable, a dainty watch is a dainty watch.

[@b_altmann]

@@rafaeloliva6425 that's quoting Mr Vigneron. I will break it down for you: if you have nothing to prove, wearing a small watch does not affect your self-esteem.

[@PYRO200055412]

I have 7.5" writs, 6' 180lbs and I regularly wear 34mm to 36mm watches. I wouldn't wear anything bigger than 42mm.

[@AverageBros]

Great video, I'm with the camp that has been sized out of the Explorer at 36mm, the 39mm was a grail but at 36mm it's just too small for my 7.25"-7.5" wrist. I may go that small for a flat dressy Nomos with long lugs on leather but for a sporty watch I'd want to wear on the steel bracelet, it just feels like too much of a compromise.

[@BraveBeaters]

Fully agree with you! A 7K compromise :D

[@icemandl6]

Watch connaisseurs tend to side with the 36mm, but for the average consumer, 39mm looks more suitable. For me, the 39mm Explorer 214270 mk2 is hands down the perfect size!!

[@Mark-kj4xd]

Modern sensibilities tells us that 38 mm would be the perfect size for the Rolex Explorer I. Which would appeal to a wider range of customers, both male and female. Yet, 36 mm for a sports watch, especially on a bracelet will wear larger then its size and look good on a wide range of wrists. What we are seeing in the 7 out of 10 is that people have grown accustom to larger watches and yet we have seen the trend of larger, especially those watches that were on the extreme side of large come back to reality. No matter what size Rolex went with or may move to in the future, that move will always be applauded by some and derided by others. Until you put one on your wrist, you will never know for sure if a watch will work for you unless you have monster wrists or twigs for wrists. To each their own. And for the record, I like and would buy the 36 mm Explorer if given the chance and available funds aligned at the same time.

[@TacBlades]

Anything under 39 just looks like a ladies watch to me and looks strange on a larger wrist, but there is no right or wrong there is no rule book, its just art or jewelry if you like wearing small watches then its fine no one should buy watches to get some kind of approval from others thats a shallow path.

[@BraveBeaters]

I agree with you!

[@briansanchez1740]

Love it! Nato straps are awesome because they "Dress down" a timepiece.

[@canadianwatchmonkey3992]

36 mm is a good size . It is a very strange thing that your eyes adjust to whatever you are wearing, what looked small before grows and what looks large before shrinks.

[@ThePlaiibox]

36mm is a great size but I'd be wary of wearing on a NATO because it accentuates the small size. IMO on a 6.5" wrist (or higher) the bracelet makes it wear nicer and is looks classic rather than small. Natos cheapen the piece. The watch looks dainty on your wrist with the Nato but amazing on bracelet,

[@whereRbearsTeeth]

It definitely looks ridiculous on the nato.

[@sebastianmorenoag]

36 mm It is the perfect size, back to the roots. Compact and thin!