I would totally buy that watch IF...

[@CoffeandReviews]

One thing that usually stops me from buying so many watches is the lack of money in my bank account.

[@LabofmusicRecords]

small wrist guys conversation: oh yes, 38 - 39mm is so perfect :) me: 44 would be nice 😇😂

[@jamesnicholas7078]

Same.. 6ft. 4in. 215lbs, just under 7.5 in wrist, everything under 43 mm looks like a kids watch on me. Sometimes my Omega PO looks dainty from certain angles. I find myself wearing the nato strap more as it makes the everything look slightly bigger. White dial explorer 2 is my favorite watch by far from Rolex and yet I can't wear it... I'm restricted to the deep sea which is underwhelming... My next watch will either be an older two counter speedmaster that's 44.25mm, a Panerai Luminor, a GS GMT, or the Oris Skeleton 10 day reserve

[@Stona999]

@@jamesnicholas7078 I totally agree. Why would I want to wear a watch that looks like a ladies watch on my 7.25" wrist. Anything under 42mm is a hard no for me

[@LabofmusicRecords]

@@jamesnicholas7078 I own a Speedy 44mm and it's not that big 😅 try it before buy it ;-) Try the Zenith DEFY, that's a very nice 44mm watch :)

[@meson183]

@@jamesnicholas7078 Yep. I'm right there with you brother. 7.5inch wrist. Try finding a field watch over 40mm. Hard enough finding one over 38.5mm. All look lost on my wrist.

[@BRV2728]

Same here. Smallest I can go is 41mm, but lug to lug my biggest preference is 50mm & smallest I’m willing to go is 48mm lug to lug

[@lordcharfield4529]

The PRICE is usually the one thing that stops me buying a watch! 😅

[@BruceWilliams]

lol truth for me too

[@AforATY]

😂 so true

[@douglasmstewart]

Pin this comment

[@JimJones762x39]

The 42 wears really well. I love my 226570 and would not change the size. The slightly larger size makes it so much more legible than a Sub

[@joshuakaplan5726]

Agree all day on bringing the explorer 2 back to a 39-40mm! It currently wears larger than the SMP300M due to its lug-to-lug even they are virtually the same size.

[@sivalipath1707]

Explorer 2 is a great watch even 42mm

[@coronetmag]

Awesome video and discussion. The breadth and quality of the B-roll really highlight how long Bruce has been in the watch field. Well done!

[@BruceWilliams]

lol almost 10 years

[@scottwexlin6456]

I like these back-and-forth chitchat sessions. 👍

[@BruceWilliams]

Have filmed 3 more since this one. Plan to keep it going

[@Treetopflyer777]

I have the explorer 2 polar (42mm) and I could not agree more about the size. I wish to God it was a 40 mm or even 39 Rarely a day goes by when I don’t think about selling it for the previous five digit version .

[@vijaymehra1101]

Not sure why they don't offer more options when it comes to sizes like omega does.

[@craigwoolbert2443]

Yeah - the 4:30 date window sure is a turn off. These vids are always fun.

[@DSupremeLounge]

Sold my Aqua Terra because that small muffin crown was too small and somewhat painful to deal with. Also, I agree on butterfly clasp being limited.

[@Fuzzy-zk8ix]

Love the chat gents! I could see the E2 in 40mm being popular and looking good, but for me it is absolutely perfect at 42mm. As for the 4:30 date window, I completely agree with you guys - haven't seen one yet that I really like. More watches should be doing the big date like to G.O. Seventies model - for old guys like me it makes it a lot easier to read.

[@Leturane]

Mine would be the modern Seamaster. If Omega were to offered one in sword hands (a la 2254) I would seriously considered it!

[@Guitars-Watches]

My first Rolex was an Explorer II polar in 1999. Despite many more purchases over the years, I always come back to my Explorer II. I find it an unpretentious, under the radar tool watch 😊that can be worn for any occasion.

[@thatguy6111]

I love my 16570, it’s perfect in so many situations and actually looks good and wears well on a leather strap. The crafter blue rubber strap is also amazing on wrist.

[@daniell2217]

I’m with Rob - despise the 4:30 date window.

[@Not-a-bot222]

Tudor was too thick and Rolex was too large. In Rolex terms, I went with a 7 digit Grand Seiko. The SBGN003. Perfect size, literally perfect. The movement while quartz is incredible. I swap between the bracelet and an Artem Sailcloth. Until Rolex and Tudor un eff themselves, my daily tool watch will be the GS

[@stevesaka8191]

Love, love, love the 42mm Polar "as is" - I think the appropriate size of a watch is almost wholly dependent on the size AND shape of your wrist - for my 7.65" wrist 42-44 tends to be MY sweet spot - 40mm is my low end and 46mm is my top - case shape also matters so much, for example the 45 BP FF fits and wears great on me, as does the 45mm SLA033 - whereas my beloved 42mm Pelagos FXD actually doesn't fit on me as well due to flat case shape, so the 45mm SLA033 hugs my wrist perfectly, where the lugs on the FXD tend to sit high off my wrist - still love it, but that is a perfect example where how a case is shaped wears on your wrist vs just looking at width/diameter specs. No ill will against the sub-40mm or 38mm is perfect crowd, what annoys me is the iconoclast mentality of some reviewers when they discuss this subject - IMO, the "correct" size is wholly dependent on what works on each specific person's wrist best.

[@theenavybluemonster]

Longines should update the Big Eye by making it a manual wind with a clear case back hopefully making it a little thinner. That would be interesting.

[@BruceWilliams]

I am down for that

[@richardlocke7264]

circular date windows are always too small, but I do own one

[@MrZanzibar123]

That 4:30 date window on the black Seiko looks sweet.

[@AdityaSingh-fz7wb]

Oooh 100% ! Absolutely yes

[@light1531]

Solid gold Speedmaster professional (with dark green dial) over Daytona is a NO BRAINER 😂😂😂

[@joeschlicht]

If they made a modern Explorer II with the same case dimensions as the 5 digit series (39mm). I'd be camping out at my AD to get on that list ASAP! And yes to that Orange hand too...

[@yz8096]

Good discussion Bruce and Rob. Date windows at the 12 are OK by me, even if they move it down a bit toward the hand stack (but not too much). The eye is quickly drawn toward that part of the dial, so a date has utility there. It is of course, preferred at the 6 but I like "no dates" too. As far as size, 42 is the sweet spot for me and anything sub-40 is just too diminutive for my taste. I like to feel like I have something on my wrist. PCL's are an obvious "no-no" along with anything under 4hz (except Omega).

[@realalexmackenzie]

I've resigned myself to the idea that it is probably a good thing that there is something unappealing about the vast majority of watches. Otherwise I might be tempted to own the vast majority of watches, and I would list a kidney on eBay or something to fund it all. :) Cannot agree on the Exp II. I think 42mm is a great size for it. As a big watch guy, there isn't actually that much in the Rolex catalogue that appeals to me size-wise. That is why the only Rolex in the collection ATM is the Exp II. There are plenty of Rolex for the more slight of wrist without shrinking the few remaining.

[@David-nx2vm]

I like bigger dials, especially with complications. So does anyone else who wears glasses.

[@JuanSegarra-td6yr]

I like the white dial and had it on my list. The AD called me for the Submariner Starbucks instead. I picked it up and never looked back. I wish I had money because I had a lot of Rolex watches on my list. Lol. I did have to wait 10 months for it. I also have a mint green smooth day just.

[@BruceWilliams]

LV sub is awesome. I would prefer that one myself

[@GrumblingForesight]

Agreed 100% on the modern Explorer II. I used to daily a Planet Ocean but that 42mm Explorer is simply too big for my wrist! It’s a 42 that wears like a 44 and those straight lugs dont help. At least the Planet Ocean drops down at the lugs.

[@FriedlandM]

The aqua terra is my current every day watch and I gotta disagree about the band. I think it looks amazing.

[@edjack1993]

Agree - current Explorer 2 proportions are off. Looks odd. As does the minute hand on the polar - looks too thick. 40mm with refined hands would be perfect. P.s. really enjoy this format of video. Good watch chat.

[@bmike679]

Guys great discussion. I agree with all points on the exp 2 bring it down to 40mm or 39mm and it will be so popular again. I too believe the portions are off at 42mm. The Aqua Terra all good points tried on the green dial the butter fly clasp is so flat looks horrible they had that right on the previous version. Another point on the AT is the cupcake crown looked better before in my eyes. Keep up the good work great topic and disscussion.

[@kk7sm]

LOl - Rolex Explorer II without a date magnifier. 42 is fine, but magnifiers... That's the one thing :)

[@meson183]

I do not like the cyclops lense either.

[@YIZHAKBAICONUR]

TUDOR black bay with ceramic bezel I’ll buy it any day of the week !

[@zachg9065]

Buy the submariner/GMT master 2 if they slimmed down the lugs like the 16710

[@dlee0207]

Explorer in 40 mm would be amazing

[@captkerosene]

Agree on the Explorer2.

[@Leo-gh7nz]

FWIW, I'm 80% confident Tudor will release it. Using same movement, and thus same dimensions (39mm and thinner) as the new BB58 GMT but putting it in the BB Pro and introducing a white dial.

[@BruceWilliams]

Totally

[@SaltyWatchCollector]

That watch would break the internet😂

[@AdityaKhorana]

Blancpain has a full ceramic bracelet now that is beautiful. So I’m sure omega can figure it out

[@satai]

Longines BigEye: because it was already really tall without Open caseback … but i also hated the Lume, it is so Bad ..

[@_AlphaLimaGolf]

2mm of the height is the domed crystal, so it actually wears pretty well. Lume is also serviceable, it’s not a dive watch so doesn’t need to glow like a torch.

[@satai]

@@_AlphaLimaGolf Pilots don’t fly at night?

[@meson183]

I want a field watch. Most field watches are 38.5mm. A small handful are 40mm max. For some reason no-one will do a field watch larger than 40mm. I also want it to have a luxury leaning, but only subtley so. The Rolex Explorer 40 looks to be the ideal choice, BUT... I tried on a Rolex Explorer 40. It looked lost on my wrist. Too small. I think the proportions of bezel to dial as a result of the Oyster case design make the dial look small. So the one change I'd want is for it to be 42 or 43mm. So same size argument, but from the other side.

[@tuyenhoang5546]

Isn’t explorer 2 is 42mm?

[@meson183]

@@tuyenhoang5546 It is. But I'm talking about the Explorer 1.

[@tuyenhoang5546]

@@meson183 then why not get the explorer 2?

[@meson183]

@@tuyenhoang5546 Because I don't want a GMT complication. Or a cyclops lense.

[@markbolton7561]

They have a 36 and a 40 explorer 1. No reason to not do something similar for the Explorer 2.

[@junkyardparadise]

It's a no-brainer to bring back the 1655 in a modern moment. How difficult can that be?

[@watchexplorer321]

Not here in Germany. No way you get an Explorer hear easy. Explorer 42 is perfect. Glad its not hyped. The problem is your wrists, not the watch size 😂😂😂.

[@denniskai2331]

The Rolex Polar Explorer 226570 is absolutely great --- except that the center of the dial is this gigantic big black dot

[@67NewEngland]

- Why has it taken so long for Omega to understand the majority hate the polished center links on the Aqua Terra?

[@nickbrooker1411]

Nah! speaking as an 8" wrister, my Explorer 2 Polar is the only Rolex i wanted - GMT function AND 42mm!!! Its the only "perfect" watch i have where i wouldnt change something!!

[@timchan334]

Thats my thing with all current rolex, way too big! Not thay my wrist cant handle it but I like 38-39mm watches!

[@kylewinter2297]

Would run to the AD with my wallet out for a 40mm polar dial Explorer II. I tried the current model and it’s just gargantuan.

[@younusimam-thesalamproject6340]

How much money has to be incoming for you to be financially comfortable with a purchase? Right now i dont feel comfortable with spending beyond a Helm.

[@BruceWilliams]

Lots of collectors are tightening up. I have pulled back my spending

[@bernardwadding]

Are you guys in the same room, an additional wide angle camera capturing you both would make a huge difference to the production, in my humble and unsolicited opinion 😅

[@toneswinger]

I got a solution to the Aqua Terra buy a non bracelet model and put it on a omega mesh bracelet

[@SaltyWatchCollector]

Great idea

[@canadianwatchmonkey3992]

Hahaha. This is why I went with the Tudor Pro GMT rather than the Explorer 2. The thickness of the Tudor is a non issue for me

[@wristopia4101]

If there are two dimensions that get people who are not buying anything commenting, its 40mm and above case sizes and 21mm lug widths. Its like me saying I would buy a Porsche GT3 RS if it had higher profile tyres 😂

[@thaumaturgeishere331]

Excuse me for laughing about your comments about Explorer II GMTs being easy to get from ADs. This is not the case in the UK.

[@TrendyStone]

When Rolex’s were 40mm people wanted larger. Now that they are 42mm people want smaller. 🤷‍♂️

[@ogramail]

I have decided to get a Tüseno shellback 2 « polar »: vibes of a polar Rolex explorer 2 in 39 mm at a fraction of the price and only 6 months to get it!😂

[@BruceWilliams]

Lol

[@zdruk1]

I would flip for a 39 mm Explorer. The current model is way too big.

[@YIZHAKBAICONUR]

Explorer in 42 is perfect. Stop asking for miniature sports watches

[@SaltyWatchCollector]

Down with the 4:30 date window!!!!😂

[@tylersaltmarsh9025]

Give me an explorer II with 150-200m water resistance, I mean come on.

[@vijaymehra1101]

What the difference between 100m and 150m? Your not diving over 300 feet down at 10bar

[@osobad1127]

Rolex op needs to go back to 39. 41 is too damn big!

[@wristopia4101]

I think the reality of people actually buying a watch they say they would if their criteria was met is

[@RMJJ91]

I’d buy a nice car from all the money you spend on watches. All the best to you!

[@user-qt5xh9mt7x]

The Explorer is my absolute favourite Rolex watch for the reason that it doesn't look like Rolex.

[@bernardwadding]

Explorer 1 or 2? I recently bought the 5 digit polar. Sold my speedy and tudor and no regrets

[@innout3x3]

39 mm watch. Those are too small. Bring on 42+

[@MatoyaLim]

"I would totally buy that watch IF..." no. just no. you will not buy that watch even IF it's"..." period.

[@DuncanMacDonald-Korth]

You guys sound like Noobs regarding the Exp II. Yes it is not as popular, but it is HARD to get bc they just don’t produce very many. Many expect it to be easy and then they wait a year.

[@SaltyWatchCollector]

Interesting take. Thanks for watching even though you're dead wrong with Rolex not making very many. Most modern Rolex are not really that rare. The scarcity is artificial and manufactured by the ADs. Rolex makes a million watches a year. Again, thanks for watching

[@mkii2363]

Was Exp II 1655 Freccione white dial? Neither was 1016. The Explorer is a black dial. Whoever invented Polar hysteria did purists like me a favor. Imagine Sub with a white dial 🤮 ?

[@Leturane]

Subs with a white dial would sell like silly, as for Exp II, im fine with people getting more choices.

[@nomad7734]

Anything less than 42mm is gay and a girly man watch lol. And then a Rolex... we call that a loser... lol