The Perfect One Watch Collection? Rolex Explorer 36mm 14270

The Perfect One Watch Collection - Rolex Explorer 14270 on the JustBlueFish KZbin channel, home of high quality wristwatch and horology related reviews and videos.
Thanks to Clyve Watch-Wrangler for loaning the watch:
/ @clyde2801
5 Ways You Can Help JustBlueFish
Direct Donation:
www.paypal.me/...
Become a Patreon:
/ justbluefish
Shop on Amazon (my affiliate link):
amzn.to/2rIzw9K
Provide Watches for Review (contact me):
[e-mail]
My Social Media Accounts:
/ justbluefish
/ justbluefish007
/ justbluefish
#####################################
Today we are reviewing, on loan from the Clyve Watch-Wrangler channel, a Rolex Explorer 36mm 14270. Having owned a 39mm Rolex Explorer in the past, and being unhappy with several aspects of that watch, I have always wanted to check out this 36mm version of the watch. Well I've had that chance, and here is what I think about it.
#####################################
Thanks for watching!

[@clyde2801]

Good review, you were very through and even handed for a new watch guy. Respecktos.

[@JustBlueFish]

New watches and the retail experience!

[@stephens2r338]

@Weird Science interesting points that l had noticed myself but not put together and joined the dots. The 36mm Explorer has the perfect dimensions and many buyer's are turning away from the larger size and looking for used. So the used price have also risen especially the 114270 with its more modern looking end links. If it's between 2007-09 then it also has the rehault and they have risen up by about 10% over only the last two years. It's nice to dream that they will come out with a newer smaller version but history shows the more you ask them the less likely it will happen. The previous version basically stayed visually the same for 20 years while the latest fixed 214270 has been around since 2016. It will be a long time before we see another example.

[@fraserdoverty1545]

@@stephens2r338 well well well Rolex have done it!!

[@stephens2r338]

@@fraserdoverty1545 l don't believe it... l don't think anyone out there does. To go back to an identical explorer 1 and do nothing to the explorer 2 on its 50th. What are they smoking at Rolex. As the dust starts to settle l wonder what's going to happen on the used market. Explorer 39 doubles in price. The older 36 versions that look identical 114270 and 14270 could drop by 50%. Why buy one if you can get the improved version for the same price. So maybe they will market them like the Daytona, impossible it get.

[@michaelbishop9157]

@@stephens2r338 I was super happy to see the 36 come back (it was a dream for you as well) but it was disappointing to see them just upgrading the Exp 2

[@n.h187]

All Rolex need to do is release a 36mm explorer with updated movement and bracelet and they can have my money.

[@DavidDatura]

If Rolex do release an updated Explorer, I reckon it will most likely be a 38mm, I don’t think they’d downsize all the way back to 36mm. The addition of a glossy white dial (like its Explorer II cousin) variation might be interesting too.

[@UkeleleGuitarDrums]

Our prayers have been answered!

[@n.h187]

@@UkeleleGuitarDrums yes !!!! 🤩

[@resjon7981]

They took too long I purchased a BB36 and very happy with it.

[@hughblaisdell6933]

Lol. Nice one

[@hughblaisdell6933]

I LOVE how honest and thorough you are. This is becoming my fav channel and i’ve seen em all!

[@mariosiaven2965]

114270 is the one: eliminates the downsides of the 14270 keeping the same feel, size and shape and movement like you said at the end, also, the chunkier case of the op is an advantage for whoever thinks a 36 mm watch is too little

[@scundoalex]

The Rolex Explorer 14270 is absolutely the perfect "one watch collection" watch and the styling is, if you'll pardon the term, "timeless". Great review!! I recently started leaning towards the smaller diameter watches. You're absolutely right about the trend going back down. This video is now 2 years old and you can see the trend clearly (about damn time). The large watch fad was just ridiculous. After a couple of vintage dress watch purchases, I really started enjoying the comfort and classic appearance of a smaller watch. After very recently purchasing a 36mm Marathon TSAR, I've fully committed to the smaller style. With the bracelet option, it's a great looking tool watch. The 14270 has been on my list of "must have watches" for many years now and I hope to add one to the family soon.

[@therustyspoke]

Rolex 36 is the ultimate size imho

[@JustBlueFish]

Truth

[@jjpp612]

20mm lugs though. I think it would be better with 18mm instead for a 36 case.

[@jnetwal]

I have a reference 114270 version of this watch and I love it. No, there is no more perfect watch than the 36 mm Explorer. The bracelet on mine does not have the diver extension and has solid end links. I actually like the bracelet as it is and wouldn't change it if I could. I agree with your comments about the modern version - the proportions just seem off and it is too chunky, in my opinion (I know others like it a lot so clearly just my opinion). I would love to see Rolex release a 36 mm again, like you said, why not offer it in different sizes. Lume on my watch still works fairly well. I think you should seriously consider getting a 114270.

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks for watching Jeff. There’s a chance I’ll go for a 114270 in the future if I found one that was in the condition I was happy with.

[@FreshFr33ze]

Hey Jeff I am in pursuit of that ref currently, do you mind me asking how much it set you back? Cheers

[@Watchdoc65]

Yes, the 114270 has the solid end links t-shape pivot and mini-flip lock bracelet and upgraded 3130 movement with super luminova! Way better than the 14270 with rattley hollow end links and fading tritium lume.

[@robs.3409]

Thank you for a another great review, Guy. This is a nice watch but I still like the newest 39mm version. I have tried both and decided on the 39. It feels more sturdy, substantial and a better wrist-presence on my 7” wrist IMHO. Perhaps I’d choose the 36 if I had a smaller wrist.

[@JustBlueFish]

The new version does have a lot more in terms of refinement and is more sturdy and substantial for sure. I just can’t get past the idea that the aesthetics and proportions are a little off.

[@JungleEddie]

As a guy with an 8.25 inch wrist I would definitely go 39mm

[@dr.raymond4337]

I totally agree, also trying both on I bought the 39mm. The 2016 Basilworld release with the lumed numerals and longer hands is perfect! I for one, feel the proportions are perfect, especially for a modern mans watch.

[@FatSamEIE]

I have 6.5in wrist and loved the 36mm explorer but I tried in the 39mm at the same gtg and it looked and felt even better... I was surprised as assumed smaller would suit me better but with the new lume and constant improvements Rolex make it opt for the newest version when I get one. Just need to decide whether I'd rather a grand seiko spring drive sbga085 and an omega speedmaster professional (both bought new by me- heavily discounted) or a new Rolex Explorer which will cost the same as those two combined. I think for now I need to keep the two watches I've got, as much as I love that explorer it's too similar to the GS and twice the price

[@Watch2Wear]

This was the best Rolex Explorer video on the internet. Once again, thank you for such a comprehensive and thorough review. It will be my next Rolex.

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks buddy.

[@TheWayofGrace89]

Definitely the best one watch collection you could get for under $5k. I’ve considered it heavily. I have a Hamilton Khaki King (Champagne), Seiko Alpinist and a Halios Seaforth (pastel, no-date, 12-hr bezel) and that is my whole collection. Don’t know if I could go down to just one, although it sounds like it would be so awesome. But, I love my three-watch setup at around $1.5k total value a lot. That said, if I were to go big on a watch it’d either be this or a 39mm contemporary reference Explorer. It is the penultimate grail for me. Great review as always, Guy! One more thing: that 36mm fit is ... M O N E Y on your wrist.

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks for watching buddy. That’s a great 3 watch, but the Explorer would make a pretty nice 4th!

[@highdesertforester]

I feel exactly like you: I love the 14270 but no way am I going to spend $4-5K on a watch that old. That dial is just perfect though.

[@JustBlueFish]

Yeah it’s a tall order to go for this watch at that kind of money.

[@TobbeRocks]

So you like the watch, why not buy it? It’s not like you are gona lose money on it.. I found a new, not worn 2005 114270 for 8,500 dollars, that i am thinking about. So if i take care of it, maybe in ten years i will get my money back. But it’s not about that. I am not made of money, i am an industrial worker that happens to like the 36mm explorer, thats it.

[@n.h187]

You guys got it easy I wanted to buy a 114270 and the price in the UK is £5200 on the used market. Definitely not paying that for a 14 year old pre owned watch. Hopefully Rolex release the 36mm again.

[@tgemz3376]

this comment didn't age well lol

[@tarzan6405]

T Gemz why???

[@thorsten9437]

I believe to this Explorer is a Sub 16610 bracelet fitted. If I remember correctly no foldover clip nor a diver extension on the (1)14270 bracelet.

[@JustBlueFish]

Someone else in the comments pointed that out. I'm not entirely familiar with what would have come with this watch originally, but it makes sense that it might not be an original bracelet since it has that dive extension.

[@thorsten9437]

@@JustBlueFish No problem, great review anyway!

[@Sebastian85]

I can completely understand you. I also think that the new version is not balanced anymore. It looks bulky and not understated. In my opinion the 14270 and 114720 are the best looking explorers. Of course the 1016 is the killer ;). Best regards, Sebastian

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks Sebastian.

[@nekton.avenger]

Thanks for the comment. Enjoyed the comparisons with other time pieces.

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks for watching.

[@ccw1961]

I just can't see the differences you describe. I have owned both and I think the 39 is just a clear improvement throughout every detail, its just too small for a 7 inch plus wrist IMHO. I had the 3000 movement in my 14060 sub. It was fabulous and I never had it serviced in twenty years and it was consistently +2 all the time. Sold it three years ago has since gone up in value by $2000. scratched and used for all and every occasion, never taken off and worn in the bath and the shower, every cardinal horological sin. Just shows how dam good Rolex's are as every day watches..the ultimate tool watch.

[@JustBlueFish]

I have 38-40mm watches that I'm comfortable wearing, but the 39 Explorer presents larger and I don't care for the proportions. This 36mm was pretty close to perfect, but I think the modern cased Oyster Perpetual 36mm watches are even better.

[@johnnyguitar6697]

Hi Guy, great video, thanks for doing it - and thanks to Clyve for making it possible. Here's a bit of information regarding some questions you raised: - steel used: Rolex transitioned from 316L to 904L around 1988. The 14270, which started in 1990, would always have the latter - bracelet with dive extension: the regular bracelet for this reference would have been reference 78360, with a simple folding clasp without fliplock / diver's extension. But the 93150 found on the Submariner was available on other Sports models (14270, 16570, 16710) as an option in the mid 90's until around 1996 when they released the 78790 (fliplock / no dive extension). One way to check if this 93150 came originally with this watch would be to look at whether the production code on the clasp more or less matches the year of production of the case - service: the caliber 3000 came on the 14270, but also the Submariner 14060 and Air King 14000 / 14010. So it has been produced in large numbers. I wouldn't worry too much about serviceability, at least not for many more years - lume: went from tritium until 1997 to luminova 1998-2000 to superluminova from 2001 onwards. After 20 years, tritium would hardly have any luminescence left Agree on the proportions of the 36mm Explorer being better than the 39mm one, but I just feel it wears a tad too small on my 7 inches wrist. Nothing wrong with 36mm, but I tend to gravitate to 38-39mm models, as a personal preference. Also, already owning a 16570 from 1995, I like having the upgraded movement / construction / lume / bracelet of the 214270. It is more complementary in my mind, though it does wear more like a 40mm watch. Had they kept it at 38mm by shaving 1/4 mm thickness on the bezel and 1/2 mm width on the dial, it would have been close to perfect in my book.

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks for watching Johnny, and for the information and filling in those blanks.

[@situation_zero]

The older Explorer reference 1016 is the one to have. With the helvetica numerals. Cheers.

[@JustBlueFish]

To expensive for me!

[@J43rv1]

cool just give me 20 grand I'll buy one today

[@jonnybreakz]

Yup it sure is! I have a 1016 and a 14270 in my collection. Bought them years ago, thinking they were expensive then, in hindsight it was a good move on my part!

[@blueshirtbuddah1665]

Another fantastic video Guy! A big thank you to The Rancher for sending you “the surprise f-k off watch of 2018” to review. This is the watch that was the beginning of the end between Clyve and The Pontiff. As Archie said “ it does less than nothing for me!” For me, I love my 39 mm Explorer reference 214270 Mk 1, it is my everyday watch.

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks for watching and for the comments Buddah. It is the F off watch of 2018.

[@audioinjection2642]

Great detailed review. I think too, the 36mm explorer has better proportions and balance compared to the new 39mm version. But I kind of prefer the new OP 36mm or even 34mm (I have a very small wrist), I think it looks nicer with the light sunburst effect on the dial and the straight hands. For me the perfect low profile looking Rolex. One of my grail watch. Maybe one day!

[@JustBlueFish]

I like the OP36 a lot as well.

[@FatSamEIE]

I struggle between the op36 with blue 369 dial and the explorer. Big difference in price and prefer the hands and colour of the OP36... but I worry the op36 would feel too entry level and almost a step down from my Grand Seiko but the explorer is a classic that will never get boring but just doesn't make sense to me, especially at the price they're at. Regret not buying when they were 2k and I was first in the market 😖

[@danielmeier8321]

rolex should consider making a modern 36mm explorer like they did with the datejust. At this point, i feel that the 36mm explorer is no where near the modern quality standards from rolex, but it asks almost the price of it. The 39mm just looks off like you already said. For me, the oyster perpetual with the blue explorer dial is the way to go. Nice bracelet etc. and reasonable priced. And i also like the applied crown better than the printed one of the explorer, looks cleaner.

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks for watching and for the comments. I am leaning towards the OP36 being my best option based on the available choices. I tried the Exp39. It didn’t work for me. The Exp36 has great aesthetics, but the quality doesn’t match the price. The OP36 is overall excellent, there’s nothing to really dislike.

[@ricchrono5907]

exactly the way I see this, i bought a ref 116000 instead as well, but with the black dial. it's an odd breed. simply the best of both worlds imo.

[@ajgross67]

I completely agree that Rolex should make a modern 36mm explorer I. I think they would be able to seek them side by side like the do for the various OP and datejust sizes. In a few years when I pay off my student loans I am going to celebrate with likely an OP36, but I would get a modern 36mm Explorer I instead if it was an option

[@phmwu7368]

well 2021 is here...

[@BLR653]

Your prayers have been answered! 2021 - reference 124270!!!!!! They did everything you wanted!

[@danielbeniste5150]

The older bracelets are really good to wear in a daily basis. I personally love them. I even love the noise the have.

[@robinhook37]

All points well made and I think with the current available models you are definitely right 114270 is the way to go. Thank you for another great video Guy!

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks Robin. The 114270 is tempting.

[@WickedRichie]

Spot on with the 39mm to 36mm comparison. Just went with the 114270 36mm myself

[@GeordsYouTube]

Great watch but am not keen on the clasp the newer clasp is far better, the case design is a thing of perfection. Never liked the Mercedes hands but love the lume marker at 12. The 36mm OP blue dial 3 6 9 will be my next watch, I hope if I keep saying that it will happen.

[@JustBlueFish]

You can do it, it’ll happen!

[@em-4297]

The "dive extension" is for the mountaineers and explorers who explore the polar regions, who may prefer to wear the watch over the sleeves of their thick winter jackets !

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks for watching.

[@coffeeboyclips1973]

i have the blue op 36 and agree with you that the perfect watch would be an explorer dial in a modern 36mm case and bracelet. I still love my blue dial 36 op though.

[@DodgyDan4]

Hi, I know your comment is a year old haha, I was wondering how you are getting on with your blue OP 36? I'm really strongly considering one instead of an explorer, and would love to hear your thoughts

[@coffeeboyclips1973]

@@DodgyDan4 Hi, I sold it a few months ago, it was a lovely watch but I found it to be a bit on the dressy side. I'm an outdoors person and found it didn't really fit my lifestyle even though it could handle it. Anyway I ended up buying a Hamilton khaki field 38mm and I'm really enjoying this watch. My next Rolex will probably be the 39mm Explorer.

[@DodgyDan4]

@@coffeeboyclips1973 Thanks so much for your reply!! That makes a lot of sense :) I hope you're enjoying your Hamilton, and good luck on the Explorer acquisition!

[@golfbuddy1969]

Great review. If you want the modern Rolex, but this style, you can get a Oyster Perpetual 36 proportions, or with the explorer dial in blue. Beautiful!

[@JustBlueFish]

I don't generally like colored dials, but that is an option for some people for sure.

[@golfbuddy1969]

JustBlueFish Watch Reviews I think I’ve seen them in a white or silver dial with the explorer markers...

[@stephens2r338]

To answer your question. Its not possible to change the bezel. Its part of the solid case. If you damage it you can only polish it and that always removes some metal. The glass is easy to replace. The clasp on the watch is probably from a sub. The Explorer was never a dive watch. The original is a lot shorter with no extension

[@JustBlueFish]

Are you sure? When I had my 39mm I nicked the bezel. Rolex said they could replace it for $500. The bezel is press for to the case, at least on the new model.

[@stephens2r338]

@@JustBlueFish To be honest I'm not 100% sure. As a watchmaker l have never heard of this type of operation on any other watch. I could be wrong though. Normally they would remove the glass and then reduce the thickness a small amount. Then they can polish the bezel to make it look flat. The give away is the thickness of the edge around the glass.. Because it's been filed down it's a little thicker/wider than normal. Considering the bigger picture it means little but to some it's still not original and over polished.

[@stephens2r338]

Been looking into it some more and it's possible to remove the bezel. So l guess that it can also be replaced during service

[@_sr]

I have a 7inch wrist. 36 mm rolex explorer wears just perfect. I am loving my 124270❤

[@tomkhong9828]

Excellent and honest review. It looked nice on vid but when I tried it on , the explorer sat a little too big on my 17” wrist it seemed. A Milgauss would be a better choice than an explorer.

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks for watching Tom. I appreciate it.

[@EgdeFilms]

This guy takes review to another level.

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks for watching I appreciate it. Hope you enjoyed it.

[@neilwade9870]

Great review. I agree 100% come on Rolex bring out a new 36mm Explorer.

[@JustBlueFish]

Fingers crossed.

[@Watchdoc65]

If you’re asking if this model had 904l steel vs 316l, one way is to look for the “b” stamped on original bracelet, particularly on the end pieces. The “b” signifies 904l steel but used during a transitional period since modern SEL and later production does not use the “b”. Your version has the 93150 Sub bracelet so not sure that is correct for that model since it should normally have the 78360 oyster clasp. You stated it was 20 years old but it’s more like 30 now! You referenced the Walt Odets review of this model with the 3000 caliber and I read it but thought he was a little harsh! He still acknowledged the incredible accuracy despite his critique of movement finishing but this article I believe also caught the attention of Rolex and probably is one reason Rolex stepped up their game on QC! So thanks Walt! Rolex switched to 904l steel in about 1985 by the way. The go to watch you mentioned is the 114270! It’s better for sure! I only wish they would have added lume to the 3-6-9 as they did later with the 214270 (which was an un-proportional flop). The 36 mm size is absolutely perfect!

[@runshittoplay]

You’re the only one who I have seen bring up the changing of the “ Explorer “ placement. I prefer it up top without a doubt.

[@hishamhabib666]

Bravo 👏🏻! Excellent, very in-depth & detailed review of the Explorer ( 14270 ) also known to many as the “ F off watch “ of 2018. I’m just kidding Guy! I love the watch. Has a certain charm to it when compared to the new 214270, which I own. Big shout out to Clyde from the “ Watch Wrangler Channel “. Great guy👍🏻. Really nice of him to send the watch over to you to review...You pretty much covered everything about this gorgeous watch👍🏻. Once again thanks a lot Guy! Best, Hisham.

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks for watching Hisham. It is the F off watch of 2018, for sure!

[@brett2396]

Rolex came out with a new version of this watch and it's the best watch for a one watch collection.

[@grahambowes756]

Good to see this size come back 😎

[@WildmanWoodie]

I have a 114270 and it's outstanding!

[@pejpm]

I’m about to sell my 5513, buy a 14720, and put the rest towards something else. The 5513 is awesome, but the market has gone so nuts and I honestly think the 36mm Explorer is design perfection, and you can still find them sub $5k. I want a relatively modern steel Rolex I can wear every day as a ‘beater’, and this is exactly what I want. The problem with owning pretty much any vintage sports Rolex nowadays is that prices have got to the point that they’re not really ‘beater’ tool watches. My 1675 was a 7k watch when I bought it in 2011, and I let it go last year when I got offered nearly $20k and realized I wasn’t thinking of it as an everyday watch anymore. To me the 39mm version looks like when a manufacturer puts a small movement in a big case and it looks all out of proportion. My advice to a lot of younger guys who are convinced they need 40mm+ is to try out some smaller pieces as you might be surprised.

[@jashoo8597]

My thoughts exactly too about explorer 36mm vs op 36mm. They are about the same price (explorer being used and much older and op being much newer with objectively better spec), and if we are getting a smallish rolex to be used as a everyday/work/semi-formal watch, op seems a better buy for the 5 years warranty and better tech. The price of explorer has gone up so much that I think it has become a collectable vintage rolex sports watch more for the collectors not so much for that one watch guy.

[@JustBlueFish]

Yeah the prices on the older Explorers are getting too high, but then again most Rolex sports model prices are too high.

[@ryansahs]

Solid review, I jus bought the exact OP36 you had in the side by side. It is absolutely perfect on my 6 3/4 in wrist and really has the cool steel explorer vibe I wanted

[@rockon21ful]

Great review, though its got a Submariner clasp! The Explorer clasp looks about the same but much shorter and of course no dive extension. Rolex didn't put a fold locking clasp ( much shorter than the submariner clasp on this watch) on the explorer until 98-99 and before that it just had a fold over smooth clasp with a crown embossed on it!

[@JustBlueFish]

Very cool thanks for the info.

[@steveforest4678]

You’re right, frankenbracelet😆

[@enriquea4890]

Excellent review. I full agree with the too crowded text above. The exolorer text looks much better down.

[@mt24Carson]

Excellent, in-depth review. The fact that you are able to compare from experience w/the 214270 was helpful. Thanks and Happy Holidays.

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks David, appreciate it.

[@aminai8581]

36mm explorer is so beautiful on your wrist.

[@JustBlueFish]

Yeah I like it.

[@SunsetSheen]

There is a current 36mm Explorer that Rolex sells, but it only comes in a blue dial. Wish they would release a black dial variant bc this watch is simplicity at its finest.

[@JustBlueFish]

Yeah I couldn't do the blue dial OP36 with the 3-6-9. It needs to be black.

[@yogishraval6301]

Wow. Spot on with your predictions about scaling the Explorer back down. Great review, Thanks!

[@markodell2379]

This may have been mentioned but in the 90's the Sub bracelet was popular and in those days you could just request one when purchasing and get it I did this with my GMT 2 from 92. It is annoying now that it doesn't have the exactly correct clasp but oh well. You make some good points in comparison to the 39mm. The 36mm is perfectly beautiful to me until I put one on and the size totally kills it for me. I love the Explorer so 39mm it is for me.

[@kkcwl]

Other than the non solid end link, I do think this 14270 that comes with a Tritium dial is a plus for collection since the 1016 has became too expensive for beginner collectors. Overall the 36mm looks elegant and nice with its unique 369 dial.

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks for watching.

[@sanjivrpatel]

Nice vid as usual. A bit of research would be good for your vids. As has been pointed out, the bracelet is not correct - a newbie error I wouldn’t have expected from you. 1990/91 The Explorer had a “Blackout” dial, whereby the 3, 6 & 9 were black filled instead of white filled. The text was either white or silver. A rare watch indeed. I look forward to watching your channel grow. Regards

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks for watching.

[@joshuabriggs7114]

Great review! Agree on the 36mm size and I'm 6'3 with 7.3" wrist. Perhaps a review of the Tudor Heritage 36 is in order?

[@JustBlueFish]

I've already reviewed that Tudor BB36, if that's the one you mean. Check out my video library!

[@jordanwiltshire9201]

There are very very few times that the explorer had a divers extension. This would of been when the buyer would of requested it from there AD when Rolex was a helpful customer based company! I believe that the bracelet maybe a submariner original that has been fitted at a later date unless it’s states it on the paperwork maybe off a 14060 Great video mate

[@bmoz9140]

great review sir ! This is one cracking watch ! perfect case and size ! I have tried one on and loved it ....hopefully I will own one 1 day !

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks I appreciate it. Good luck getting one, it’s awesome.

[@dcam1075]

Great review as always, especially helpful as I am looking into this exact model. What are your thoughts on the Tudor Black Bay 36? That is one of my favorite watches at the moment and is doing a good job thus far fulfilling the role of an Explorer in my collection. In some ways I think I prefer it, I appreciate the clean dial with no 3,6,9 and I am a sucker for the snowflake hands especially at times like 6 o’clock or 9:15 when the hands and markers line up perfectly. Amazing symmetry.

[@JustBlueFish]

I reviewed the BB36 a few months ago. High quality, good price, but I wasn’t in love with it.

[@timemycollection]

I’m wearing the Smiths Everest because I can’t get hold of an 36mm Rolex explorer. P.s I love my Smiths

[@drewhunkins7192]

I'm seriously thinking of getting the 39mm someday. I know this is the 36, but it's just a bit too small for me. The 39 seems perfect as I do have bigger wrists. I'm not one to drop a lot of money on a watch so it's a big step for me to get a Rolex, it'd be my first and last big time watch. I have a few months to think things over before I get up enough cash to pull the trigger. Thanks for this vid.

[@craig2100]

Great video, enjoyed the commentary with the comparison of the two sizes.

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks Craig!

[@smartmad68]

The clasp and extension link are not the original ones for this watch, they are directly interchanged parts

[@dimitriskekos]

39mm not small not big ...perfect size

[@JustBlueFish]

There’s a difference between size and proportions. The 39mm version gets the proportions all wrong.

[@ChevyBM]

The 36mm is really good, I own a 14060 Submariner and a 16013 two tone Datejust and the Datejust is more comfortable to wear. I'm thinking of getting a 14270 to my collection.

[@MegaBlackley]

My wife bought this watch for me and it's just too small. It could easily be a ladies' watch and looks pretty silly on my wrist, which sucks because I LOVE the design of the Explorer. If it were just about 15 percent bigger, it would be a legendary watch for me.

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks for watching.

[@tantu2395]

The 36 explore in real world is beautiful and elegant, but the 39(distance from the window display) also looks great, they all have their own of charming,one as a yesterday classic, another more as a today fashion trends. 😊

[@AmishNinjaMaster]

Clever Dan here - - Compare & Contrast specs of the Omega Speedmaster Professional (Ref. 3573.50.00) vs. Rolex Explorer (Ref. 214270).

[@JustBlueFish]

Those are pretty different watches. Would make for an odd comparison.

[@jeanlefranc3817]

Guy, great video as always. For some reasons, this 36 mil Explorer does look a tad small on your wrist. But good for you if this one is your cup of tea.

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks! I’m pretty happy with the size of it, but I think the ore modern 36mm Oyster Case from the DJ and OP work a bit better.

[@jackpurcell274]

My 36mm Datejust fits me great, it does have a faux bezel and I guess it wears bigger. I did go to Exquisite Timepieces today, what a store. Evan was very nice and the watches wow. Great content as usual.

[@JustBlueFish]

Hey Jack, glad you made it to see Exquisite, I hope you told Evan I said hi!

[@jeromef2001]

Hi. If you are not satisfied with the quality of the 14270 you should buy a 114270 as you say in the end of the video. It s a perfect 36mm Explorer. But you forgot to mention the main difference between both model! The tritium! I personally think that the tritium lume version will take value in the future.. So in my opinion on a long term the 14270 tritium will be a much better choice in term of investment than the luminova 114270.

[@Flooblecrank]

I have a Tudor Ranger largely because I love the aesthetics of the Explorer. I do like the modern 39mm, but my 7” flat top wrist wears it well. But the price of these five digit references has me curious. Great review, Guy!

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks for watching Jake. I like the Ranger, at least what little I’ve seen. I need to visit the Tudor AD and look at them closer.

[@JungleEddie]

I wanted to try the 36mm OP with the blue Explorer dial but I couldn't fit it over my hand. I would love to try some small watches but the industry has decided that it is no longer in fashion for a guy my size...8.25 inch wrist.

[@JustBlueFish]

They sell that one with too few links. I’ve noticed that.

[@sandman6617]

Enjoy your content and detail. I own the 39mm version with lume on the 3, 6, and 9. Saw your in depth review which I also enjoyed. Not able to get a good fit on your wrist puzzled me. There are so many ways to get a fit including the easy link when needed. To each his own, but I believe OCD with both versions has taken a slice of quality away from your content. Cheers.

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks for watching Lloyd, I appreciate it.

[@OrryYoung]

Think you just described the perfect Explorer. Size and proportions of the 114270, but the technology and build quality of the modern one. Maybe one day Rolex will offer both the 36 and 39mm versions.... but I doubt it

[@noelyates]

Yes, GEARY has it right. From personal experience since 1978 a 1016 is reliable and accurate.

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks for watching.

[@ronpower7790]

With a 7 1/4 inch wrist I felt the 36 mm version was a bit too small, almost flimsy, even thou I regularly wear watches down to 35 mm. It just feels smaller than e.g. a Nomos Club in 36 mm. I went for the actual 39 mm, which admittedly has no vintage feel at all, which is a good thing. The 39 mm is much more solid feeling watch with a modern wrist presence. I would prefer the Tudor Black Bay 36 mm to the 36 mm Explorer if I would go for something smaller. The Tudor feels also more solid than than the 36 mm Explorer imho.

[@JustBlueFish]

Modern 36 watches like that Tudor or a DateJust/Op are more robust and solid. I can see why you’d feel that way about these older references.

[@life-onmars8223]

It's now 2021 and the cost of buying a 14270 with a T dial is just moving up and up. I guess because they are so desirable. I can't find a minty, full set for under USD9500, more than a few average pieces around USD7.5 -8.5 but generally without B & Ps. I wish I had got in earlier. I think I have missed the boat.

[@Heart.Maldives]

Get the 34mm OP, the bracelet is fully brushed, black dial, wears very much like this explorer.

[@Youcantleavethisempty01]

I would agree although I prefer the vintage Explorers. Much tidier and refined. Those arabic numerals on the modern Explorers are just too big! Great vid.

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks for watching!

[@Amen20]

Dive extension in this watch is so you could wear it over winter jacket exploring etc, usual rolex bs. Great review and charming watch, I prefer 36mm as well.

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks Tom.

[@DavidDatura]

The 114270 successor to this reference was produced up until around 2009 I believe. Not what you’d really call vintage! Why not just search for one of those later production cycle models? You could probably find one in very good condition.

[@stephens2r338]

The watch has the wrong clasp. It has a clasp from maybe a GMT. The 14270 did not have a safety clasp, that came with the newer 114270. Both are a lot shorter than this one and the Explorer never had an extension until their latest 214270.

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks for watching.

[@marcocastagnetti7086]

Great honest review it's amazing that a watch with so many flaws still commands the price it does I'am sure you will agree there are better watches overall out there at a lower price but just goes to show the power of the brand and the mentality of the buyer.

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks for watching I appreciate it Marco!

[@conradcoolerfiend]

Guy, your dream watch can be made. They did release a black dial 369 modern op. You just have to change the hands.

[@JustBlueFish]

That’s true, although finding authentic Mercedes hands and having them installed might be a pain.

[@conradcoolerfiend]

JustBlueFish Watch Reviews I have seen one like this sold on a forum somewhere. One time.

[@joeschlicht]

I agree, the 39 explorer looks way out of proportion, especially the bezel... I also have a 6/34" wrist, and 37-38 seems to be the right size for me, wondering if my first Rolex should be this used Exp I or an OP 36 or 39. I have tried on the white dial 39, and it surprised me how well it wore and just how comfortable it was. Have not tried on or seen a 36 OP in person. Would love to try one. In comparison to the 14270, I prefer the sleeker case and slimmer lugs with a flatter bezel, but I actually prefer the simpler dial of the OP, stick hands, and indices vs numerals. Like you, but the opposite, I'd love to take the OP dial and put it in the Exp case, Ha!

[@thewatchloungechris]

Great review. I'm a fan of the 39 mm myself .

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks buddy!

[@ivankerr3570]

Nice but too small . The 39mm version is much better proportioned . The quality is also miles ahead of this old version. You criticise the dial and proportions of the 39mm yet you bought one . Why? If it was so bad.

[@coffeeboyclips1973]

The quality on the 39mm is better but the size is not, the bezel is too thick and it just doesn't look right. A Rolex has got to be 36mm unless you get a submariner etc

[@coffeeboyclips1973]

The 39mm is better quality but does not look better, the bezel is too thick. Rolex has got to be 36mm unless it's the submariner etc.

[@rebelman333]

I do not think that is the correct clasp for the watch. Looks like the clasp for that period submariner maybe. Great review! I love my 14270 and thank you for the time you put into this one.

[@JustBlueFish]

You are right I think. Some other people noted the same thing.

[@patrikjarl8650]

Actually that clasp was an add-on in the beginning of the 14270s (and sold by ADs) if you didn’t liked the simple folding clasp. Cheers!

[@SuperKawaz750]

the best rolex ever!!!

[@JustBlueFish]

Submariner 4 life!

[@henryduron1778]

I have 7.5 inch wrist, I got the 39 and love it! A 36 just wouldn’t look right

[@Valera_Scotland]

The new 36mm !!! Praise the lord!!! :) I'm so happy about this.... on the waiting list (I'm expecting to be much older by the time I finally get it !)

[@zaf240489]

The proportions of the 39 is off. The dial & sapphire being larger than a submariner just throws it off for me.

[@JustBlueFish]

Ya I agree.

[@paulcorrea1613]

I also don't like the haut engraving, takes away from the simplicity.

[@davidhouston8017]

Funny you got the best old school bracelet for the TSwiss Explorer Unique Dive version why it’s on an Explorer (I’m thinking factor mistake)

[@ernestkrajnc6412]

For a three hander without the date (I thing explorer should have one) I'd pick modern op for sure...

[@JustBlueFish]

Ya that’s the direction I lean.

[@rcm4u2]

I agree, the 36mm Explorer is really awesome.

[@leeonr]

might have to settle with tudor 36mm as only watch

[@JustBlueFish]

I reviewed that watch. It was well made, but I wasn’t in love with it.

[@loungeisalivecigars]

Great video. Very informative. Thank you

[@jamesestrada82]

Hi Guy, I'd love to see you review an Omega Speedmaster Reduced - a 3510.50 would probably be the easiest to get a hold of, but if you can get the ST175.0032 with the 1459 bracelet, that would be amazing!

[@JustBlueFish]

I’ll see what I can do. My friends at Exquisite Timepieces might have one I can borrow.

[@jamesestrada82]

@JustBlueFish Watch Reviews: Fantastic! Hope you can acquire one. I really think you'll dig it, considering you love the way the 36mm Explorer wears. I've heard that the "Reduced" wears like a 36mm Rolex President!

[@gls11lg]

Nice review, great watch. Only the clasp is not originally from this watch...

[@traviskoh999]

the perfect classy watch

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks for watching I appreciate it.

[@davelee9791]

A quality In Depth review of this classic piece...

[@JustBlueFish]

Thanks Dave.

[@jaimey3971]

I'd have to go with 114.... model.

[@JustBlueFish]

Same.

[@robertfiala5337]

Rolex should offer the older size. I’ve seen a great deal of comments of people wanting one. I’m quite sure they’d sell.