The Rolex Explorer 39 is BETTER Than the 40… Change my Mind

[@BrittPearceWatches]

I SHOULD HAVE SAID - these explorers were on loan from my fabulous friend Mark! @mr_watchaddict on Instagram! It was far too kind of him to loan me all his explorers!!! THANK YOU MARK!!! 💕💕💕✨✨✨🎉🎉🎉

[@mr_watchaddict3146]

You're extremely welcome darling! Excellent spot with the lug lengths by the way! Also, the 40mm has AR coating on the underside whereas the 39 doesn't. Love the matte dial of the 39 too, and the massive ding I added right before I leant it to you!! 😁❤Xxx

[@acethis]

I find the EXPLORER text on the 40mm makes it look "Top Heavy". I much prefer the 39mm's text layout. I have the EXPLORER 39 (Mk II) in my collection 😉

[@explorerjlc1743]

The classic layout is at the top though.

[@awristology1]

Personal preference. I do prefer the text up top.

[@h.l6344]

Ditto 👍

[@olivertrott5338]

The "Cosmograph" text is on the top, too, and makes it veeery busy (there is no space on the bottom) Still looks very good!

[@andrewpalmiere7022]

100% agree

[@watchesandfitness]

I'd spent 18 months toying with buying a 39mm and then the 40mm was released, and I just couldn't bring myself to pay over retail for a pre owned watch with an inferior movement. Completely agree that the 39mm wears better and I prefer the proportions, but it wasn't so much of an issue that I would have paid the extra for the older model. Have had my 40mm for 6 months and love it.

[@markbannister8031]

Some would say the 32 are inferior… read about it

[@BrittPearceWatches]

I really can’t fault you here!!! That’s something I should have clarified in this vid - just that the 39mm ISNT current catalogue anymore! Are the prices on these still crazy, I wonder?? Hopefully not! Such a great watch! BUT SO IS THE 40mm!! I totally understand why people Prefer the 40!

[@lonewolfemcquade8133]

Inferior movement? The 3130 is a indestructible movement. In fact every watchmaker I spoke to said the older 48h Rolex movement's are extremely better than the new 70h power reserve movement's and they need servicing alot less. The 3130 is one of the BEST movement's Rolex ever produced and its extremely accurate with a dead silent rotor. Unlike the new movement's that have a more autobile rotor. New?? Dosen't automatically mean it's better. The 3130 is TRIED AND TRUE and if I ever add a ceramic Submariner to join my 14060m and Explorer 114270. That both have the 3130. You better believe it will be a first generation ceramic with the 3130 movement

[@lettuce1305]

In the world of mechanical watches newer is not always better, the 31xx family of movements have proven over the years that they're bulletproof and super accurate. To me the only real benefit of the new 32xx movements is the longer power reserve but other than that, not much else. The older movements have been super robust, reliable, and accurate anyways.

[@carlmoulton5719]

when you say counldnt bring yourself to shell out for inferior movement, the 39mm is hardly like buying a poor movement. it's rock solid. the most in demand rolex are are cheap as chips bracelets, non ceramic with movements that wouldnt live with a modern day. tudor blackbay

[@JacobLawrenceCanning]

Have both a OP 36 and an Explorer 40mm. For those of you saying the 40 is a large watch, you're wrong. The OP 41 and DJ 41 feel substantially larger. The OP41, for example, has a large dial surface that the explorer 40 just doesn't have. The 40 has extremely nice proportions not unlike the OP36. I prefer 36 mm Rolex usually, but I can't help but think Rolex were aiming at a "his and hers" duo with the new 36 and 40. The 36mm is actually a 35mm with a extremely tapered and elegant bracelet and the 40mm is actually a 39mm with a robust and sporty bracelet. My advice for anyone deciding between the 39 and 40, do yourself a favour and try them both on, the 40mm will still be very pleasing to folks like myself who generally prefer midsized cases. Because off the top heavy proportions of the 39, I find it wears much larger than the 40. The 40mm is my favourite watch in the current Rolex lineup. The 39 is very nice but the 40 has a nicer lacquered black dial, larger white gold handset, larger crown, 21mm bracelet, clasp, and overall head to bracelet proportionality. You can't go wrong with the 36, 39, or 40, but the 40 is my choice of the bunch.

[@bobbycalifornia7077]

I agree. I’ve tried both on and prefer the 40. The better proportions make it wear “smarge”. It’s nice.

[@DennisFilms]

What is your wrist size? My wrist is 6.85in and stuck between 36 or 40

[@bobbycalifornia7077]

@@DennisFilms I’m about the same size - 6.75/6.8.

[@DennisFilms]

@@bobbycalifornia7077 awesome!

[@liquid_metal]

Totally agree. I have a 6.5", but flat wrist so I can get away wearing larger watches. However, I was shocked at just how diminutive the Explorer 1 36mm was in person. It's basically child size and the dainty bracelet is very feminine. I've recently found out what you've said - it's actually nearer 35mm, while for all the critics saying the 40mm is "too large", it's actually closer to 38mm. The bracelet is what adds to the look of a watch and the 40mm has a wider, more masculine and sturdy bracelet. It is also more "sporty" to have a larger watch, while the 36mm is more of a dress watch. I think you are spot on that the current sizing is a "his n hers" duo. This watch "speaks" to those who do outdoors activities and many couples will do such things together. That's where the 'hers' 36mm and the 'his' 40mm comes in.

[@fabriziotramonti9026]

Explorer 36 mm Is the best 😂😂 Explorer 16570 black Dial Is better😂👋👋👋👋👋

[@TrumanBurbankFE]

40 mm because of the new movement 3230 with the Chronergy escapement, AR coating on the underside, the broader width displaces the thickness better, and it suits my 17 cm wrist.

[@ahha6304]

OK I think 39 looks better, and in some weird way I find it's easier to read

[@watchpapi]

It’s more vintage feeling with the almost tropical like dial. Plus the Explorer text works better at the bottom to balance things out IMO.

[@RichardKoppinger]

I'm team 39mm too, even with my eight inch wrist. I like a nice matte dial. My favorite Glycine Combat Sub has a matte black dial and it's very easy on the eyes. Plus, I've seen so many glossy and sunburst dials. Matte finishing makes a nice change, and I think it gives the dial a more no-nonsense tool watch appearance.

[@stephenbaumhauer2593]

I'm definitely team 39mm...Only thing you didn't mention, though, is that the 40 has anti-reflective coating which is nice. I wish the 39 had it but i'd still go with that one.

[@earlbee3196]

⏰🕶️⏰ ✌🏻👩🏻‍🦱✌🏻 I could wear either one! Love them both .

[@alfieakaronaldog]

Who buys a Rolex to pop a crappy 20mm aftermarket (non specific) strap on it? 😂 You guys basing your watch purchases on those crappy lazy arse strap manufacturers who don’t make a 21mm option are beyond funny 😹

[@watchesandburgers]

I bet you can't make a 10 minute video obsessing about a millimeter. 'Cause this one is only 8 minutes 25 seconds. How's that for obsessing!

[@michlo3393]

Anything sub 40mm is better. Who wants to wear a hubcap on their wrist? This reminds me, it seems as though on Reddit that only children are allowed to post wrist shots because everyone you see the person is like "Yeah this is a 29 mm ladies' watch" and in the pic, it looks like a damn manhole cover strapped to a tent pole. Who are these dainty people? and aren't they hungry?

[@idjwatches]

40 is just perfect, never liked the matte dial on the 39

[@underachievingwatchcollect1878]

FYI the 40mm Explorer has AR coating. I bought my 39mm Explorer mkII when it was in the display case at my AD. The 39mm can be worn on any large wrist-both are great 😎.

[@BrittPearceWatches]

Woooah now THIS is good to know! Thabk you so much! You know, back in 2019 I bought my husband the 39mm explorer! Just in the display case! What a great time to be alive 🤣

[@Spook291]

There are maybe over 150 watch brands, yet these “watch enthusiasts” channels mainly just cover Rolex in various variations of topics. Almost like these channels are actually just….Rolex channels with the odd Tudor tossed in and a few insulting omega videos for sport.

[@tacticaltruth8118]

Okay, a couple of points for the Explorer 40 over the 39 - for me - are that the 40 has anti-reflective coating and also a glossy dial, which looks a little more crisp.

[@sojirou]

Totally agree, I still prefer the case size of the Explorer 39 over 40 the same way that I prefer the OP 39 vs 41.

[@BrittPearceWatches]

Right?? I totally agree with this! 💕👏🏻

[@WatchYourselfJorge]

I want the 36mm in my life 😭 working in an AD I've played with all of these and the 36mm is just PERFECT for me. I neeeed it! Great Video Britt! Had never realised all of these differences, hadn't even clocked, (haha) the difference in the "explorer" placement!

[@Explorer40mm]

40 beats the 39 in every possible way. Gloss black lacquer dial. Rolex does lacquer oh so well, so having it on a time only watch without a rotating bezel is excellent. Bracelet to head radio. Sporty big crown > little button crown. Larger hand set. Upgraded movement. AR coating. Power reserve. Amazing clasp dimensions. Smaller lug to lug measurement. Overall just a more refined product but the 39 is nice too. The mad watch collector just mentioned he’s selling his 39 because of the little crown. I tend to agree. Same with the OP41, the crown is small. Rolex leave room for refinement at all times. It’s their version of planned obsolescence.

[@dinamiena6186]

Sorry but I had them all . 39 is the king together with older 36

[@Maarten_official_account]

So interesting watching people going at each other over the “perfect size” of a luxury accessory. And here we are wondering why the world is so full of problems? 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@BennyLlama]

Don't feel too bad, Britt. I spent hours agonizing over the sizes of the older 39mm or the new 40mm only to decide to put my name down for a new 36mm 😅

[@janbaborak]

Same here. 36mm all day long.

[@johnprosser5035]

I have the 40 and love it... The proportions of the bracket and clasp are just right for me. Everything is balanced just right

[@markpiper6249]

Hey Britt, I can’t believe you don’t prefer the 40mm more !! Go to your room without any supper and don’t come down stairs until you can apologise. The 40mm is a sleeker case, better balanced bracelet and an alround better movement. Love your channel and fabulous review, even though your obv wrong 😈😈😈

[@Barweezy]

The “Explorer” on top killed the 40 for me. It just looks so crowded.

[@BrittPearceWatches]

RIGHT?!?! I agree completely!

[@michellep2682]

If a choice between the 2 it would be 39mmm for me as well with my 6.3" wrist. But I purchased the 36mm that I am actually wearing as I type. I have a few sport models with the ceramic bezels and 40mm works but with the smooth or domed bezels the 40/41mm ones look like a dinner plate on my wrist. My OP's are all 36mm as well.

[@Bisley1]

I agree with you. My wrist is 6.7“ and 40/41mm and even some thin 42mm are perfectly wearable, but the Explorers/ OP/ DJ/ DD just all look more balanced in 36mm - and also more refined in my opinion, but thats subjective. The proportions however, are objectively better onthe 36. Plus I just enjoy wearing 36/38mm watches because I find them comfortable.

[@MattVashMusic]

The biggest contributing factor between these two is the measurement of the dial. I believe the 40mm dial is about 0.5mm larger than the 39mm. It gives it that massive “dinner plate” aspect on the wrist that I feel the explorer should never have. The 40mm is also thicker and the case back does not taper quickly, which makes it wobble around and not wear nearly as close to the wrist as the 39mm.

[@donulldh4785]

Auntie Britt!! If you can make a 10 minute video over 1mm, how long would the video from James be over 6mm (.25 inches)??? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Long Live the Cult(s) and 4:30 date windows!!

[@Angry_Gnome]

…and the 36 is better than both 😉 …and those that laugh at the 36mm saying it’s too small and a girly woman’s watch it’s ok. The rest of us understand you’re insecure about the size of ‘other things.’

[@guillaumemichel3156]

Not trying to change your mind, but it seems to me that every difference you point to in your video clearly places the 40mm as a better choice over the 39 haha! That being said, you're right on one point: anyone spending more than 7 seconds on this needs more friends

[@Greg_de_Toulouse]

No debate. The explorer can only be 36. Nothing else. Period. 😀

[@Touyoujin]

It's a sport watch, not a dress watch. 36mm is what it used to be and the current 36mm is just too dainty for the modern world as a sport watch, 39mm is more well balanced in the modern world, Rolex pretty much fixed almost all the flaws in MKII to push the watch into the modern world in terms of visual, practicality and versatility.

[@cheemomugdoo799]

The hand in pocket shots are worthless, they don't show much, if anything, about how the watch wears.

[@Keffin1]

Great video. Would love to see a comparison between the 36mm Explorer models (114270 and 124270) and your take on them. I'm still undecided on which one I prefer.

[@BrittPearceWatches]

Ouuu now THIS is a video I’d love to make!!!

[@eli14eli14]

I went to buy the 36… but it was truly too small for my 7.15 inch wrist. I have the 40 and it’s a dream.

[@inCanada55]

Ahhh Britt....you've got a personality that lights up the screen. You're easy to listen to and look at, and you speak the universal language of love....Watch Talk! I, too, have the Exp 39 and can't say enough about it. I pretty much share all the reasons you love this reference. I had reluctantly bought the 124270 (for the less initiated, the latest Exp 36, which actually measures 35.5). I say reluctantly because my sweet spot in sports models is 40mm, as in my GMT-Master. Liking the idea of keeping with the 'classic' Explorer size, and having read enough posts on forums where 36'ers swore that you quickly get used to the diminutive size, I decided to go for the 36 over the 39. [The 40 was out of the question because of the distinctions that Britt points out, especially the wider lug and bracelet -- just more metal clinging to the wrist.] Well, I should have stuck with my instincts that had told me that I would NOT get used to the size of the 36, even on my not-so-large 6.5" wrist. The nail in the coffin was my wife's reaction at first sight: "It looks like a boys watch". "Boy" that hurt! How does this story end? I sent the 36 packing, welcomed with open arms a 39, and the sun is now shining once again. The discontinued 39 (since 2021) remains controversial within the watch-geek community -- not sure I understand why -- but for this occasional flipper, the 39's a keeper. Thanks again, Britt, for the great, and entertaining, review.

[@irishwatchenthusiast6647]

The only two ways in which the 39 is preferable to the 40 are the text placement (I agree that 'Explorer' below the pinion is more balanced) and possibly the 20mm lug width (although it's not difficult to source 21mm straps these days). I don't intend on taking my 40 Explorer off its bracelet, so that isn't an issue for me. Had they still been making the 39, I would have happily taken one, but I wanted a brand new watch, so took the 40 when one was offered to me in May last year - zero regrets having done so - it's a simple, beautiful, iconic timepiece with mod cons.

[@Explorer40mm]

I seem to be one of the few that prefers the text up top. Part of the poor balance on the 39 had to do with the saggy bottom text on the 39

[@whereRbearsTeeth]

@@Explorer40mm saggy?? It looks much better on be bottom.

[@Explorer40mm]

@@whereRbearsTeeth nah, in person I prefer the text up top. More of a title rather than a sub heading

[@denbo74]

Wasn’t the actual watch Hillary wore up Everest an Oyster Perpetual? Probably why they moved the “Explorer” to the top. I do prefer it at the bottom though

[@hugohernandez3651]

39mm is too small for my wrist. I would take the 40mm or even better. The OP 41mm.

[@bigiona3938]

Adding the anti-reflective treatment to the new 40mm clearly makes it the best model (see what I did there…..) I’m biased as I own the 40mm, but I do adore it and it fits my just over 7” wrist perfectly.

[@maxsplaining]

Excellent video Britt. But can't believe nobody is talking about the crown!! Always thought the crown on the 39 was a bit too small and dainty. Pretty sure they just took the 36mm crown and used it on the 39. The 40mm now has a "big boy" crown that feels more appropriate to a tool watch of its size. (Might be the same size crown as the Explorer II?) It's a lot easier to get a grip on and looks better in proportion to the rest of the watch.

[@popomomo12]

I can not unsee that now

[@whereRbearsTeeth]

There’s nothing whatsoever wrong with the crown in the 39.

[@popomomo12]

@@whereRbearsTeeth not that there is something wrong, more a matter of preference

[@ibez07]

39mm Explorer = my grail watch

[@MDchaz]

8” wrist. I picked up the 40. I prefer the glossy dial. I do think the Explorer text at the bottom looks better even if it isn’t historically accurate.

[@blackice4867]

4:39 you nailed it. I prefer the slimmer, classic shape of the 40 mm. But: the end links protrude too far. The current "41mm" Submariner is shorter than the 40mm Explorer and wears better on a smaller wrist! Quite unexpected!

[@leemurovec24]

214270 mk II is the best 😊

[@Not_Mark_Twain]

The first thing to know is that there are two 39 mm Explorers: MK1 and MK2. The MK1 was a rare Rolex disaster. Google it, learn about it, and avoid it. I fell for the 36mm hype and bought one. Couldn't stand it on my 7.5 in wrist even a month later. Bought a 39 and loved it. Rolex brought out the 40 a week later. Arghh. Altogether, however, I'm happy with my choice. The cost, wearing experience, matte dial, strap size, and layout of the 39 are all marginally better. That said, nobody would turn down a 40 nor should they.

[@awristology1]

With a 7.5 inch wrist I can hands down say the 40 fits me better. I do enjoy smaller watches and can even pull off a 36. However, having owned the Explorer 40 since May of last year it has been my daily driver. I tried my friends 39 on and it did wear very slightly smaller - the improvements on the 40 for me were the winner and the whole package is just beautiful.

[@Paka1983]

They are 100% the same watch!! Change my mind.

[@watchpapi]

😂😂 ok.

[@lupino1414]

I’m a 36 guy but you really can’t go wrong with with any Explorer!

[@chadw.6049]

You forgot to mention a HUGE difference with the 40mm - the anti reflective coating on the underside of the crystal. Big improvement. Plus the slightly larger crown on the 40mm.

[@willsmeg1967]

Brilliant video Brittney. I’ve gotta agree 39mm is definitely the sweet spot, but in this model I’d take the 36mm . Keep up the great content. Wills

[@salty5402]

Well the right answer is 36mm - for me. 😉 *With all jokes aside - both seemed to wear well on your wrist Britt.

[@BrittPearceWatches]

Bahahaa! YES SALTY! 36mm is ALWAYS the right answer! I couldn’t agree more! 🤣👏🏻

[@rhystudordavies]

36mm is perfect for Britts wrist 🎉

[@emc14000]

case and shoulder lugs are deceiving. the explorer 2 polar wears quite bigger visually because its a very WIDE watch case. i prefer the older 40mm case for 6.5-7" wrists.

[@rhystudordavies]

👇🏼👇🏼❤ 36mm gang!

[@DrBob0910]

Superb video Britt! I tried on both versions and went with the 40mm on my 7 inch wrist. Let's see more of these comparisons please. 😀

[@lesguersten7252]

Happy owner of a 39mm Explorer - the script is too busy with the Explorer logo at the top imo. That said the 72h reserve would be nice. Got my Smith's Everest recently & will get the 1016 one day to complete the collection around the Everest story to go along with the Moonwatch collection in the making. Nothing beats those two for backstories & that's what counts for this particular collector....

[@whereRbearsTeeth]

🤣

[@russellseah2347]

114270 36mm has the best symmetry, propotions and fit. The 124270's 19mm lug width n aggresive bracelet taper to 14mm makes it too dainty wears too small for my taste.

[@Bisley1]

I completely agree with all of your points. That being said, I own both and still decided to wear the 124270 and I just forget about those details when I‘m not actively obsessing about them. The antireflectant on the crystal, the better lume and lumed 369 digits are all winners and outweigh the drawbacks of the new model. Except that the new one isn’t as well suited to swapping straps which is a pity. Yet still I can’t bring myself to part with my 114270 which I purchased 3 weeks before the new one was released😅

[@AlexanderB.]

I'm team 36 mm all the way!

[@BrittPearceWatches]

This is the REAL CORRECT ANSWER! 😅

[@jeffreyf4074]

Milgauss is written on upper half of the dial, just sayin’ 😉

[@JasonMilner]

No! Now I know my 124270 has its name in the wrong position, and I just can't unsee it :..(

[@wallyandellen5099]

I have the 39mm mk2 dial and the 1016, I really like the domed plastic crystal.

[@michaelbradley6488]

39 for me and i have large wrists.

[@BassStevie]

Having just got a Sinn 556 which is 38.5 - I think I’m more likely to prefer the 39mm. Though it’s unlikely I’ll ever see one. Or own one.

[@fletch557]

I’ve got a 39mm MK2 that’s in fantastic condition for sale - shout if you’re interested! Even though I’m selling it, I totally agree that it beats the 40mm : ) I switched to a Sub 14060M and can’t justify keeping both.

[@watchpapi]

Had one and sold it, similar reasons, always reached for the Vacheron Overseas ahead of it.

[@cliffwheeler7357]

The 124270 36 mm introduced in 2022 is far superior to either of them.

[@MBCGRS]

Over the years, Rolex has released something like 35 different versions of the Explorer. The Vast majority (30ish) have the word Explorer at the top...

[@JasonReilly-up6jj]

Yea think 36 is best

[@happyhorology575]

36mm 114270 is the best 😀

[@cdaack]

I have 7” wrists and I’m between the 36 and 40 modern versions…but I might need to look back and consider 39…thanks Britt for ruining my shopping experience with your wonderfulness

[@navboi12]

39 or gtfo. Rolex fuged up with the 36's uber dainty dimensions and awkward lug width.

[@watchpapi]

It is very dainty now.

[@explorerjlc1743]

6:50 explorers have historically had their names on the top line. It is just Rolex respecting their past design language which is a good thing.

[@nmcduff4891]

Hi Britt. Comparing these watches is like comparing yourself with Jenni Elle. They are both adorable but out of my price range. Anybody would be happy with either. Happy New Year ;-)

[@ac346673]

The wording EXPLORER historically has always been at the top. The wording at the bottom was an anomaly.

[@MrRca1987]

If you look closely the “old” and “new” sub they didn’t drop the maxi case. They just created a maxi bracelet to match it. I have a hulk and a 2020 no date and the bracelet is huge on the 2020. I have recently just got a 36mm explorer and for some reason I was looking into spring bar sizes and you would be surprised. Hulk 2mm new sub 1.5mm same as a 36 explorer. Exp 2 16570, milgauss, air king are 1.8mm.

[@talega1]

I'll chose the longer duration of winding.......70hr. for 1mm......in my wrist it probably looks the same......

[@AndreaDoesYoga]

I'm with you, the 39's elegance is unbeatable! 💯

[@muds1123]

Completely agree Brit. I had the 39mm Explorer and it was perfect. They shouldn’t have changed it.

[@JDinHNL]

Spectacular review... and I just got the Explorer 40... and sorry to agree to disagree, but the 40 just works for me... okay, so I'm also 6'4", but that movement upgrade and the somewhat glossy face also did it for me. But if you have a 39 floating around, I'm okay with getting another Explorer 😀I think the Explorer in general is the perfect "unRolex" Rolex. Net, you convinced me Explorer 39:40 is worthy of a 10-minute comparison!

[@wristopia4101]

21mm lug width and bigger crown are winners. Just a shame its not actually 40mm (its nowhere near 39.7 either lol). The 39 is probably bigger 🙄 A Girl telling Guys what size is better is plain funny lol (SOZ) 😂

[@jackserious3282]

I agree with you on this one. 39 mm my favorite.

[@Sauternes1965]

Great video! I just bought a 40mm after having considered buying the 39mm, but I wasn’t very happy to spend more for a used watch! Apart from the “Explorer” text position (it should have been placed at the bottom!) I totally love my new 40mm and think I made a wise choice going for it.

[@Brimme1]

Thanks for you video. I have been owning a 124270 for a year now. And have put my name on the list for a 40mm, my wrist size is 7inch. Sometimes I thing the 36mm is perfect. Sometimes I think it looks tiny. It’s a complete mindf*ck. I’m still not sure if I should upgrade..

[@hongkong322]

you mean downgrade

[@penne9346]

💯 right about "EXPLORER" should be at the bottom of the dial like on all other professional models.

[@WatchUnwind]

Both are great but as I own an OP 41, a Starbucks submariner, and an explorer II I’ll probably never feel the need to get an explorer I. If I get another Rolex it will be a Daytona or a skydweller

[@watchpapi]

Both great options.

[@WatchUnwind]

@@watchpapi thanks watch papa, when are you and gringa going to make a little watch baby? I think it would be a good mascot for the channel

[@watchpapi]

@@WatchUnwind 😂🤣 it certainly would!

[@dukes70]

So the 40 diameter is .7 larger but lug to lug is .9 smaller but it feels so much bigger? I wonder what the dial and bezel measurements are. When I got the call for the 40 at my AD they also had a 39 in the CPO area for $2K more. I took the brand new 40!and love it!!

[@Number_006]

Thanks Britt - the devil is truly in the details.

[@kevinmccalister8197]

''You can really feel that millimeter.''

[@jasonp1568]

Thats what she said. Literally

[@TheNimbleNomad]

I’m not sure I agree with 39 being better. I think it’s not which is better.. it’s more which is better for YOU.. I personally have only ever been able to try on the 40, as the 39 is harder to come by in store unless you find someone that stocks it.

[@OngoGablogian185]

I've got the 36mm and it's perfect. Really wish watches start getting smaller again. I can't even wear my Seamaster 300M now as it looks like a grandfather clock on my wrist. The Explorer makes everything feel cumbersome and ugly in comparison.

[@seetcheryang2142]

Daytona has its wording on top too! I always like the 39mm but felt it a tad too huge for my 6.2inch wrist and when I saw the Explorer40 in person, it was a game changer for me.. the newer layout of the whole dial just somewhat creates less empty space and somehow made the Explorer40 looks and feel smaller than its predecessor- at least for me. I’m currently the lucky owner of both the 124270 and the 224270 ☺️

[@mrb6597]

I honestly think the 40 is still too small. Or rather, the width of the bezel is pretty significant, which makes the dial itself pretty small, I think I measured mine at 32 mm. The hour markers, hands, and numerals are really a lot of information jammed onto this not very large dial, it's very cluttered. If Rolex insists on having such a wide bezel, and jamming so much information onto the dial, they need to go to a large diameter. I would say 41, but I don't think that that's going to work out based on their inexact diameter measurements versus model names. I think that would have to go to 42mm to get something that has enough blank space on the dial to look good, while making the dial itself closer to 35 or 36 mm. Of course, the more I describe this, the more in just describing my 42 mm AquaTerra, which in my opinion, is one of the most perfect watches ever created. I may need to try the new OP-41, that might be closer to what I'm looking for. TLDR; explorer 40 is great watch and I like mine a lot, I just don't think it's a large watch at all.

[@davidb9531]

Rolex destroyed the Explorer as a strap monster with the 36 nasty bracelet attachment which means it chews straps along with the odd sized lug width for 36 and 40, the 39 is the only option for someone that wants to play around with a plethora of straps

[@watchpapi]

I found the 39mm still chewed straps… but definitely the best of the 3 in my eyes.

[@Eclipse.7897]

Wow I literally thought about this today just before the video came up

[@lukewiltshire1916]

Milgauss is on the top half of the dial! 😅 Suppose it doesn't count any more though...RIP

[@jmat94]

I have the 40mm version, and I measured it at 38.5mm with my caliper

[@SuperFreeFreeFree]

both pancake face style, nothing to do with wrist size. 39 better. 40 mm in addition unbalanced "explorer" branding.

[@watchk1]

What about contrast? Who is more antireflective (more legible) in strong natural light? Both watches have AR coating only on the inside of the crystal, right? One has a matte dial, while the other has a glossy dial. Is the new glossy dial worse for overall contrast or better?

[@Thomas-vq5pb]

Explorer 39mm is the one on my wrist for the past 6 years and really enjoy it. Maybe I would have liked a 36 or a 40 had it been available, but a good watch gets better over the years, and that’s what the 39mm is.

[@micaljimenez7381]

I own a modest airking 34mm,i dream in an oyster 40mm just for the size,but if i am realist,my only 34mm is a perfect size for any ocasion,for lisibility perhaps 36mm will be better but i am concient that i want a 40mm just because its a new model..just vanity in my case,i want it like a children wants a toy...

[@tacticaltruth8118]

Well, having the name Explorer at the top or bottom of the dial did not bother me … until you pointed it out. LOL. What is more annoying than that, is that Oyster Perpetual is written on every Rolex. It would be nice to just see Oyster Perpetual reserved for the dial of the Oyster Perpetual proper and remove it from all other Rolex models. This might another topic to mull over and do a video on. Thanks for all your great videos.

[@tacticaltruth8118]

p.s., and let’s not even get started on the 5 lines of text at the bottom of the Tudor Pelagos 42 mm.

[@RocketDog73]

I prefer the longer beak at the end of the hour hands Mercedes circle on the 40mm.