Nav Ad Widget - Mobile

Collapse

Nav Ad Widget - Desktop

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Cannot decide new(42mm) or old(40mm) Explorer II

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • philoso
    replied
    Prefer the 42mm explorer 2.

    Leave a comment:


  • raverus
    replied
    Dont you guys think its so strange that an explorer 2 is 40mm so is a sub and a GMT master

    But the explorer 2 look so much smaller

    Leave a comment:


  • takuyazzz
    replied
    I have a small wrist, tried the 42mm before and sadly the lugs overhang. So I concluded that I can only go for 40mm rollies.

    Leave a comment:


  • kingsky
    replied
    I'd say it really depends on your wrist size.
    Small wrist - 40mm
    Big wrist - 42mm

    Leave a comment:


  • se7en
    replied
    Just got myself a 42mm black, nice, looked much better on my medium size wrist compared to my other 40mm black explorer 2.

    Leave a comment:


  • tsneo888
    replied
    New model bigger and blue illum.

    Leave a comment:


  • mild7
    replied
    I have the same dilemma. Love the old Exp 2 but leaning towards the new with the orange hand and new clasp.

    Leave a comment:


  • lolex kia
    replied
    I go for the newer and bigger Explorer II, with a white dial to augment the size

    Leave a comment:


  • leoric79
    replied
    40mm for vintage and the 'original' Exp feel.....................42mm for the trendy and more 'modern' feel

    Leave a comment:


  • wDin
    replied
    http://www.theprodigalguide.com/2010...y-explorer-ii/

    They opened up my eyes n brains...

    Scrambled for a white 16570 to complement my gmt2 coke.

    Really lovely to finally have her on my wrist..

    The white dial does break the monotony of the common black..
    It is indeed quite refreshing to see a white dial on my wrist.

    N i cannot ever settle for 42mm as my wrist is considerably small, almost skeleton-like w skin... Hahahaha!

    Then again, whatever those 2 says should not matter much cos at the end of the day, it's your money, ur wrist, ur satisfaction...

    Leave a comment:


  • piaggioniner
    replied
    The newer exp 2 gives a chunkier look. ��

    Leave a comment:


  • mtb
    replied
    personally I actually prefer the big fat hands... so much easier to tell time under dim lighting...

    Now my DSSD seems to have too small a hand.. :P

    but that's just me

    Leave a comment:


  • Derick
    replied
    Size 42mm is ok for me.

    But I just don`t like the big fat minute and hour hands cos is not proportional.

    Espicially the triangle big orange GMT hand. (Orange triangle means: Danger / Warning / Caution)

    Take a closer look at 40mm, all hands, nipple and baton match better than 42mm.

    ///// ///// ///// ///// /////
    Originally posted by ngokyc View Post
    If small wrist then better not go for the e2 42 cos it doesn't look proportional. The watch is nice if it has a 40 version for smaller wrist people. Just my 2c.

    Leave a comment:


  • ngokyc
    replied
    If small wrist then better not go for the e2 42 cos it doesn't look proportional. The watch is nice if it has a 40 version for smaller wrist people. Just my 2c.

    Leave a comment:


  • chopper
    replied
    New 42 mm nicer in my humble opinion

    Leave a comment:

Footer Ad Widget - Desktop

Collapse

Footer Ad Widget - Mobile

Collapse
Working...
X