We have twice the firepower this Sunday – not one, but two 36mm Rolex Explorers. One of Rolex’s most iconic tool watches now comes with a little extra glamour. Steel or two-tone, what makes sense for you? Which should you buy? What is the meaning of life? I shall do my absolute best to tackle these critical questions, mixing in a little philosophy along the way.
About
Thanks to Classical Greece, we have been blessed with a dearth of great western philosophers (obviously I read their works all the time). Sandwiched between Socrates and Aristotle is Plato, student to the former and teacher to the latter. We can attribute to Plato the philosophical position of “platonic realism” (or “platonic idealism” if you are brutish like me and prefer term symmetry). Derived from this school is what we know as the platonic ideal, which is anchored in the belief that universals transcend particulars; that is to say, we understand concepts in the material world by distilling them down to their ideal essence. At the end of the day, what makes a chair a chair? If you see one missing a few legs, you know it is a poor example because you can conceptualize what it should be.
If a universal essence exists for one object, it must certainly exist for others. You are smart, gentle reader, and you know where I am driving at by now – what is the platonic ideal of a wrist watch? They come in such an impossibly large range of shapes and styles. I am utterly convinced that, in a situation where the stakes couldn’t be lower, watch lovers would rather see the Earth shatter than give an inch of ground over whether this abstract includes a date window. The energy generated off Hodinkee comment sections alone is enough to power small cities for a day. Fortunately, it is my blog and I don’t need to consult the internet’s timekeeping proletariat. Problem solved and we avoid the threat of a horological apocalypse for now.
Thanks to friend and reader Jesse, who maintains an incredible arsenal of watches (please follow him at wristcheckatl), I believe I have found the answer to what we think of when visualizing a watch – the unapologetically ubiquitous Rolex Explorer I ref. 124270 in stainless steel. However, he had another watch on hand that also caught my eye. Jesse is not just the owner of the 124270, but also its now-infamous sibling, the new two-tone ref. 124273 released last year. This beauty is most commonly seen on the wrist of his significant other while Jesse takes on the original – talk about a hell of a pairing! Putting them side by side elicits a question for me, however: if the Explorer I is the platonic ideal of a watch, what the heck does it become when you add gold? An abomination? Nope. Couldn’t be further from the truth.
The Platonic Ideal
Predictable confession as a Speedmaster lover: I usually find pure time-only a bit sterile. A three-hander? That’s it? I had seen several pictures of the Explorer I in both its 36mm and 39mm configurations and found the watch to be spectacularly… vanilla. After seeing Jesse’s particular example on a black NATO strap for the first time, I quietly muttered under my breath “Okay, I get it.” What was initially a burgeoning acceptance of the Explorer I’s spartan existence has since developed into a sincere admiration of its “less is more” design ethos.
The Explorer I is well known across the watch world, having been launched originally back in 1953 at the same time as the Submariner and Turn-O-Graph. The current generation ref. 124270 is a 36mm time-only watch made out of Rolex’s 904L-derived Oystersteel. It has a sapphire crystal, is water resistant to 100 meters, and has approximately 70 hours of power reserve. The beating heart of the 124270 is the caliber 3230, an in-house automatic movement with a parachrom hairspring accurate to -2/+2 seconds per day (which falls within Rolex’s better than COSC “Superlative Chronometer” certification).
Perhaps the most iconic feature of the Rolex Explorer I is the 3-6-9 dial layout, featuring oversized luminous numerals. The Explorer I line hasn’t always had this dial style and it has also appeared on other watches (i.e., Air King and Tudor Ranger), but they are synonymous with each other in today’s environment. The biggest advantage of the 3-6-9 layout is legibility – the more I realize how impossible it is to quickly tell the time on my Speedmaster, the more I appreciate the clean simplicity of the Explorer I. This watch certainly isn’t Bauhaus-inspired by any stretch, but I do think it embodies that school’s tenet of modest and functional elegance quite well.
Note that the Explorer I does not include a date window or rotating bezel. If you are decrying the notion of a field watch called the Explorer that can’t tell you where you are in the month or time activities with an external mechanism, I wholeheartedly agree with you. If you are alternatively decrying the notion that this watch needs a date window because the dial is perfect already, or that it needs a tool bezel because it would be an affront to nature, I also wholeheartedly agree with you. In a weird way, the inherently asymmetrical numerals make the dial appear nicely symmetrical to my eye. Similarly, the smooth bezel avoids unnecessary visual clutter.
Back to my philosophical rant about platonic ideals and avoiding wars for horological dominance – in my mind, the Explorer I is the standard from which all watches should be measured. When I close my eyes and picture what a watch should be, the brain of yours truly generates a core image suspiciously similar to the Explorer I. It is the essence of a watch that is already distilled down to key, no-frills features but retains a high degree of artistic excellence. I think its foremost competitor for the title, another Rolex product in the Submariner, is ultimately too focused as a dive watch and thus doesn’t pass the mental gymnastics of my test.
I recently listened to an episode of OT: The Podcast, which featured Hodinkee alumni and Explorer I fan Stephen Pulvirent. He put it best – the Explorer I line isn’t so much timeless as it exists “out of time,” looking like it could have been drawn up in the previous century (which is true), yesterday, or even at some point in the future. The right to be considered “out of time” should be given to only a few watches, one of which is most certainly the Explorer I. I think it is a fitting way to describe the foremost quality of a watch that humbly rises to the occasion.
Adding A Little Romance To The Equation
Okay, I have a second confession: I am not the biggest lover of two-tone watches. Put a gun up to my head and I will make a two-tone only collection, sure, but of my own free will and volition I can be pretty picky when it comes to mixing metals. I find the style somewhat dated, but maybe that is because I have seen Grandpa’s two-tone Datejust enough to last a lifetime and thus my subconscious can react somewhat negatively (no offense intended, grandpas of the world). This is unfair contempt – I love vintage watches. I just think that most designs typically age a bit better when uniform in color, something that two-tone actively argues is boring.
Third confession: my early judgmental opinions about two-tone have been… corrected due to spending time with the ref. 124273. This is a thoroughly modern watch: the smooth gold bezel, gold indices and hands, and polished center-links completely transform the Explorer’s profile. The watches are largely identical in features between the 124270 and 124273, but what I find incredible about the latter is that these gold elements have a tendency to combust from sunlight in a way that steel does not. Gold also adds real heft and predictably gives the 124273 the feel of a more premium option – based on its MSRP of $11,150, Rolex certainly intended this watch as an offering a bit further up the food chain.
I think what ultimately gets me over the hump with the 124273 is the size of the watch. The Explorer I belongs in 36mm, full stop. Two-tone, if executed poorly, can come off as gaudy or loud and the physical size of the watch can amplify this noise. The smaller case diameter helps mute the effect of an already tasteful shade of gold (except in sunlight as mentioned prior), and so you get more a cultured execution that doesn’t quite scream “I am here” in everyone’s faces. Rolex knows current market trends and likely recognized internally that doing a two-tone derivative of the now discontinued 39mm version would be a tactical mistake. I am inclined to agree with them.
A quick note about tool watches with a bit of bling on them – when this model was released last year, I feel that it unfairly received a lot of vitriolic criticism. The peanut gallery certainly reacted adversely to the idea of the Explorer I, perhaps Rolex’s last tool watch to still truly adhere to their old pre-2005 design language, being updated with extra luxury in mind. I find this criticism unfounded, however, because we have had Submariners and GMT-Masters coming in either gold or two-tone for decades (I’m staring at you specifically, Root Beer). As polarizing as two-tone can be sometimes, I see nothing but broad adoration from the masses for these vintage models. They may not always do it for me, but if they do it for you, you owe it to yourself to check out the Explorer I in two-tone.
You have already heard my argument on why the Explorer I in steel is the platonic ideal of a watch. Let me ask again – what does gold transform it into? Material matters and the 124273 stands on its own, perfectly straddling the line between function and flash. One of the best qualities of the Explorer I in 36mm is its ability to effectively and comfortably disappear on your wrist. The 124273 doesn’t do that as efficiently, but that is not the goal. It is warm, inviting, and has a certain spark of electricity to it that the steel model lacks. There is just enough sparkle to stir up dust at the party, but the conversation only starts when you feel like it.
Decisions, Decisions
Okay, time to make up my mind. Two excellent versions of the Explorer I, both in 36mm – yikes. I am going to bite the bullet quickly and admit that stainless steel still tugs at my heart. My newfound love for the two-tone model, while real and genuine, unfortunately does not yet surpass the delta in pricing versus the steel offering (which will set you back $7,200). Having an extra $3,950 in my pocket is a material chunk of change, and I could use that money, financial stability permitting, to surround the Explorer with an ensemble cast of complimentary watches from other great brands such as Longines or Seiko. That being said, my personal collection is small and targeted – if you already have a diverse group of watches with a two-tone shaped hole nestled amongst them, the 124273 is a perfect choice.
At the end of the day, Rolex has done a great job with the Explorer I line. Steel and two-tone are battle-tested; they are both stunning in their own ways, and I see now that the latter is just as wonderful as the former. I shall leave with you a final thought on these watches – if the definition of a relationship can perhaps be surmised as two bodies and one heart, I can’t think of a more symbolically fitting pair of watches than these Explorers to go through life with.
Leave a Reply