Rocking a grail on the trail

Specs 
Diameter: 35.4mm 
Lug to lug: 43mm 
Thickness: 11.6mm 
Lug width: 19mm 
Movement: Rolex caliber 3230, 70hrs power reserve, automatic, 28,800vph, +/-2s per day

TLDR

The Rolex Explorer I has been a dream watch of mine for a long time. While I prefer the proportions of the vintage 114270, this modern installment is superior in build quality and movement performance. It works with every outfit in just about any environment, even the mountains and fjords once inhabited by my Viking ancestors. Well judging by my disposition my ancestors were more likely to be shepherds than warriors, but you get the idea. Anyway, I love this watch. If you want to read more about Norway, check out my WhereYaGone post.

It’s a tool

Or whatever it is that everyone says to romanticize their glorified piece of jewelry. But if we’re going to set aside the absurdity of wearing an $8,000 object that tells time and nothing else, then the Rolex Explorer 124270 fits the description well. It feels purpose-built and durable, it displays the time legibly and boldly, and I actually don’t feel the need to baby it like I probably should (because remember, it’s an $8,000 piece of jewelry).

When I decided to return to Norway for the first time in many years to see my family and do some adventuring, I thought it would be fitting to bring the Explorer. I believe that is because of Rolex’s marketing. There’s no objective feature about this watch that screams exploration any more than an Oyster Perpetual. It’s a far less useful travel watch than just about any watch with a date and not only does the Explorer I lack that bit of useful functionality, but it’s also missing a GMT function like on it’s younger brother, the Explorer II. It tells the time, that’s it.

So why do we take our Explorers exploring? Perhaps simply because we fell for the name.

What’s in a name?

Well not really that much, as it turns out. I won’t go into the details because there is already a fantastic and well researched article by Outdoor Journal chronicling Rolex’s 70 years of brilliant marketing deception, but suffice to say, the Rolex Explorer was not the first watch worn to the summit of Everest. Not just because the Explorer wasn’t invented yet, but because it’s doubtful that either Norgay or Hillary wore a Rolex that day at all.

Nevertheless, Rolex named their Himalayan adventurer-honoring watch “Explorer” and it has been associated with rugged outdoor manly man adventure ever since. Hence, why I took it halfway up a mountain before giving up and heading back down to the nearby cafe for some pastries.

The perfect me watch

If you’ve read my articles before, you know that I prefer smaller watches. I’m even happy wearing 34mm Oyster cases by Rolex and Tudor. But in my experience, for my 6.5″ wrist, the “36mm” Oyster case is probably the best fit out there. At 35.4mm in diameter and with a lug to lug of only 43mm, the 124270 sounds diminutive. Some probably see these dimensions as unworthy of the “manly” heritage of the Explorer line, and would opt for the 39mm 214270, but I’m an Explorer purist and I was happy to see Rolex return to the original size of the watch when they released this in 2021. If the Himalayan mountaineers of the 50’s sported 34mm watches when they summited the highest peaks in the world, then I can’t see how a 36mm watch is too “feminine.”

For me, the size and design of the 124270 are almost perfect. I wore this to weddings, the mountains, my studio, the pool, dinner, I wore it everywhere doing everything. I’m sure I’ve said before that I hate the term, but GADA really applies here. This is an ideal go anywhere, do anything watch and I think that if I had to pick one watch for the rest of my life it would be an Explorer I. That being said, I’m not sure it would be the 124.

Well, almost perfect…

Yes, it is more practical as this is a modern watch with a state of the art movement, solid link bracelet, and milled clasp with Easylink adjustment. But there is something that the 124 is missing that its predecessor, the 114270 is chock full of (OFFENSIVE OPINION ALERT) : charm and proportional perfection. The dimensions of this modern Explorer are altered subtly but noticeably to the trained eye of a freak who cares this much about watches (i.e., me.) In fact, at a glance, the 124 looks a lot more like that hideous 39mm Explorer I that I threw veiled shade at in the previous paragraph. Due to the short lug to lug and the quick taper of the bracelet, the watch head looks more bulbous and round. The vintage 114 by contrast has those sharp long “bat ear” lugs that give the piece a more elongated appearance. The bolder text on the 124 also fills up more space on the dial adding to it’s modern physique. While this is practical and more legible, I prefer the more restrained look of the older model.

Why go modern?

As mentioned, there are some features unique to the 124270 that make it a more practical choice for a daily forever watch. Most important is the bracelet. This watch sports a fully solid link (including end links) Oyster bracelet with a milled stainless steel clasp. The bracelet tapers significantly from a narrower 19mm all the way down to 14mm near the clasp. Such a steep taper may give the watch a somewhat daintier appearance and serve to make the whole package even smaller on wrist, but don’t be fooled by these elegant curves. The bracelet feels tough and dependable, far superior to the older Oyster bracelets that I’ve encountered. But unlike on the much larger and more cumbersome Submariner, this bracelet gives the watch just enough weight to feel substantial, but not so much so as to feel like I’m at the gym on left body day.

The movement inside this is also an absolute beast. The 3230 is actually the same exact movement in the Submariner 124060, and as with that watch it keeps the Explorer right on time. This has taken the cake as the most accurate non-quartz watch I’ve ever owned, coming in at less than +.5s/day. I wasn’t afraid to bang this thing around climbing up the mountains or flailing my arms around on the wedding reception floor. While I don’t yet have personal experience with the neo-vintage Explorers, I’m always more cautious with my older watches and would be reluctant to treat it as non-chalantly as I treated this one.

And finally, there is almost no comparison between vintage and modern when it comes to lume. The 114270 has the significant defect, in my view, of having no lume on the numerals. As soon as the sun goes down and you look down at your wrist, the watch ceases to be an Explorer as the iconic 3,6, and 9 disappear into the deep black of the dial just as your shadow is swallowed by the deep black night (he said pathetically trying to sound like Cormac McCarthy because he’s reading All the Pretty Horses). While this may not be a big issue practically speaking, it simply bothers me visually. The dial looks incomplete in low lighting when the indices light up green and the numerals stay in shadow. The 124 on the other hand, as well as the previous 39mm monstrosity, has all hour indicators lit up brightly in that beautiful blue proprietary Chromalight. Praise be.

In Conclusion

My high school AP English teacher told us to never end an essay with the trite phrase, in conclusion, yet it’s so easy when you can’t think of a final heading. So, in conclusion, the Rolex 124270 is one of my favorite watches I’ve ever owned. While the design appeal initially avoided me in my early days of watch addiction, I’ve had the iconic design hammered into my head by the internet for so many years that I’ve come to crave it. The simplicity and legibility of the dial, the sexy light and mind bending curves of the domed case, the dependability and timeless design of the Oyster bracelet…it’s the full package.

If you’re in the market for a GADA keeper in the collection, even a one watch collection, and you have around $8k burning a hole in your pocket, look no further than the 124270. It’s probably as close to watch perfection as you can get in my potentially controversial opinion.

-G