Search the Community

Hello everyone, it's Steve and I'm back About Rolex model comparison, we have done a lot of issues, during the period I also occasionally find time to do some other brands of comparison, but Steve is a very stubborn person, if not all the Rolex series to do a comparison, I will feel imperfect, ha ha, although this task is very difficult, but I will grasp the footsteps of continuous efforts, regardless of the models made by the popular models or the low attention. I think as long as there are friends interested in this, it can provide some reference for their choice, that is enough! So this time we bring you a comparison of the Explorer I generation. Let's cut the crap and get to the bottom of it. Front Dial View Natual Light View Under Light View The color of the dial is not much to say, it is still Steve's favorite black dial, black is good, mysterious and cool but also thin, the main thing is no color difference, ha ha. in addition, The factory claims that the GM and BP are actually from the same factory, except that the GM is made of 904 steel and the VR3230 movement, while the BP is made of 316 steel and the A3230 movement, otherwise they are the same. In fact, this is not the case, because during the comparison, I found that only some of the parts are common, but some of the details are different, probably due to the assembly, so let's compare GM and BP as two factory products. Bezel Side View From the top view alone, all the factory bezels are fine, but the differences can be seen from the side view, the side height of BP is obviously narrow, GM, EW and Gen remain the same, the slight flaw is that the gap between the bezel and the case is a bit large, Gen is almost no gap at all. Crystal Side View All factory crystals have the same edge chamfering as Gen, there is no significant difference between them, mainly in the thickness of the mirror, from the picture you can see that the BP crystal is too thick, resulting in its raised too high, and after a careful comparison of the physical found that EW is closest to Gen, GM is slightly thicker, but the impact is not significant. Markers Side View Regarding the stick, GM and BP should use the same parts, because no difference can be found in shape or details. The triangle and bar stick of GM（BP）are better, with edge chamfering , while EW is not, and the sharp corners are too sharp. But in the edge of the Arabic numerals, EW does a better job. In addition, you can look at the digital stick 3 (marked in the figure), the corner of the Gen edge is curved, not sharp. In this small detail, EW noticed and synchronized it, while GM and BP ignored it. Luminous Filled View GM is still in its usual style, the surface of the stick is smooth, as is the BP, while the EW is well filled and very grainy. The filling on the hands is not superior or inferior, we can focus on the end of the minute hand, where EW is still very commendable, because its end is sharp-angled shape, the same as the Gen, while GM and BP are flat (commonly known as scissor needles) Oil Font View Overall, the level of Oil font in the three factories is not very different, and there are no obvious mistakes, there is not much to say, anyway, in my opinion, under the naked eye are the same. Middle Axis View The Middle Axis of GM and BP is raised higher, there is almost no hollow part, so EW is better in comparison. As for the factories have burn marks on Middle Axis , we don't have to care too much Rehaut Side View The clarity of EW's Rehaut is a little better, and its backing is more densely engraved. There is not much difference between GM and BP. Their serial numbers begin with GC6, both should be the same Rehaut parts. Crown side view There is no problem with the shape of the crown, and the tips of the teeth are rounded and smooth, but the actual touch will be a little sharp, including the Gen is also the same. Case side view There is no significant difference in the shape of the case, but after careful comparison I found that all the factory‘s lugs are slightly on the fat side, but this difference is very subtle and within acceptable limits. Caseback view There is nothing to say about the Caseback, if I have to pick out some flaws, it is factorys edge of the teeth are a little sharp, EW is relatively better, but the actual touch does not feel different. In our Chinese way, that is "no matter the difference, the problem is not big." Endlink side view Regarding the curvature of the Endlink, we have done so many issues of Rolex model comparison, in fact, we also found that this has a certain relationship with the assembly, Gen will be different from model to model, even the same model will be different. So we don't need to be too concerned about that, if we look at it according to what we think is the standard, GM is a little better, BP and EW are a little too flat. Strap Details View There is nothing more to say about the strap, so check it out for yourselves. Laser Marker and Luminous View As you can see from the comparison pictures， the EW laser mark is still very clear, the GM and BP are slightly more blurred, and this is confirmed by looking at the real thing. The Luminous is not much of a differentiator, as long as there is no problem with the tint, I don't think the brightness is a factor of comparison. Movement view GM uses the VR3230 movement, BP uses the A3230 movement (based on the 2824 movement), and EW also uses the A3230 movement based on the 2824 movement, which is from Hangzhou. Data comparison chart Note: All watches are measured in a clamped state, and there may be errors due to the slight deviation of the position of the caliper. In addition, GEN intercepts the strap, and the factory has a steel strap protective film that has not been torn off. Well, today's post is here, thank you guys for watching. If there are any mistakes, please correct me. If there is anything else I overlooked, you can put it up, and I will try my best to complete it. Welcome to comment and exchange! I will continue to bring you more detailed comparisons between replica watches and GEN’s. And it is also for you to choose the favorite models conveniently. Illustration: Some photos deviate from the real object due to the light source. For details, please refer to the content. The size of the comparison picture is relatively large, you can download it and enlarge it for comparison. There is no perfect replica, only the one you prefer. Thanks. Steve. Website: https://www.theonewatches.io/ Telegram: https://t.me/theonewatchesnews WhatsApp: + 86 17081934955 Email: Theonewatches.ru@gmail.com

Just getting back into reps again after a break ... seeking views on whether there a good Explorer I rep out there at the minute? 39mm is a good size. I'm not really into the whole Franken business so looking for something that looks the part on arrival, and not too worried about things from a movement perspective. Appreciate any views on the subject. I have done a good search but this rep hasn't sparked much discussion lately and of course is fairly new even in a gen.

A bit over one year has passed since I entered into this fantastic scene, after receiving my first Explorer 1016 (a MBW version). Finally I managed to gather enough courage, equipment and not at last knowledge & parts, thanks to this forum and its members, to try to build (put together) my own Franken! A big thank you members (too many names to mention)! Thanks to the nice posts from lhooq, JMB and a few more members, the new project was all clear to be an Explorer 1016 build, based on the "famous JMB Datejust 16200 case", including a flatter Clark Tropic 25-22 crystal, JMB´s special bezel and a few more specialities. The mission was to get a few more steps closer to the gen by keeping the budget at a reasonable level. I personally see the vintage watch (re)building as sort of restoration of an oldtimer car, where most of the parts for it need to be recreated, because they are no longer produced. It is "almost" the same case with the building of the vintage Explorer 1016 for example. The whole process of gathering parts from all over the world, do months of research and talk to a lot of helpful members here on the forums, make the project so interesting. It is the road to the destination in combination with the destination (the Explorer 1016) that motivates. Well, after straight two months of searching and ordering parts, patience and a lot of luck, I was forced to let the project lay aside another two months, because of a hectic professional life, but that´s a different story. The past few days were so thrilling as I got the chance to return to the Explorer 1016 project and build it. It was in fact my first Franken and of course doing it was way more difficult and tricky than my initial thoughts (I had been warned before ). But I knew I can do it, because of my previous trainings with vintage Seiko restoration. The more important is to keep calm even if something does not go as planned, do a new research, rethink and it will work out well. Here I present you some pictures of the Explorer 1016: and some side by side with my other favourite Explorer 1016 version My new 1016 build (In the background is the MBW Explorer 1016) The MBW Explorer 1016. Side profiles (each version has its Pro´s and Con´s, but I love both of them!) *The MBW 1016 is on the right side. I would keep myself away from commenting all the differences between both 1016´s, but one major difference I´d like to mention is the appeal of the crystals! Both crystals (in terms of shape and profile) we see above, have been used in the gen in the course of about two decades, experts my correct me. The Datejust based 1016 has a Tropic 25-22 crystal, that is gen spec.(Clark´s). The MBW on the other side has a domed crystal that is not gen specification but is quite close to the gen domed Tropic, in terms of visual appearance (in my opinion). Nevertheless I personally prefer the Tropic 25-22 crystal as it is much flatter and makes the dial "come into shine" in a different way, it also makes the dial look wider, compared to the domed crystal. A question for the experts: Would a Tropic 25-22 crystal fit on the MBW 1016 case without modifications? * (I only know that the MBW crystal bezel is not compatible with the Tropic crystals) Bonus info on the build itself, not really a step by step, but would like to highlight some special details. Some of the parts involved in no particular order. That dial is one of the most important parts of the project itself. This version is, in my opinion, quite a good alternative, considering the current market situation for Explorer 1016 dials (rep or gen)! It is also budget friendly. The ones of you that are long enough on the forums, would recognise what origin the dial has From the start of the project I knew I had three alternatives for attaching the dial to the movement, as the dial has its dial feet placed for an 1570 movement. The first alternative would be to use dial dots (round double sided tape). Fast and really budget friendly. The second version is to glue the dial on to the movement spacer, that comes with the case. Problem is that the dial and spacer pass/fit from different sides the movement. This way locking the dial on the movement, when the dial and spacer ring are glued. And what if you screw up the keyless works (like I did a couple of times) and need to remove the dial and reassemble the Keyless?! Maybe there are some other methods of attaching the dial in a secure, service friendly way ... Third alternative, is to place the dial on the movement using dial feet (that was always my favourite one). The most important part of this method is to have proper "dial feet". The experience here on the forums and on other sites has shown that no one recommends this method, because the only alternatives are the Bergeon dial feet. They are in fact the most popular, but pricey and do not have a well sized basis/head, that can be glued on the dial. What I used and can recommend, are the so called "D109 Gents Dial Feet" ( I will not place any links as the supplier may easily be found on the internet). Some measurements and details: How I glued the dial on the dial feet? Therefore I have been looking for an ETA 2824 Main plate, luckily the member "1680" pointed me to one that was on sale for not much money. Then I took a common lighter apart and cut-fitted the mini gas outlet tube on to the ETA Main plate in order to have a cone type centre-alignment-helper for the dial. With the dial feet placed it was an easy task to centre and glue the dial with epoxy glue. Later I had to cut and file the glued dial feet, place and remove the crown stem by holding only the dial. The glue and feet stood rock solid on their place! The result: * The little epoxy that can be seen is really not a problem as it has the same height as the dial feet head. It would have been too risky to file down epoxy glue on that tiny dial edge. Hope I could bring in some new inspirations into the mighty Explorer 1016 Franken world

Dear respected experts, Need you to help me check out this Rolex Ex 1. The problem seemed to be with the dial: 1. The markings are painted on instead of the normal raised markings 2. The arabic numerics seem rounded as opposed to the more squarish ones 3. It says swiss T<25 instead of swiss made. I am however comparing this to the newer rolex Ex 1, which is the 39mm ones. But this is, of course the out of production 36mm. I don't have much to compare with, and there seem to be a few variations for this older (and dare I say, better) version. Please help! Thanks so much!