By-Tor's tribute to replica Rolex Explorer II's

[By-Tor]

I'm a huge Explorer II fan. So big that I absolutely had to get both versions, black and white. Actually I already owned a black ExpII quite a while back. You can read the review HERE.

 

However, that version had many problems, the biggest one being the cyclops/datewheel position. They were placed way too right on the crystal/dial. The SELs were less than stellar (didn't fit very well), and the hour markers were positioned too close to the minute ticks. I traded that one, and I had to wait for over a year to find the correct black version. Beware of the wrong version... many dealers carry it. Pay attention to the hour markers at '6 and '12 (too close to the minute ticks). Those are the easiest "tells" of the inferior CN version.

 

Actually the correct WHS version was available all the time from bklm1234 but it had an ugly, thick 24h hand which was a major turnoff for me. But miracles happen, sometimes the factories actually make improvements, even without screwing up anything! Now Eurotimez is able to get this best version (with thin 24h hand), and BK has access to this as well. It was time to make another purchase!

 

My new black one is visually identical base with my white franken-Explorer II. It has the correct datewheel/cyclops position and as I said, now even the WHS version uses a thin, excellent 24h hand. Other improvements are almost perfect date magnification (small) and perfect bezel numerals. They were either too thick - or too close to the bezel edge (on the older versions).

 

The only small complaint are the SEL endpieces, which are a bit too "rounded" in typical "Noobfactory" fashion. Also, the etched crown is the same as on the Noobmariner. Not disturbingly oversized, but still too visible. Other than that, the black version is extremely accurate "out of the box". Besides replacing the thick and ugly default crown (and tube) with genuine parts, there's absolutely no need to do any modifications. The black replica dial is excellent and I didn't even touch the crown guards. They're virtually identical with my gen 16710, which is technically the same watch as 16570.

I've mentioned all the good points of this version in my previous ExpII writeups and the issue about those two different ETA GMT movements has been beaten to death, so I don't want to go there any more. All I can say, I've owned countless of ETA WHS versions and never had one single problem with them.

 

And as I've said many times, there are many stupid myths about genuine Rolexes floating around (even in this forum) that simply aren't true. Like "heavier bracelet" and "it's easy call out the rep from the steel color", etc. Another myth is that "all replica Rolexes have wrong crown position". Nice myth, but it has nothing to do with reality. The CHS Explorer II has 100% perfect crown position, and the crown position on the WHS version is 98% exact.

 

Does the genuine dial fit?

 

To make things more complicated, there are two different "batches" of even this best version. Visually, they're indistinguishable from eachother, but unfortunately none of these newer versions will accept genuine dials. For some reason the factory has changed the dial diameter at some point.

This is what Dluddy said (after experiencing with gen dial w/ Noobfactory Explorer II):

"The issue I had with my genuine dial and new "Noob" Explorer II' dials is as follows:

Gen dial is 27.5MM
Current Rep Dials are either 28MM or 29MM and the gen dial does not work.

I had to find an older 2006 Trusty model through resale as this one works fine since the dial is 27MM."

My franken is 3 years old, so apparently it's the older Trusty version. My personal advice (if you want to avoid stress): Forget the white one, and forget about the mods. Just exchange the fat crown and enjoy! What there's not to like on the black version?

If it's so good, why this replica never became a big seller?

 

I simply don't know. It's one of the mysteries in life. One reason might be that the "Noob" ExpII was never "hyped" like some "megasellers", although it's better than GMTIIc (which has a bad rehaut engraving) and light years more accurate than the "Super" Sea Dweller, which looks fundamentally wrong. Another reason might be that people simply don't like the black version.

Personally, I love both versions (almost) equally. In my opinion, the black version has been the king of otb Rolex replicas for many years, but I predict the new WM9 v2 Submariner and possibly the WM9 Yacht-Master will inherit the crown (or at least offer a good challenge) very soon.

Sorry folks, I couldn't think of anything new to write about this replica model, which has always been one of my favorites, and definitely the most underrated Rolex replica ever... a real "sleeper". It's no surprise so many HC Rolex guys (like BK and dluddy) own this rep, and have used the base watch in their franken projects.

 

In short: I'm lovin' them both... and I finally have them both!

Click HERE for the wallpaper sized version.

 

[hank7502]

Very nice. Thanks for sharing.

[freddy333]

Excellent read (as usual), By-Tor.

At some point, I will definitely get the white dialed version, preferably with chs (I know it is difficult to spot, but since I can I have to assume others can too). In addition to replacing the crown/tube with gens, I would also swap the lens out for either a gen or Clarks. That visible etching is another 1 of those a-bit-too-obvious blemishes that spoil an otherwise wonderful out-of-the-box rep for me. Finally, is it me or is the GMT hand installed at an upward angle in this pic (if so, I suspect it was done to provide the hand with sufficient clearance to pass over the hour index markers without coming into contact with them)

[By-Tor]

Finally, is it me or is the GMT hand installed at an upward angle in this pic (if so, I suspect it was done to provide the hand with sufficient clearance to pass over the hour index markers without coming into contact with them)

Good observation. I checked it in direct lighting and at least I can't see that with naked eye... but could be. It doesn't show that way in other pics though. Could be also my Photoshop noise filter which sometimes smoothens the shadow edges. All I know it works.

The WHS/CHS debate is endless. I prefer a working and reliable movement. If I could, I'd change the CHS to WHS on my white Explorer II as well. Doesn't mean a lot to me.

[Chino]

congrats on your new adquisition, By-tor. And the write up as top notch as you have us already used to. Just excellent, and fun!

[tmg]

Superb write-up as always BT!

[HauteHippie]

Good deal, BT !

[Seadweller4000]

Even though I have to be in a test in 1 hour, I took the time to read this in full. I think that means something!

Thank you very much for sharing!

[Stephane]

Thanks for sharing By-Tor.

I'm very happy you have a black one now finaly.

I intend to buy one myself.

The info about the gen dial not fitting is a pity though.

I love gen dials

Congrats to you.

Cheers

Stephane

[By-Tor]

Thank you all. Appreciated. This was just a quick writeup, compacted to as few words as possible.

@Stephane: I just stared my both ExpII's and I swear, I can't see any difference between them. Except for the bezel numbers and crystal coronet etching (my chs version doesn't have one).

I'd verify the dial size from Eurotimez or bklm1234. Maybe this actually IS the "older" version.

[docblackrock]

BT, congrats and sorry to be a pedant but you don't have BOTH Exp IIs, you merely have 2 out of 3 (ignoring the cream dial 16550)

That third variant is the only one that speaks to me. Sadly it is a [censored] as a rep project, eye-wateringly expensive as a franken, and obscenely-priced as a gen.

*sigh*

[FxrAndy]

Nice one again BT, i assume you have a nice little collection again now?

[By-Tor]

@Doc: I don't really know the history of that rare version. Did they ever produce the "cream dial" version in the factory, or was it some kind of defect in production that caused the white dials turn yellow?

@Fxrandy: I'm at 9 watches right now and at 10 when my WM9 v2 Sub arrives.

Wrist shot added to the review. Enjoy!

[Stephane]

@Stephane: I just stared my both ExpII's and I swear, I can't see any difference between them. Except for the bezel numbers and crystal coronet etching (my chs version doesn't have one).

I'd verify the dial size from Eurotimez or bklm1234. Maybe this actually IS the "older" version.

I believe you By-Tor.

I'll check it out for sure, thanks.

[kitersoze]

wonderful write-up. thanks for sharing your new acquisitions...

[dluddy]

Nice BT

Guess I better grab one before they disappear

[Corgi]

By-Tor: you are probably my favorite photographer. All of the pictures you take, the watches look so perfectly clear - like I'm really there with you!

Congratulations on another mouth watering series of photographs!!

[docblackrock]

@Doc: I don't really know the history of that rare version. Did they ever produce the "cream dial" version in the factory, or was it some kind of defect in production that caused the white dials turn yellow?

Well firstly the 3rd Exp II I was actually talking about was the 1655

But to answer your question, yes you're right, the so-called 'cream dial' 16550 does not officially exist - it is artifactual, as the dial colour was supposed to be white, but the paint they used degraded during the assembly process, and the dial hit the shops with a cream or off-white colour. Mid 80s I believe. Didn't sell well (like most Explorers ). Naturally, obsessive collectors have bumped its price up massively in today's market, almost to the level of the 1655 (not quite though).

Silix did a rep of it a while back, not great though I recall. Actually, just checked - Jay still carries it...

[By-Tor]

By-Tor: you are probably my favorite photographer. All of the pictures you take, the watches look so perfectly clear - like I'm really there with you!

Congratulations on another mouth watering series of photographs!!

Thank you Sir.

@doc: That Silix version ain't bad at all... for a cheapie.

[Slartibartfast]

Great review, as always BT. I have been an Explorer fan for some time now. Maybe will take the plunge some day soon. You certainly make them look tempting, and give invaluable advice on choice!

[freddy333]

@doc: That Silix version ain't bad at all... for a cheapie.

Does this mean that we will be seeing a 3-way shoot-out of EXIIs soon?

[By-Tor]

Does this mean that we will be seeing a 3-way shoot-out of EXIIs soon?

Definitely not. It's a nice cheapie, but it's still just... well... a cheapie.

[kbh]

I definitely want one that will accept a gen dial, if anyone can point me in the right direction.

[TeeJay]

I'm not a big Rolex fan, but that was an awesome read Thanks for taking the time to put it together

[By-Tor]

I definitely want one that will accept a gen dial, if anyone can point me in the right direction.

I listed the dial measurements in the article. And like I said, there are two versions of this rep, indistinguishable from eachother (visually). The only way to make sure the gen dial fits is to ask the exact measurements from the supplier.

Happy hunting!