A Week on the Wrist with the Rolex Explorer – basic, boring, brilliant

I finally got the call: after four months of waiting, an authorised dealer phoned to tell me there’s a Rolex Explorer 1 ready to pick up… once I parted with a fistful of cash.

Now I wasn’t expecting to get my first Rolex quite so quickly – I’d planned to wait until I got closer to 40 (I’m 38 at the time of writing) to toast a landmark birthday. However, Rolexes have become slightly easier to get, with the dreaded waitlist not as long as it used to be, though there are exceptions with super-desirable models like the Daytona.

Yet I’d opted for the simple Explorer, which is basically an entry-level watch from Rolex’s ‘Professional’ range. Often described as a boring watch, with its three-handed, no-date black dial, I’d call it a classic watch that’ll look just as good 50 years from now as it does today.

While I’d not say no to a Rolex Submariner, I opted for the Explorer 1 due to a combination of its history – it was based on the Rolex Oyster Perpetual watches Sir Edmund Hillary and Tenzing Norgay apparently wore when ascending Mount Everest in 1953 – and its simple design that doesn't scream ‘Rolex’ and can be worn just as comfortably in the office as it can hiking across hills.

The latest Explorer 1 range comprises a mere four models: the 36mm and 40mm versions in steel, and the same sizes but in two-tone steel and gold. These all share the same movement and only come with a black dial. I tried on both sizes, and while the 40mm model looks good, the smaller 36mm watch is more historically correct to the watches Hillary and Norgay wore and I feel is more suitable for wearing in formal settings. I also tried on the 36mm two-tone Explorer, as during my first visit to the dealer it was the only model available; it looks good but gold on purpose-driven sports watches doesn't work for me.

The steel Explorer 1 is considered one of the best ‘go anywhere, do anything’ watches, in that it's robust enough to swim with and survive the elements, yet can also be dressed up. Now I already have a ‘GADA’ watch in the form of the OMEGA Seamaster Aqua Terra, but I wanted something a little smaller with lumed Arabic numerals and indexes, and an alternative to my beloved Aqua Terra.

But let’s talk specs before I dig into my journey so far with the Rolex Explorer reference 124270.

Rolex Explorer: The specs

Despite its 36mm designation, I measured the dial and bezel of my Explorer to be closer to 35.5mm, with Rolex likely rounding up. Lug-to-lug, the Explorer comes in at 43mm, has a lug width of 19mm, and a thickness of 11.5mm, making it a fairly compact watch.

The case uses Rolex’s proprietary Oystersteel, with polished bezels and sides that contrast the brushed finish of the lugs, giving the Explorer some wrist presence without being too showy. Leaning into the explorer-centric rugged ethos, there’s a lightly-domed sapphire crystal with an anti-reflective coating on the inside that does a reasonable job of absorbing reflections in direct light, and a screw-down crown to give the watch 100 metres of water-resistance. Completing the case is a solid case back that emphasises the tool-watch nature of every Rolex watch.

While I think this is fitting for the Explorer it does mean the manufacturer calibre 3230 is hidden from sight, which is a pity as it’s an impressive bit of kit. It’s the automatic movement you’ll find in a handful of modern Rolexes, offering a chronometer-certified accuracy of -2/+2 seconds a day, and a very healthy 70 hours of power reserve when fully wound. It might not have the METAS certification of my co-axial escapement-equipped Aqua Terra with its deviation of 0/+5 seconds a day, but the 3230 is still fabulously robust and I’ve not seen it anything less than pinpoint accurate.

The movement powers the ‘Mercedes-style’ hands, which feature an hour hand with a three-pointed star motif that’s a lot like the iconic Mercedes-Benz emblem, a broadsword-esque minute hand that precisely pinpoints the flat white minute indices on the chapter ring, and a rather simple lollipop-style seconds hand.

These hands smoothly make their way around a glossy black lacquer dial made up of 3, 6, 9 Arabic numerals, an inverted triangle at 12 o’clock, and rectangular indices marking the rest of the hours. All the indexes, numerals and hands feature Rolex’s own Chromalight luminous paint.

This simple dial belies the Explorer’s field-watch DNA, presenting white lumed-filled indices on a black background for easy legibility. With no date or further complications, and only minimal text detailing the Rolex logo, brand, model and the watch’s “Superlative Chronomenter” chops, there’s little to clutter the dial.

If you were looking for straps from Rolex, you’re out of luck as the only option here is a brushed steel Oyster bracelet. It’s a classic Rolex bracelet, only on the 36mm Explorer it has a fairly dramatic taper, going from 19mm from the case to 14mm at the clasp; to some it could feel a tad dainty, but I enjoy the slimness. I also love the Oysterlock clasp, a feature of Rolex’s professional models, which secures the folding clasp with a locking mechanism that’s very satisfying to use thanks to a solid click. There's also a simple micro-adjustment system to give a bit of on-the-fly flexibility for warm days when one’s wrist expands.

On the Oyster bracelet, I feel the 36mm Explorer wears a little larger than its size would suggest. On my 7-inch wrists – the average size for male wrists – there’s an argument that it could look a tad small, especially given the slim lugs of the latest Explorers, with the 40mm model potentially being a better fit. Yet that’s down to taste, with the trend for big and bold watches slowly moving to more classically smaller case sizes – as much as I adore my 42mm OMEGA Speedmaster, I’m all for smaller and subtler watches, especially those with no complications.

So for a simple watch there’s a fair bit going on with the Explorer 1. And what makes it a joy to wear is that combination of specs and design.

What’s the Rolex Explorer like to wear?

With the Explorer, Rolex has taken a simple three-hand design and executed it so well, I’d argue it’s the ‘platonic ideal’ of a sports watch.

While other Rolex models have got more bling-like, the steel Explorer 1 remains firmly in the camp of function giving it form. Since its launch in 1953, the Explorer hasn't really changed all that much. The case, movement and dial have evolved and the bracelet is a lot more capable, but DNA of the original Explorer is easily present in the latest 124270 model.

There’s zero fat or faff to the Explorer, with every bit of the watch feeling so purposeful in the pursuit of telling the time regardless of the tough environment one might be in; there’s nothing that feels extraneous and there just to look good. It makes my Seamaster Aqua Terra with its teak dial, lyre lugs and abundance of finishing, feel fussy in comparison – though I love Omega’s tendency to over-engineer its watches, which makes the Aqua Terra appeal to me.

The Explorer’s somewhat stark design might not appeal to everyone, especially when the Rolex name can be associated with the idea of fancy ‘look at me’ watches.

At 36mm, my Explorer feels stealthy, slipping under cuffs and only likely to be noticed by people who know watches; I’ve worn it on several social occasions and it's flown under the radar, while dramatically cheaper watches like my Swatch 2Q have sucked in attention. I love this, as I’m not after a watch that seeks attention – the appeal of a Rolex to me being a robust tool watch with a dose of luxury.

Equally, I still think the Explorer has some wrist presence if you go looking for it. The shiny polished bezels capture the light, and to my mind at least, makes the dial pop that bit more. I love the Arabic numerals, which are bolder and less curvaceous here than on older Explorers and makes the compact dial feel more punchy. Speaking of which, I think the dial is just perfect in the 36mm case, as unlike the 40mm Explorer I reckon it's beautifully balanced, while the larger watch has a tad too much negative space. Of course, that’s highly subjective and people who prefer larger watches will be drawn to the 40mm Explorer.

The glossy black lacquer on the dial is wonderfully executed. It doesn't play with the light as much as the sunburst blue dial of my Aqua Terra, but it suits the Explorer and gives it some depth without being distracting.

Another thing Rolex executes brilliantly is the case sides, which are gently curved rather than flat as is the case with a lot of sport watches. Not only do these look great, they give the appearance of a watch that’s got a lower profile on the wrist.

As for actually wearing the Explorer, well it’s simply lovely. I had originally planned to wear it on a sailcloth strap, as I’m not normally a bracelet fan. But as a lot of Rolex fans will tell you, the Oyster bracelet is excellent; they’re not wrong.

The Oyster bracelet has the appearance of being rugged yet refined at the same time, reminding me a little of interlinking plates of armour. Yet it’s also one of the most comfortable bracelets I’ve ever tried, confirming neatly to my wrist once sized correctly, with the brushed finish feeling great.

While I’ll find myself staring at my Aqua Terra and its bounty of design flairs, the Explorer is a more tactile affair – I find myself semi-subconsciously running my fingers across the bracelet as I stare elsewhere. The only bracelets I’ve tried that arguably beat the Oyster, come courtesy of the Vacheron Constantin Overseas and the recently released 222, but those start at some three times the price of the Explorer.

I’ve yet to take the bracelet off and try on other straps, but a quick search on Instagram and it’s clear the Explorer 1 looks great on a variety of straps, be it dressed up with a leather strap or made super-sporty with a rubber strap; such is the versatility of its unfussy design.

All that being said, as much as I can praise Rolex in the execution of the Explorer, I still needed to ‘bond’ with the watch to truly love it. This might sound ridiculous given it’s an inanimate object, but that’s the weird world of watch collecting and enthusiasm.

That moment came when I was taking the photos you can see in this very article. It was a grey day in London, with the late afternoon light transitioning into evening, and I was deep in an East London park complete with ponds, woods and winding paths. As the light started to go, the Explorer came into its own with the dial remaining easily legible as the Chromalight lume started to shine. And I loved how the brushed steel on the bracelet and the case took on a muted slate-grey look.

Now I won't claim that I was exploring, but I really got a taste of how rugged the Explorer can feel when out on a hike. While I usually opt for a field watch like my Seiko 5 SNK809 or Chistopher Ward C65 Dune – both excellent examples of such outdoor watches at different price points – the Rolex felt equally at home as I trudged across mud and leaf-strewn paths. It made me think that if I was going mountaineering, the Explorer’s combination of practical design, a faultless movement and a comfortable yet rugged bracelet, would make it my watch of choice with no fear it would let me down.

In short, something just clicked with me and the Explorer out in the dusk, and I found myself compulsively pulling back my cuffs to appreciate the watch as it handled the dwindling light; it was then that I realised that I love this little-ish watch for what it is, not simply because it's a Rolex.

Is the Rolex Explorer worth the money?

So now we get to the price: I paid £6,400 for a brand-new 2025 Rolex Explorer 1. That’s a lot of money for most things that aren’t a car or a deposit on a house. But buying a Rolex at retail is never a bad idea – if you can afford it – as while they are becoming more readily available there’s no guarantee of being able to walk into a dealer and buy the Rolex you want.

A quick look at pre-owned watch-selling sites and my Explorer 124270 can be seen priced at £7,000. Of course, that money is only realised if one sells a watch. Given time and wear, I suspect the resale value of my Explorer will drop to around what I paid for it, which is fine as I don’t really consider watches to be investments.

In a world where smartphones can tell perfect time, it sounds mad to say the Rolex Explorer is good value. But I think for the specs on offer, the quality of the finishing, the Oyster bracelet, and the watch’s heritage, the Explorer is probably the best-value Rolex around.

Ultimately, you can get much of the same experience for around a grand less if you go for a Rolex Oyster Perpetual, it just means no Mercedes hands, a different dial – I’m not sure I like the Rolex crown motif at 12 o’clock – and no professional clasp.

Omega’s Seamaster Aqua Terra, while nipping at the heels of the Explorer at retail, can be picked up for around £1,000 less with a bit of negotiation with an authorised dealer, and offers a stellar movement and more first-party step options. And the aforementioned C65 Dune, along with the likes of the C63 Sealander from Christopher Ward, offer robust field and GADA watches respectively for on or under £1,000.

But I’d say none of these watches quite offer what the Explorer does when you take into account its specs, design and history.

I adore my Aqua Terra and would go so far as to say it’s my favourite watch, However, outside of its dressier occasions, it feels more of a watch for sipping cool drinks on the beach or at a nice bar in the sun, and ideally worn on a nice yacht (an experience I've yet to have) as it cuts through clear blue seas. Whereas the Explorer feels like it should be worn at a cosy pub after a demanding mountain climb. Both these watches are fantastic, but in my eyes serve slightly different purposes, and that’s why I can justify both in my collection.

I’ve written before that there’s no perfect watch, and I stand by that. An exhibition caseback, an innovative quick release bracelet mechanism and access to Rolex-made straps – I’d love to see an Oysterflex strap option – would pretty much perfect the Explorer 1.

But until then, I’m more than happy that the Rolex Explorer is as close to perfection as a three-hand sports watch can get; it’s simply brilliant and might just be the best watch in the world.