WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

1 - 20 of 39 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,837 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
A few days back I sold my V series polar 16570 to free up some cash for a LNIB pre-owned 216570 that I had already bought. I bought it primarily for the better movement and the upgraded bracelet. However, after wearing the 216570 for couple of days, I personally feel that 16570 had better proportions, the GMT hand was less intrusive and overall aesthetics was way better than the 216570. I am sure there will be folks with conflicting opinions about the 216570 being better than the 16570 but honestly I am having a strong feeling that I may have made a mistake "upgrading" to 216570. The 216570 although is 42mm but it wears very close 43mm or 44mm. It appears considerably bigger than my 42mm Omega LM PO.

I would like to hear your opinions about my thought process and what would you have done if you were in my place.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
466 Posts
I definitely agree. I had the 216570 and now have the 16570. The GMT hand is definitely more elegant and subtle. And it wears at a more timeless case size. However I enjoy the bracelet quality of the 216570 much more. And I also have big wrists so it looked pretty good. The 216570 is still a fantastic watch and I didn't hate it. In fact I love it and would buy one again. I just prefer the 16570


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,059 Posts
I suspect you are having buyers/ sellers remorse and I suspect that will diminish.

However I also agree with your opinion of both watches.
I too prefer the newer bracelet and maxi look of the 216570 but on my wrist it felt/ looked too large for my taste.
I prefer the smaller size of the 16570 and I agree its a little more understated.

If I was given the choice I would own the 216570 and wear it gently while I acclimated to its size and different look.
Its a fine watch
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,846 Posts
The 16570 Explorer II doesn't really have an identity of its own. It's just a fixed-bezel version of the more-desirable 16710 GMT II.

The 216570, though certainly large, has a distinct design. With almost every single component unique to the reference, it's its own watch now — not just a c̶r̶i̶p̶p̶l̶e̶d̶ slightly-modified GMT II. I actually prefer the current Explorer II to the current GMT II; it just has more character.

Unfortunately, its size makes it less versatile, and it's frankly too big for most wrists. So if you prefer the slimmer 40 mm case of the previous generation, which is lovely, then I'd say skip the E2 and get the GMT II instead.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,862 Posts
I can't speak on whether or not you will bond with the 216570 and forget the 16570 in time... I hope you do, because it would suck to have to flip back, ha ha.

But I will say again, as I have maintained forever: there is no such thing as a functionally "better" automatic movement these days, and there hasn't been such a thing for decades, despite what modern watch companies (I'm looking at you especially, Omega) keep claiming.

Functionally, automatic movements peaked a long time ago, and no amount of silicone springs, co-axial escapements, or new and improved shock suspension has changed that. A generations old Rolex Explorer II movement can be regulated to keep time every bit as well as the latest movement, and there's no evidence to support claims that the newer movements are any more durable or resist shocks any better. In fact, rational thought would put the burden of proof on the newer movements, not the old. After all, they haven't proved themselves in the field for years, as the older ones have.

I don't even accept that some of the newer movements that up the power reserve from 40-48 into the 60s are realistically any better. If your watch hasn't moved in the 48 hours, it's because you're not wearing it. Why do I care how long a movement can run when it's forgotten in a drawer somewhere?

When somebody comes out with an automatic movement that keeps quartz time, let me know. That will be a quantifiable, realistic improvement. Everything else is just innovation for the sake of innovation. Nothing wrong with that... But it's not improvement.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
888 Posts
I will also agree with the 16750 vs 216750 comparison. I wore a sub for years, them a Seamaster for years, when I wanted that next new watch I tried a bunch on at the local AD, and really wanted an Explorer II. I couldn't get excited that big orange hand and the size. Thought it was well made and looked pretty good, but I wasn't sure how the size and hand color worked when wearing it with a suit. So instead of getting the new 216750, got a used 16750 and a 16220. maybe because I'm getting old, but I really like the older smaller Rolexes.

image.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
308 Posts
I feel your pain. As many watches as I keep collecting, my trusty Exp II 16570 is the one I'm most attached to. It's well balanced and has a bombproof feel about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ccm123

·
Registered
Joined
·
558 Posts
I'm on the cusp of getting the 16570! I've recently tried on both, and I find the proportions of the older 40mm model just work far better! That's just my opinion though, they're both obviously still similar in essence
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
986 Posts
The polar 16570 is, quite simply, the most versatile Rolex of all time. It is comfortable with both suit and with sandals, in the board room or in board shorts. I will never part with mine. The 216570 is a one-track pony. It's a weekend/sport watch.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,166 Posts
The 16570 Explorer II doesn't really have an identity of its own. It's just a fixed-bezel version of the more-desirable 16710 GMT II.
I think the Polar variant certainly has an identity--white dial with brushed sports bezel and GMT/date complications. Pretty unique in the Rolex range. Mine was my first Rolex and I love it. The 167x0 is currently riding a wave collectability with prices rising. I think the 16570 will follow suit in several years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
483 Posts
Hi all, I've got my eyes well and truely set on picking up my grail of a 16570 (Polar) in the mid-future and I was wondering if I could pick the hive mind.

This model was in manufacture for some years and I was wondering if there were any particular years that I should be wary of // looking for in particular.

Instinctively I would lean towards newer releases as less time for wear and tear, or is that just an oversimplification?

Note (in case it's relevant) whilst resale is nice I'm not looking for an investment piece that will be worn.

Thanks for any input.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,487 Posts
The 16570 does not look nice in a suit imo, it's just way too sporty and toolish, just about any other Rolex sports model is more versatile.


The polar 16570 is, quite simply, the most versatile Rolex of all time. It is comfortable with both suit and with sandals, in the board room or in board shorts. I will never part with mine. The 216570 is a one-track pony. It's a weekend/sport watch.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
307 Posts
I will also agree with the 16750 vs 216750 comparison. I wore a sub for years, them a Seamaster for years, when I wanted that next new watch I tried a bunch on at the local AD, and really wanted an Explorer II. I couldn't get excited that big orange hand and the size. Thought it was well made and looked pretty good, but I wasn't sure how the size and hand color worked when wearing it with a suit. So instead of getting the new 216750, got a used 16750 and a 16220. maybe because I'm getting old, but I really like the older smaller Rolexes.

[iurl="http://forums.watchuseek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9241090&d=1471704992"]
[/iurl]
I'm not old, or I don't think of myself as "old" (but what is old), I'm an 80's kid, and I like the smaller Rolex cases much better than the larger and larger looking maxi cases. My AD always says that today's model will be future vintage, but I don't like the looks that well as the models from 10-20 years ago. I guess I want the classic looks. But I've never tried on an Explorer 216570, and it has a "funky" 70s vibe to it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
243 Posts
I don't share your feeling as I am totally happy with my black 216570. It will grows on you, trust me. It is a good blend of sportiness, toughness, functionality and a bit flashy to make it don't look boring. It agonized me only when I have to choose between black or white. I like the White gold hands more than painted hands. So I choos black in the end. I have this only sport Rolex before I went for dressy Rolex. A Cellini dual time. They compliment each other.
 

Attachments

1 - 20 of 39 Posts
Top