As a tough adventure watch, the Ranger is awesome. It also works as a one watch to own, but there I will make a comparison too and things change a bit. The Explorer is a great watch, only not that well adapted to adventure as one would have thought. Enjoy your Ranger!
Thank you for this video, I was on the fence between the Summiteer and baby Alpinist, SPB155. I can't bring myself to spend the money on the Tudor or Rolex at this point. I selected the Traska, and I am quite pleased with my choice.
What a great video! I love your take on the different watches and the comparisons you draw! Have to finish the video another time, but hope the personal issues get solved!
A very beautiful video and review of four lovely watches. Your experience with the watches and ability to directly compare creates very valuable information for us enthusiasts. Thank you 🙏
I'd make a few more changes. I'd use white color for the numerals, polished bezel and drilled lugs. With 36 or 37, it would be awesome and probably perfect.
Great comparisons and I really agree with the importance of each of the categories. As a fellow Explorer owner, I agree 100% about the Explorer not being the most convenient adventuring watch…in my collection, the Hamilton Khaki has taken it’s place as it is less blingy, lighter and far easier to replace if ever lost (heaven forbid!). And yes, my eyes are also getting older and legibility isn’t the best on the Explorer in all lighting conditions. Whenever I go for a hike, a run and I’m not 100% sure I’ll be in a “watch comfortable” situation, I prefer to strap on the Hamilton Khaki Field that I feature in many of my videos. Thank you for the enjoyable video, Mario.
Thanks a lot. To take the Khaki field really makes sense. It's not like you don't have to be careful, but it hits the right balance of taking care of oneself and the watch.
I think a lot of people have underestimated the newest Tudor Ranger. When it first came out I underestimated it for sure. I listened to way too many reviews that were saying a lot of negative things about it. I'd never had the chance to try one on and when I did all those negatives reviews just went away. It truly is a field watch in the best possible ways. I've owned mine now for almost 2 years and find it hard to swap out with my other watches (Omega, Tudors, etc.).
Great video. You are so right that there is no such thing as a perfect watch. Once you think you found “the one” either your taste changes or it will be short lived. I am currently on the waiting list for the 36mm Black Summiteer. It has that classic explorer design but yet still it’s own thing. I love all the watches in your comparison. Cheers!
Nice comparison. I had the black 36 Summiteer. It was so comfortable on bracelet. I sold it too but the blue one, but the blue one’s bracelet had some sharp edges. So I ended up selling the blue one despite enjoying the dial color lots
I guess the QC is not as consistent with these watches. I have two Traskas and the bracelets are good in both, but there are, for instance, more lume in the Sandstone hour hand than in the Black version.
I guess not. That said, I reached out to Traska with pics and they said they believed the bracelet was not a QC issue. Having had a number of Traska watches, I think it was QC. I’ll be checking out their updated Summiteer though😊
@@anthonyjack1859 I had this issue with one of the on the fly adjustment clasps I got for my Traskas. One of them worked flawlessly, while the other was a bit hard to close. It has solved itself after some time, but nothing changes the fact that one of them was a bit stiff at the beginning. I guess this can happen with other things. Having had a lot of bracelets from Traska and all very comfortable, it stands within possible that one of them is too sharp, but well. These things happen in the best of families.
I was waiting for this video. Very interesting comparison. I kept the Explorer and the Alpinist, too. They are all great watches and each one is something special... Greetings!
The alpinist is such a beauty, i ignored it to my peril lol but the sarb017 has shot up in price as they are getting harder to get. I would keep it forever.
Other category contenders ?: CW63 36 or 39(?)mm - adjustable clasp, good lume, natos no problem, all brushed; Hamilton Jazzmaster 34mm or 38mm& 40mm - anti magnetic but needs more lume ( i need to trest mine more), haven't used natos, all brushed (95%!), luckily (?) good fit with butterfly clasp.
Which watch would you take with you if you were going on a long trek such as the Appalachian Trail or Spain's Santiago de Compostela? One watch for months, on the go, weight is too tight to to carry extra straps and such
Well, good question. I guess it all depends. My first thought is towards the Summiteer. It is a worryless watch with a reliable movement, easy to adjust on the fly with the bracelet, and not out of place in any situation. Very light, on par with the Explorer. The Explorer is more comfortable, though. The other option would be the Ranger on a single pass strap, maybe with just another one to change every once and then, an elegant looking one, but not with the bracelet. Although you can easily adjust the bracelet, it might be just a bit too much of a weight for such long periods wearing it. It would withstand anything, but I'd try to make it as light as possible with, as mentioned, using a single pass strap.
@@TheWatchFramethe budget friendly approach has great merit. I think I’d be interested in the idea of a more iconic watch being along for the adventure of a lifetime would be cool to say that it was your “***** watch” Maybe the Ranger cause the Explorer might be too risky.
@@DFW_AV8R sure. That's a very good point, and I've been considering it since my first answer. Either the Explorer or the Ranger would surely work. The idea to attach memories to the pieces. Right now, I'm going to the mountain and the Ranger will be the one I'm carrying.
Very well made video, again. I do think we have almost the exact same taste in watches, kind of a mix between vintage and modernized field/explorer watches which easily both can be dressed up, but also possible to "explore" the mountains with. I am also a big fan of vintage dress watches, especially Omega's. Would that be something you possibly have thought of diving into?:)
Awesome video, I do agree with others that point out the disproportionate low scores for the explorer. On scratch resistance 1 should be solid 18kt gold 10 being sinn tegimented steel. Legibility was also disproportionate. The only place it deserved the low low score is the lug hole placement. While I agree with your views the actual scoring was disproportionate. The reason for this is probably proportional to how you feel scratching a watch that price and the high expectations. That leaves us with the old problem of diminishing returns above 2 or 3k priced watches. Great video!
Sure. You can add three or four points to the scratch resistance, but the fact is that it's not really scratch resistant at all. It is the opposite. And the opposite of what you would expect from this type of watch. I even managed to scratch it with my plastic calipers. Maybe the steel of my unit is even softer. I don't know :D. About legibility, I stand by it. If you have good sight, it's ok to average. But with certain light conditions and will all the shininess inside, including the dial, and the bold branding, can be really difficult. That is not the case with the other three watches. It could be a two or three. Maybe, but this is an adventure watch, and being the way it is, maybe as you say about the diminishing returns, seems like a sin to me. The strap-ability is very bad. Very, very bad, and the 19mm, something that really bothers me a lot. And all of that seems weird in an "exploring" watch, unless it's not really conceived to be us such. But I love this watch. And as a watch, is way better than I expected. Even as an adventure watch even. So good is it in general.
I would say any of the Elliot Brown automatic watches has they blow there tool watches up. But but if I needed money to get out of a country, then the Rolex, so keep the Rolex in the bag and then wear any of the Elliot Brown automatic watches:
Have you tried the solar powered gshock g5600ue-1jf? I feel like for exploration, this is the complete and perfect watch. It is aesthetically pleasing as well.
Most of my mountaineering years have been while wearing a Casio DW310 from my childhood that I still have. And it's still working. I also got a couple of Casio G5600 one with battery, the NASA approved and the one I use when I really need a beater, and a solar one that now belongs to one of my kids. The problem with these watches is that I can read them easily because of my poor eyesight. I need hour and minute hands. Other than that, these are the true best exploring watches.
So, you didn't end up selling your Explorer, or did you purchase it back! Great comparison, and great video as always. If they made the ranger in 36, I'd sell my explorer. I love the ranger, but 39 is just too big IMO - And i have a 7 In wrist. I like the smaller sizes for hiking and everyday wear.
I love the Ranger, I own one. I agree it's too big. I got a San Martin "homage" to wear daily and they nailed the proportions. Available in 38mm and 36mm.
Excellent video as always. Love your channel. We have similar tastes in watches. I have two that I would love to get your opinion on. The Wolbrook Outrider no date and the Nezumi Terrain. I have the Wolbrook amd really like it, the Nezumi is in my short list.
I'm going to try to keep the Explorer and this will be more clear with the video comparing it as a watch by itself. The Ranger is awesome, but, besides true true hard exploration, the Explorer hits the mark. Even if the Ranger was smaller, I think in some regards it's more toolish than elegant.
@@DennisBible I don't have direct experience with the Wolbrook but generaly I'm attracted to them. In this case, however, I personally don't like the hour hand and having a date, while the Nezumi looks more vintage and classic. I have the Nezumi Aviera and it's really well design. But the specs of the Wolbrook are impresive. I got two straps from the brand, and the quality is superb.
If you are going to score the Explorer 1/10 for scratch resistance you must in turn mark the other watches 1/10 for corrosion resistance as that is only fair. Rolex swapped over to 904L steel in the late eighties as many of their watches previously made of 316L steel were showing signs of corrosion, particularly under the bezels and where the end links meet the watch case. You see this a lot on watches over 20 years old that are worn as daily watches in all environments. Overall Rolex think the 904L steel leads to better longevity for the watch so to score it down for its scratch resistance doesn’t make sense, it will outlast the other watches. It will have more scratches but it won’t be corroding in these vulnerable areas.
Thanks for the feedback. That might be something to reconsider with the scoring, but it's really really soft, to the extreme. I guess there could be other solutions in this case. On the other hand I have had a lot of vintage 316L steel watches with no issues whatsoever. I think it's more important to take care and washing them after contact with salty water. And I do that with the Explorer too.
@@TheWatchFrame Grade 904L stainless steel and Grade 316L stainless steel score 130 and 150 on the Vickers hardness scale respectively so Grade 316 is 15.38% harder. I’m an engineer sorry 😅 so you should have scored the Rolex 8.5 if you are scoring the other watches 10, there is no logic in what you’ve done, I mean that with respect. The Vickers scale is a linear scale so that would be the correct scoring.
@@Anonymouslyme1 you are probably right. However I address the durability of the watch in the other video I'm preparing comparing the Explorer to the others as pure watches to own :) Thanks for your input. I really appreciate and have learned a lot.
If he scored the watches for corrosion resistance, then yeah, maybe. Could also score it a 10/10 for attention seeking, but that wasn’t a category so keep it moving…I own an explorer and a ranger, and I will agree with this review, especially on the Scratch Resistance aspect. Polished 904L gets scratched reaching into my soft sweatpants pockets, my ranger purchased 7/19/22 looks better than my explorer I got back from rsc for a full service including polishing ($1100…) in October of 2023. Ranger is a daily wear and the explorer is basically a drawer dweller now because I legit like the ranger so much more…and I LOVE my explorer. I just feel like I’m always watching out for the explorer to not get scratched (I also chipped my sapphire crystal in three places prior to servicing) but with my ranger, I need to watch out for whatever could get damaged when my wrist smacks into it.
Great video 👍and I agree with your sentiments about the explorer. I guess wealth is realtive, but with Tudor and many brands out there, why would you mountaineer with an explorer in todays age?-I got offered the 36 explorer in april by my AD but went with a slightly dressier silver dial OP which ticks more boxes for me. My hiking/camping watch is my Citizen PMD56-2951 - hardened titanium case, 40mm, domed sapphire, perpetual calander with day and date, its quartz, but solar and it deviates about 1sec a month so its like a HAQ.
Thanks for commenting, but let me unpack a bit, so I can explain my perspective and intention here. Actually, I'm not comparing as "field" watches per se, but as adventure, exploring watches. I mean, civil made watches to alleged exploration and adventures in the mountain, travelling, caves, crossing rivers, glaciers and the like. On the other hand, I think the Explorer is not a "great" GADA, as it's not really designed to go to any place. For exploration and true adventure, it's a bit out of place. While it can do it, for certain, it's not the intention of the watch. It's more of an EDC watch instead. The Summiteer is more of a GADA watch, or even the Alpinist. The third thing is that I'm comparing watches that I owned at the moment of comparison. While it's true I had a Hamilton Khaki Field automatic, I sold it long ago. I have recently bought a Benrus 3061. This one is a great "field" watch but in my humble opinion it's not the best for exploration, as it has important shortcomings, specially water resistance. Still one of my favorite watches and worth talking about it in a future video. I short, I tried to compare four watches that I currently own that somehow resemble or are linked to the Explorer and or the "exploring" lore. Of course, there are a lot of watches that could also be compared here, but the video would surely be way too long :)
@@TheWatchFrame Now I see that our definition of GADA differs. I also did not understand that it was based on your current watches. My interruption of GADA, adds the ability to wear it in a dressed up situation as well. The Explorer add some polish, along with brushed finish. It has the ability to go to the field ,as well as, fit under a dress shirt, with a sports jacket. For my personal travels, that include, hunting, fishing, diving and places I sometimes don’t want to drawn attention to myself, I tend to choose a less expensive watch, brushed finish, easy to read dials and with a date (personal preference), or a G-Shock. For general travel and light field use, I like the new black lacquer Aqua Terra. Another, is the very inexpensive, great field watch, the Bodrrey Voyager. Thankfully there are choices that fit everyone’s needs and wrist size.
@@uncles2000 sure, the Explorer is a great watch, and as a watch by itself, it will reveal itself in the video I'm preparing. There are, as you say, a lot of options fit for many purposes. Thanks for the recommendations.
Its the weird yellow-green colour for me. Got offered one few years ago- nice watch, really liked the boxy crystal and how the hands caught light, but i would go for the first gen, if only they made that in 37mm with the master chronometer movement..
The price as new is too high. I agree. I don't mind the printed indices, actually I like them like that as a tool watch. As a forma everyday watch maybe not that much.
Sorry but your views are only based on aesthetics because the Explorer is more robust than those others. Sure, it scratches easier, but it can take a beating better
Actually, I try to take the aesthetic away from the considerations, because the Explorer is the most beautiful watch of the bunch, for me at least. I will tackle the capacity to endure in the other comparison I'm working on, where I compare the watch not as an exploring tool, but as a watch by itself.
@@tab3Gator that is a good point. To be fair, this is going to be central when talking of the watch by itself, in the other video I'm working on. I have the feeling, totally unscientific of course, and probably flawed, that the difference of endurance is marginally better with the Explorer but that other modern movements are very resistant too. Couldn't quantify as I have had no issues with either and have used and abused some movements of some of my watches, being humble, vintage or modern. From the perspective of pure adventure, which can take somewhere from a few days to a couple of months at the most, any movement with a good case I think is going to endure. That is the reason, too, I wanted to highlight some aspects of the Explorer, like the power reserve and the resistance against magnetism. But to be honest, you have a very good point there. I hope to give more weight to the next video's conclusion, taking all your great feedback!
I have a real SUB but I also bought one of these replicas from amzwatch for piece of mind if I go to another country or if I am doing activities that can damage the watch. I don't see anything wrong with that.
just bought my new ranger. I decided over an explorer your video verifies my decision. keep up the great work and God bless
As a tough adventure watch, the Ranger is awesome. It also works as a one watch to own, but there I will make a comparison too and things change a bit. The Explorer is a great watch, only not that well adapted to adventure as one would have thought.
Enjoy your Ranger!
Thank you for this video, I was on the fence between the Summiteer and baby Alpinist, SPB155. I can't bring myself to spend the money on the Tudor or Rolex at this point. I selected the Traska, and I am quite pleased with my choice.
The Summiteer is a very solid, competent option, indeed. Worth having it and take it to any adventure.
What a great video! I love your take on the different watches and the comparisons you draw! Have to finish the video another time, but hope the personal issues get solved!
Thanks a lot!
A very beautiful video and review of four lovely watches. Your experience with the watches and ability to directly compare creates very valuable information for us enthusiasts. Thank you 🙏
Thanks a lot!
A ranger in 36mm would fix the only issue I see is the proportion of the dial and the amount of negative space. It would be your perfect watch!
I'd make a few more changes. I'd use white color for the numerals, polished bezel and drilled lugs. With 36 or 37, it would be awesome and probably perfect.
@@TheWatchFrame yes you are correct. Perfect.
@@TheWatchFrame yes You are 100% correct those are features that would make a good improvement in addition to the reduction to 36-37mm.
Great comparisons and I really agree with the importance of each of the categories. As a fellow Explorer owner, I agree 100% about the Explorer not being the most convenient adventuring watch…in my collection, the Hamilton Khaki has taken it’s place as it is less blingy, lighter and far easier to replace if ever lost (heaven forbid!). And yes, my eyes are also getting older and legibility isn’t the best on the Explorer in all lighting conditions. Whenever I go for a hike, a run and I’m not 100% sure I’ll be in a “watch comfortable” situation, I prefer to strap on the Hamilton Khaki Field that I feature in many of my videos. Thank you for the enjoyable video, Mario.
Thanks a lot. To take the Khaki field really makes sense. It's not like you don't have to be careful, but it hits the right balance of taking care of oneself and the watch.
I think a lot of people have underestimated the newest Tudor Ranger. When it first came out I underestimated it for sure. I listened to way too many reviews that were saying a lot of negative things about it. I'd never had the chance to try one on and when I did all those negatives reviews just went away. It truly is a field watch in the best possible ways. I've owned mine now for almost 2 years and find it hard to swap out with my other watches (Omega, Tudors, etc.).
Sure is a great watch that feels so comfortable in the wild and when things get tough!
Great video. You are so right that there is no such thing as a perfect watch. Once you think you found “the one” either your taste changes or it will be short lived. I am currently on the waiting list for the 36mm Black Summiteer. It has that classic explorer design but yet still it’s own thing. I love all the watches in your comparison. Cheers!
Thanks a lot. The Summiteer is an excellent overal tough watch with its very own design. A true tool watch that is somehow elegant too.
Nice comparison. I had the black 36 Summiteer. It was so comfortable on bracelet. I sold it too but the blue one, but the blue one’s bracelet had some sharp edges. So I ended up selling the blue one despite enjoying the dial color lots
I guess the QC is not as consistent with these watches. I have two Traskas and the bracelets are good in both, but there are, for instance, more lume in the Sandstone hour hand than in the Black version.
I guess not. That said, I reached out to Traska with pics and they said they believed the bracelet was not a QC issue. Having had a number of Traska watches, I think it was QC. I’ll be checking out their updated Summiteer though😊
@@anthonyjack1859 I had this issue with one of the on the fly adjustment clasps I got for my Traskas. One of them worked flawlessly, while the other was a bit hard to close. It has solved itself after some time, but nothing changes the fact that one of them was a bit stiff at the beginning. I guess this can happen with other things. Having had a lot of bracelets from Traska and all very comfortable, it stands within possible that one of them is too sharp, but well. These things happen in the best of families.
I had that with the clasps too. Like you said…. Things happen
I was waiting for this video. Very interesting comparison. I kept the Explorer and the Alpinist, too. They are all great watches and each one is something special... Greetings!
Thanks. Both are excellent watches worth using and keeping. I might sell the Alpinist as I'm not using it, but it's absolutely great.
The alpinist is such a beauty, i ignored it to my peril lol but the sarb017 has shot up in price as they are getting harder to get. I would keep it forever.
@@CTizerthat's the main reason I'm having my doubts to sell. If I ever regret selling, prices are so high that it would be hard to get it back.
Other category contenders ?: CW63 36 or 39(?)mm - adjustable clasp, good lume, natos no problem, all brushed;
Hamilton Jazzmaster 34mm or 38mm& 40mm - anti magnetic but needs more lume ( i need to trest mine more), haven't used natos, all brushed (95%!), luckily (?) good fit with butterfly clasp.
I've had experience with CW, and they are really good watches and contenders.
Which watch would you take with you if you were going on a long trek such as the Appalachian Trail or Spain's Santiago de Compostela?
One watch for months, on the go, weight is too tight to to carry extra straps and such
Well, good question. I guess it all depends. My first thought is towards the Summiteer. It is a worryless watch with a reliable movement, easy to adjust on the fly with the bracelet, and not out of place in any situation. Very light, on par with the Explorer. The Explorer is more comfortable, though. The other option would be the Ranger on a single pass strap, maybe with just another one to change every once and then, an elegant looking one, but not with the bracelet. Although you can easily adjust the bracelet, it might be just a bit too much of a weight for such long periods wearing it. It would withstand anything, but I'd try to make it as light as possible with, as mentioned, using a single pass strap.
@@TheWatchFramethe budget friendly approach has great merit. I think I’d be interested in the idea of a more iconic watch being along for the adventure of a lifetime would be cool to say that it was your “***** watch” Maybe the Ranger cause the Explorer might be too risky.
@@DFW_AV8R sure. That's a very good point, and I've been considering it since my first answer. Either the Explorer or the Ranger would surely work. The idea to attach memories to the pieces. Right now, I'm going to the mountain and the Ranger will be the one I'm carrying.
Very well made video, again. I do think we have almost the exact same taste in watches, kind of a mix between vintage and modernized field/explorer watches which easily both can be dressed up, but also possible to "explore" the mountains with. I am also a big fan of vintage dress watches, especially Omega's. Would that be something you possibly have thought of diving into?:)
I love vintage Omegas but don't own one. My brother in law, who is a watchmaker, does have some, so maybe someday I will be able to borrow one.
Awesome video, I do agree with others that point out the disproportionate low scores for the explorer. On scratch resistance 1 should be solid 18kt gold 10 being sinn tegimented steel. Legibility was also disproportionate. The only place it deserved the low low score is the lug hole placement. While I agree with your views the actual scoring was disproportionate. The reason for this is probably proportional to how you feel scratching a watch that price and the high expectations. That leaves us with the old problem of diminishing returns above 2 or 3k priced watches. Great video!
Sure. You can add three or four points to the scratch resistance, but the fact is that it's not really scratch resistant at all. It is the opposite. And the opposite of what you would expect from this type of watch. I even managed to scratch it with my plastic calipers. Maybe the steel of my unit is even softer. I don't know :D. About legibility, I stand by it. If you have good sight, it's ok to average. But with certain light conditions and will all the shininess inside, including the dial, and the bold branding, can be really difficult. That is not the case with the other three watches. It could be a two or three. Maybe, but this is an adventure watch, and being the way it is, maybe as you say about the diminishing returns, seems like a sin to me. The strap-ability is very bad. Very, very bad, and the 19mm, something that really bothers me a lot. And all of that seems weird in an "exploring" watch, unless it's not really conceived to be us such. But I love this watch. And as a watch, is way better than I expected. Even as an adventure watch even. So good is it in general.
I would say any of the Elliot Brown automatic watches has they blow there tool watches up. But but if I needed money to get out of a country, then the Rolex, so keep the Rolex in the bag and then wear any of the Elliot Brown automatic watches:
Nice watches!
Have you tried the solar powered gshock g5600ue-1jf? I feel like for exploration, this is the complete and perfect watch. It is aesthetically pleasing as well.
Most of my mountaineering years have been while wearing a Casio DW310 from my childhood that I still have. And it's still working. I also got a couple of Casio G5600 one with battery, the NASA approved and the one I use when I really need a beater, and a solar one that now belongs to one of my kids. The problem with these watches is that I can read them easily because of my poor eyesight. I need hour and minute hands. Other than that, these are the true best exploring watches.
So, you didn't end up selling your Explorer, or did you purchase it back! Great comparison, and great video as always. If they made the ranger in 36, I'd sell my explorer. I love the ranger, but 39 is just too big IMO - And i have a 7 In wrist. I like the smaller sizes for hiking and everyday wear.
I love the Ranger, I own one. I agree it's too big. I got a San Martin "homage" to wear daily and they nailed the proportions. Available in 38mm and 36mm.
Excellent video as always. Love your channel. We have similar tastes in watches. I have two that I would love to get your opinion on. The Wolbrook Outrider no date and the Nezumi Terrain. I have the Wolbrook amd really like it, the Nezumi is in my short list.
I'm going to try to keep the Explorer and this will be more clear with the video comparing it as a watch by itself. The Ranger is awesome, but, besides true true hard exploration, the Explorer hits the mark. Even if the Ranger was smaller, I think in some regards it's more toolish than elegant.
@@DennisBible 36 would be great. Even 37 would really work.
@@DennisBible I don't have direct experience with the Wolbrook but generaly I'm attracted to them. In this case, however, I personally don't like the hour hand and having a date, while the Nezumi looks more vintage and classic. I have the Nezumi Aviera and it's really well design. But the specs of the Wolbrook are impresive. I got two straps from the brand, and the quality is superb.
If you are going to score the Explorer 1/10 for scratch resistance you must in turn mark the other watches 1/10 for corrosion resistance as that is only fair. Rolex swapped over to 904L steel in the late eighties as many of their watches previously made of 316L steel were showing signs of corrosion, particularly under the bezels and where the end links meet the watch case. You see this a lot on watches over 20 years old that are worn as daily watches in all environments. Overall Rolex think the 904L steel leads to better longevity for the watch so to score it down for its scratch resistance doesn’t make sense, it will outlast the other watches. It will have more scratches but it won’t be corroding in these vulnerable areas.
Thanks for the feedback. That might be something to reconsider with the scoring, but it's really really soft, to the extreme. I guess there could be other solutions in this case. On the other hand I have had a lot of vintage 316L steel watches with no issues whatsoever. I think it's more important to take care and washing them after contact with salty water. And I do that with the Explorer too.
@@TheWatchFrame Grade 904L stainless steel and Grade 316L stainless steel score 130 and 150 on the Vickers hardness scale respectively so Grade 316 is 15.38% harder. I’m an engineer sorry 😅 so you should have scored the Rolex 8.5 if you are scoring the other watches 10, there is no logic in what you’ve done, I mean that with respect. The Vickers scale is a linear scale so that would be the correct scoring.
@@Anonymouslyme1 you are probably right. However I address the durability of the watch in the other video I'm preparing comparing the Explorer to the others as pure watches to own :) Thanks for your input. I really appreciate and have learned a lot.
If he scored the watches for corrosion resistance, then yeah, maybe. Could also score it a 10/10 for attention seeking, but that wasn’t a category so keep it moving…I own an explorer and a ranger, and I will agree with this review, especially on the Scratch Resistance aspect. Polished 904L gets scratched reaching into my soft sweatpants pockets, my ranger purchased 7/19/22 looks better than my explorer I got back from rsc for a full service including polishing ($1100…) in October of 2023. Ranger is a daily wear and the explorer is basically a drawer dweller now because I legit like the ranger so much more…and I LOVE my explorer. I just feel like I’m always watching out for the explorer to not get scratched (I also chipped my sapphire crystal in three places prior to servicing) but with my ranger, I need to watch out for whatever could get damaged when my wrist smacks into it.
Great video 👍and I agree with your sentiments about the explorer. I guess wealth is realtive, but with Tudor and many brands out there, why would you mountaineer with an explorer in todays age?-I got offered the 36 explorer in april by my AD but went with a slightly dressier silver dial OP which ticks more boxes for me.
My hiking/camping watch is my Citizen PMD56-2951 - hardened titanium case, 40mm, domed sapphire, perpetual calander with day and date, its quartz, but solar and it deviates about 1sec a month so its like a HAQ.
Yes, a Citizen like that does really make sense.
The Explorer is more of a GADA watch than a field watch. I’m surprised you did not throw a Hamilton in the mix.
Thanks for commenting, but let me unpack a bit, so I can explain my perspective and intention here. Actually, I'm not comparing as "field" watches per se, but as adventure, exploring watches. I mean, civil made watches to alleged exploration and adventures in the mountain, travelling, caves, crossing rivers, glaciers and the like. On the other hand, I think the Explorer is not a "great" GADA, as it's not really designed to go to any place. For exploration and true adventure, it's a bit out of place. While it can do it, for certain, it's not the intention of the watch. It's more of an EDC watch instead. The Summiteer is more of a GADA watch, or even the Alpinist. The third thing is that I'm comparing watches that I owned at the moment of comparison. While it's true I had a Hamilton Khaki Field automatic, I sold it long ago. I have recently bought a Benrus 3061. This one is a great "field" watch but in my humble opinion it's not the best for exploration, as it has important shortcomings, specially water resistance. Still one of my favorite watches and worth talking about it in a future video.
I short, I tried to compare four watches that I currently own that somehow resemble or are linked to the Explorer and or the "exploring" lore. Of course, there are a lot of watches that could also be compared here, but the video would surely be way too long :)
@@TheWatchFrame Now I see that our definition of GADA differs. I also did not understand that it was based on your current watches. My interruption of GADA, adds the ability to wear it in a dressed up situation as well. The Explorer add some polish, along with brushed finish. It has the ability to go to the field ,as well as, fit under a dress shirt, with a sports jacket. For my personal travels, that include, hunting, fishing, diving and places I sometimes don’t want to drawn attention to myself, I tend to choose a less expensive watch, brushed finish, easy to read dials and with a date (personal preference), or a G-Shock. For general travel and light field use, I like the new black lacquer Aqua Terra. Another, is the very inexpensive, great field watch, the Bodrrey Voyager. Thankfully there are choices that fit everyone’s needs and wrist size.
@@uncles2000 sure, the Explorer is a great watch, and as a watch by itself, it will reveal itself in the video I'm preparing. There are, as you say, a lot of options fit for many purposes. Thanks for the recommendations.
Man that tudor ranger costing thousands with printed inidices what the..
The Ranger really looks cheap in person. I ended up buying the black BB58.
Its the weird yellow-green colour for me. Got offered one few years ago- nice watch, really liked the boxy crystal and how the hands caught light, but i would go for the first gen, if only they made that in 37mm with the master chronometer movement..
The price as new is too high. I agree. I don't mind the printed indices, actually I like them like that as a tool watch. As a forma everyday watch maybe not that much.
Sorry but your views are only based on aesthetics because the Explorer is more robust than those others. Sure, it scratches easier, but it can take a beating better
Actually, I try to take the aesthetic away from the considerations, because the Explorer is the most beautiful watch of the bunch, for me at least. I will tackle the capacity to endure in the other comparison I'm working on, where I compare the watch not as an exploring tool, but as a watch by itself.
@@TheWatchFrame but wouldn’t the capacity to endure be central to the capacity for exploration and adventure? Scratches don’t affect performance
@@tab3Gator that is a good point. To be fair, this is going to be central when talking of the watch by itself, in the other video I'm working on. I have the feeling, totally unscientific of course, and probably flawed, that the difference of endurance is marginally better with the Explorer but that other modern movements are very resistant too. Couldn't quantify as I have had no issues with either and have used and abused some movements of some of my watches, being humble, vintage or modern. From the perspective of pure adventure, which can take somewhere from a few days to a couple of months at the most, any movement with a good case I think is going to endure. That is the reason, too, I wanted to highlight some aspects of the Explorer, like the power reserve and the resistance against magnetism. But to be honest, you have a very good point there. I hope to give more weight to the next video's conclusion, taking all your great feedback!
I have a real SUB but I also bought one of these replicas from amzwatch for piece of mind if I go to another country or if I am doing activities that can damage the watch. I don't see anything wrong with that.