SubC (non Date) or EXP II (42mm)?

[catflap]

Five watches gone and I've nearly got the money together for my first Rolex. Just need to decide which one now.

Got it down to the Non Date SubC or the black EXP II, like them both and struggling to decide which I should go for and I can't afford both before anyone asks (not enough watches left to sell to fund that!)

I'm keeping a U1 and a 2531 Seamaster to keep it company along with something else of a similar value but not worked that one out yet.

I've fairly chunky wrists so the 42mm case of the EXP works fine on me as did the SubC surprisingly as I expected it to come up too small. This will be my main watch and get worn with a shirt or T shirt.

If you just had to have the one watch which would you choose?

[Nealywheelie]

I've been lucky to have owned through the years most of the Rolex Sport models. Flipped, sold (to my regret) many times, but the watch I love most these days is my black face Explorer II 216750, just because, for the main part it's 42mm which suits my wrist perfectly. As much as I've loved the GMTIIc, subs etc......etc....they just seem too small for my wrist nowadays, I still like them, but, if only all Rolex sports were 42mm I'd probably be totally skint but owning a wodge Rolex sports, if you see what I mean. So for me, no contest........EXPII. As I type, there is one on SC at a very tempting price.

[kultschar]

Have both - love both!!!!

If it was my first Rolex I would prob go for the Sub

Hard decision

[sunster]

I'm fortunate to own both the SubC and the Exp 2. I only bought my Sub C 2 weeks ago and its a lovely watch. I did own the SubC date but flipped it.
I got my Exp 2 probably about 18-24 months ago now. I absolutely adore this watch. I actually went off watches for near 18 months after buying this watch as I just wasn't interested in anything else. To many non-WIS its not immediately identifiable as a Rolex and hence often I don't feel like a poser wearing it. Of course the Sub is recognisable to all, even the new one. However if you have a bit of a collection it is nice to have a Sub in the box.
Which one- well its very much a personal choice- do you like the instant recognition of the Sub. Do you need a date or GMT function? Do you like a subtle splash of colour as in the Explorer? Both are equally fit on the wrist for all occasions- casual and smart.

[ZIM]

Has to be the SubC, probably the most versatile Rolex. Also benefits from having no date or cyclops.

[Foxy100]

To many non-WIS its not immediately identifiable as a Rolex and hence often I don't feel like a poser wearing it.

This is true for me too, I found with my GMT2c I received some negative comments, people would ask if it was a fake and so I just told them it was, which seemed to satisfy them. No one has commented on the ExpII (apart from one or two forum members but they have no taste!).

I'm wearing mine at the moment, I think it's a great watch. If I had cash to buy a Sub it would be a 5513, or possibly a Sea Dweller, I wouldn't buy a new one.

[-Ally-]

Buy a like new or new SubC for around £4000, you won't regret it.

[Tomw2000]

SubC for me.

[Vanguard]

I'd have to say Sub C as well if you're only going to have one Rolex, it's just an iconic watch.

[Incredible Sulk]

Has to be the SubC, probably the most versatile Rolex. Also benefits from having no date or cyclops.

As you get older you might find that, having a date AND a cyclops is a good thing......

For me, the most versatile Rolex is the GMT IIC. OK it has the same functionality as the Explorer, but the ceramic bezel is a lot harder to damage than the steel one on the Explorer.

[poppy]

I think the sub is an icon and is probably the right rolex to get.

but

i had the option of a sub and the 216570 and picked the latter. it wears bigger (it is bigger!) and i love the splash of colour. i think it is more discreet than the subc and i actually like that it has less fans too.

price wise, i reckon mine is still worth what i paid for it more than a year ago but i did buy it "pre-loved!"

[AshUK]

Another for the Explorer II I'm afraid. I had in the past owned a 5513, and (stupidly) sold it. Anyway, I looked at all of the 5k Rolex sports - and only the Explorer II polar sung out to me. It's a great size, the lugs seems much more in proportion, and is very comfy on the wrist. I've always been a bit of a strap whore, and I have tried to put it on a strap, but it just looks so good on the bracelet...looks like my newly bought RubberB will be on SC soon!

I also don't get how a big orange hand can be under be understated, but somehow it is! It's a very cool watch...

[SimonK]

Wouldn't it depend on whether you intend to spend a lot of your time underwater or often need to know the time in two timezones simultaneously? Or am I being silly?

[Chinnock]

Explorer II based on size.

[adesmith]

As you get older you might find that, having a date AND a cyclops is a good thing......

For me, the most versatile Rolex is the GMT IIC. OK it has the same functionality as the Explorer, but the ceramic bezel is a lot harder to damage than the steel one on the Explorer.

This.

I would miss the date if I had the sub no date but I would miss the look of a sub if I had the EXP II (Luckily I own both).

So in this case I would recommend you look at the GMTIIc as you not only get the look and feel of the sub, you also get the date and the GMT function of the EXPII. Win win.

I recently picked this up and I am really happy with the size, comfort and surprisingly the PCL's which I thought I wouldnt like.

Don't rule this model out.....

[Foxy100]

Hopefully these replies have answered the OP's question. Basically we can't help you, sorry!

[funkstar]

The Explorer, it's just cooler.

[catflap]

Hopefully these replies have answered the OP's question. Basically we can't help you, sorry!

But you are helping!
Everyone has been raising exactly the points I'm going through myself and it is helpful to see how everyone resolved them. Both watches have things going for them and let's face it either of them is a good choice, as would the GMTc be as well.
In the end it will obviously be my decision but it's good to see if there's anything I've missed when looking at these watches. So thank you for all the responses to date and please feel free to continue adding anything that may help - all opinions are welcome.

[walkerwek1958]

Go for the Sub.

I`ve never been a fan of GMT watches, but if I had to choose one it would be the Explorer11. Having said that.......it's got to be the Sub.

Don`t overlook the durability aspect. The Exp11 will eventually pick up marks and scratches on the grained bezel. Not so with the Sub c. That's got to be a big plus if the watch gets a lot of everyday wear.

Paul

[scooter]

Sub for me.

scooter

[goregasm]

ExpII for me I'm afraid.. I own one (albeit the 40mm)

Discreet, looks good, and doesn't scream 'look at me, I'm a Rolex!'. Unless that's what you want?

[Enoch]

I've had a SubC, a GMT master 11, and an Explorer 11 (white faced)

All are fine watches, but if I had to choose, it'd be the explorer11... Mainly because I actually use the GMT function, and I think the size is perfect..

[o u t a t i m e]

Exp II for me too. Just a nicer, more useful, and less ubiquitous watch.

[kultschar]

I'm fortunate to own both the SubC and the Exp 2. I only bought my Sub C 2 weeks ago and its a lovely watch. I did own the SubC date but flipped it.
I got my Exp 2 probably about 18-24 months ago now. I absolutely adore this watch. I actually went off watches for near 18 months after buying this watch as I just wasn't interested in anything else. To many non-WIS its not immediately identifiable as a Rolex and hence often I don't feel like a poser wearing it. Of course the Sub is recognisable to all, even the new one. However if you have a bit of a collection it is nice to have a Sub in the box.
Which one- well its very much a personal choice- do you like the instant recognition of the Sub. Do you need a date or GMT function? Do you like a subtle splash of colour as in the Explorer? Both are equally fit on the wrist for all occasions- casual and smart.

Spot on in my opinion!!!

[Beanie]

Sub for me. Love the ceramic bezel.

[Neely8]

I've had a Hulk and a Polar 42mm Exp II. Once I bought the Explorer II I stopped wearing the Hulk and sold it. The 216750 is a better size for me.