- 27/6/16
- 765
- 2,242
- 93
Hello everyone, it's Steve and I'm back
About Rolex model comparison, we have done a lot of issues, during the period I also occasionally find time to do some other brands of comparison, but Steve is a very stubborn person, if not all the Rolex series to do a comparison, I will feel imperfect, ha ha, although this task is very difficult, but I will grasp the footsteps of continuous efforts, regardless of the models made by the popular models or the low attention. I think as long as there are friends interested in this, it can provide some reference for their choice, that is enough!
So this time we bring you a comparison of the Explorer I generation. Let's cut the crap and get to the bottom of it.
Front Dial View
Natual Light View
View Under Light
The color of the dial is not much to say, it is still Steve's favorite black dial, black is good, mysterious and cool but also thin, the main thing is no color difference, ha ha.
in addition, The factory claims that the GM and BP are actually from the same factory, except that the GM is made of 904 steel and the VR3230 movement, while the BP is made of 316 steel and the A3230 movement, otherwise they are the same. In fact, this is not the case, because during the comparison, I found that only some of the parts are common, but some of the details are different, probably due to the assembly, so let's compare GM and BP as two factory products.
Bezel Side View
From the top view alone, all the factory bezels are fine, but the differences can be seen from the side view, the side height of BP is obviously narrow, GM, EW and Gen remain the same, the slight flaw is that the gap between the bezel and the case is a bit large, Gen is almost no gap at all.
Crystal Side View
All factory crystals have the same edge chamfering as Gen, there is no significant difference between them, mainly in the thickness of the mirror, from the picture you can see that the BP crystal is too thick, resulting in its raised too high, and after a careful comparison of the physical found that EW is closest to Gen, GM is slightly thicker, but the impact is not significant.
Stick Side View
Regarding the stick, GM and BP should use the same parts, because no difference can be found in shape or details.
The triangle and bar stick of GM(BP)are better, with edge chamfering , while EW is not, and the sharp corners are too sharp. But in the edge of the Arabic numerals, EW does a better job.
In addition, you can look at the digital stick 3 (marked in the figure), the corner of the Gen edge is curved, not sharp. In this small detail, EW noticed and synchronized it, while GM and BP ignored it.
Luminous Filled View
GM is still in its usual style, the surface of the stick is smooth, as is the BP, while the EW is well filled and very grainy.
The filling on the hands is not superior or inferior, we can focus on the end of the minute hand, where EW is still very commendable, because its end is sharp-angled shape, the same as the Gen, while GM and BP are flat (commonly known as scissor needles)
About Rolex model comparison, we have done a lot of issues, during the period I also occasionally find time to do some other brands of comparison, but Steve is a very stubborn person, if not all the Rolex series to do a comparison, I will feel imperfect, ha ha, although this task is very difficult, but I will grasp the footsteps of continuous efforts, regardless of the models made by the popular models or the low attention. I think as long as there are friends interested in this, it can provide some reference for their choice, that is enough!
So this time we bring you a comparison of the Explorer I generation. Let's cut the crap and get to the bottom of it.
Front Dial View
Natual Light View
View Under Light
The color of the dial is not much to say, it is still Steve's favorite black dial, black is good, mysterious and cool but also thin, the main thing is no color difference, ha ha.
in addition, The factory claims that the GM and BP are actually from the same factory, except that the GM is made of 904 steel and the VR3230 movement, while the BP is made of 316 steel and the A3230 movement, otherwise they are the same. In fact, this is not the case, because during the comparison, I found that only some of the parts are common, but some of the details are different, probably due to the assembly, so let's compare GM and BP as two factory products.
Bezel Side View
From the top view alone, all the factory bezels are fine, but the differences can be seen from the side view, the side height of BP is obviously narrow, GM, EW and Gen remain the same, the slight flaw is that the gap between the bezel and the case is a bit large, Gen is almost no gap at all.
Crystal Side View
All factory crystals have the same edge chamfering as Gen, there is no significant difference between them, mainly in the thickness of the mirror, from the picture you can see that the BP crystal is too thick, resulting in its raised too high, and after a careful comparison of the physical found that EW is closest to Gen, GM is slightly thicker, but the impact is not significant.
Stick Side View
Regarding the stick, GM and BP should use the same parts, because no difference can be found in shape or details.
The triangle and bar stick of GM(BP)are better, with edge chamfering , while EW is not, and the sharp corners are too sharp. But in the edge of the Arabic numerals, EW does a better job.
In addition, you can look at the digital stick 3 (marked in the figure), the corner of the Gen edge is curved, not sharp. In this small detail, EW noticed and synchronized it, while GM and BP ignored it.
GM is still in its usual style, the surface of the stick is smooth, as is the BP, while the EW is well filled and very grainy.
The filling on the hands is not superior or inferior, we can focus on the end of the minute hand, where EW is still very commendable, because its end is sharp-angled shape, the same as the Gen, while GM and BP are flat (commonly known as scissor needles)
Last edited: