If you’d like to skip the details to review a summary list of what makes this option a potential candidate for my grail watch, scroll to the bottom of this part.

Before you read this final instalment in the series, if you haven’t already - go read Parts 1, 2, 3 and 4.

Number One

Rolex Explorer Reference 1016-L (AKA, the Dash L)

You may have noticed that I went pretty hard in the paint in making the case for the Tudor that slots in at the number two position on my grail wish list (described in Part 4). That’s because I want the Oyster Prince Ranger 7995/0 Mark II to happen more than any of the options I’ve presented. But, if that’s the case, shouldn’t it take the number one spot instead of the option I’m about to describe? Not necessarily – and here’s why. The 7995/0 Mark II isn’t the very best option to make my grail dreams (and the collective dreams of many) come true. However, it’s got a much more realistic chance of coming to life than the “when pigs fly” model I’m about to elaborate on. Since it’s such a way, way outside chance that my number one option will see the light of day, the Tudor at number two is sort of a de facto number one. Nonetheless, it’s worth spelling this top option out in hopes that it may spark just enough inspiration in the right people.

So, what is this pie in the sky watch that tops this grail list? I think this was a bit of a foregone conclusion, being that this entire series provides suggestions throughout for prospective models that will sufficiently offer a believable stand-in to the much-loved Rolex Explorer Reference 1016. Yes, top billing goes to the real McCoy – or at least a revival of it.

This Rolex will be known as the Explorer Reference 1016-L. I can envision enthusiasts giving it a cool shorthand like the “Dash L”. I’ll use this moniker as reference going forward. Before we blueprint this beauty, I’d like to explain the “L” in its name. The final run of 1016s, prior to the iconic design’s disappearance into the mist, were serialized beginning with the letter “L”. As it stands right now, that letter may just as well have meant “last” – as in “last of its kind”. However, should the following insight be heeded, the 1016 can carry on from where it was stranded and that “L” can stand for “legendary”.

Regarding the details of this watch, I’ll cut to the chase. Frankly, there would be very little that needs changing.

First off – the movement. The vintage 1016 uses the Caliber 1570. Since the current Rolex Calibre 3132 shares the same diameter as the 1570 (28.50mm), the Dash L should be fitted with the latest and greatest.

The beloved 1016 boasted 100m of water resistance. I’d appreciate if the Dash L’s resistance were slightly bumped up to 150m, for just an extra bit of confidence when immersing it into the elements. This is certainly not a deal breaker, but preferred nonetheless.

As for the dial, only two elements should be changed. First, the 1016’s lume material (tritium) should be replaced with the blue-glowing Chromalight. However, the lumed appliqués, when not lit, should be coloured to match the patinated custard hue found on the face of vintage Explorers. The other revision needed for the Dash L’s dial follows from the change in lume material. Below the 6 o’clock position of the vintage 1016, you’ll find script that states, “Swiss – T < 25”. Since tritium will not be used on this reissue, the script should simply read, “Swiss Made”. Other than those two changes, the rest of the dial features should remain identical.

Lastly, like all the other options I described in this article, the Dash L should be fitted with a GlideLock clasp.

And that’s it. Keeping everything the same, save those few small changes, will truly make the Dash L legendary. It’s really a shame this series even needs to exist. The 1016 is such an unanimously coveted design and yet, it’s not represented in a modern model – it’s baffling. There’s no shortage of watch enthusiasts and influencers going so far as to say the 1016 is the greatest watch design ever conceived, and I can’t disagree with them. I just have to shake my head, shrug my shoulders and throw my hands in the air because this design’s absence from Rolex’s currently offered collection is totally beyond my comprehension.

There is no worthy reason why Rolex shouldn’t try to repatriate some of those dollars spent on vintage 1016s back into their vaults. As it is right now, savvy vintage watch dealers are making big money at Rolex’s expense. The coffers of the crown are being pilfered while the king sits back and watches. Rolex doesn’t stand to benefit in any way from vintage watches, bearing their brand, being sold at huge premiums. The fact that many of their watch models from decades ago still function well and are incredibly sought after provides Rolex with brand prestige - no doubt about that. However, granting that, what does further brand prestige mean to Rolex? How much prestige does a brand need until the very concept of prestige is unintelligible? Rolex needs more prestige like they need more profit (even though, personally, I think it’s rude to suggest as a manufacturer of goods that your bottomline is fine as is). So, if they don’t need prestige or money (hypothetically), why would they try to appease their consumer base? My suggestion is they do it purely to prove they don’t allow their ego (which they’ve certainly earned) to get in the way of perpetually asserting they make iconic timepieces. And, if one of their most iconic watch designs has been retired these many years, have the honed modesty of a time-honoured winner to admit when something was right and can be again.

Before I offer up the roadmap recap, which will obviously be quite brief for this option, I think it’s worth explaining why I think there’s little chance we ever see a Dash L or the like.

Rolex transcends the watch industry. It is one of the most recognizable brands on the face of our Earth. Yadda, yadda, yadda. Don’t get me wrong. I do care about Rolex. If you’re a watch lover, how can you not? I placed the Dash L at the top of my grail watch list not only because I believe I’m right that overwhelming market demand is evident, but also because I would personally like to have a Rolex in my collection. Unfortunately, I don’t see much reason to conclude that what people want matters to Rolex, and that’s a shame. Based on my observation, Rolex seems much less interested in responding to demand than they do in creating it. There’s certainly nothing wrong with striving to continually influence the market. That’s how designs like the 1016 were created in the first place. However, every once and awhile, the market knows exactly what it wants. This doesn’t happen all that often but that doesn’t make it less valid. Frankly, it should be taken as the greatest compliment a brand can receive. Alas, I don’t think that’s how Rolex sees it. They’re too intimately aware of their own grandeur. They know, without question, they don’t have to fight for people’s affection. Nonetheless, I really wish they would this time. They’d be wrong to think they can’t both respond to and influence demand at the same time.

Fending off my pragmatism and attempting to introduce some optimism, I’ll keep dreaming of a day when a faithful Explorer manifests itself from the archives, for a new generation of watch wearers to behold.

Since it only makes sense the Dash L will replace the modern Explorer (214270), it will assume its price point as well – $7500 CAD (approximately $5600 USD).

**Recapping the Roadmap for the Rolex Explorer Reference 1016-L:**

Reissue the 1016 and change nothing, except;
Put the 1570 movement in a museum and install the more modern Calibre 3132,
Boost the water resistance from 100m to 150m,
Use Chromalight instead of tritium for the luminescence,
Update the script at the bottom of the dial to reflect the change in lume material, and
Attach a GlideLock clasp to the oyster bracelet.

If this imagining of an Explorer reissue existed, I don’t think I’d ever need another watch again. Come to think of it, maybe that’s why they let this design go with way of the Dodo.

Rolex, I’m not confident you will ever release a faithful modern version of the 1016. If I’m right and you don’t, know this – any attempt at reimagining or reinvigorating the timeless design language of the 1016 will always fall short. On this, I am confident.