It looks great - and I think that it looks better than the Tudor ranger - the faux patina on the ranger is just a little too orange. Are you still happy with it - the quality etc. I am thinking of buying one myself. 

As you can see from this tread - everybody and his uncle have a dive watch  - so if you want to stand out from the crowd you should take the Ranger. 

As an aside - some watches look really good without a second hand, and since there is no second hand, there is no problem with the quartz hand ticking and not sweeping. I think that the Cartier Tank is a good example, and if you would like a quartz watch, then it is an excellent choice. 

The Ranger is a new Explorer 1016. 

I think that what most is missing is that the Rolex Explorer 1016 was a tool watch - among other things because it did not have applied indices. The current Rolex Explorer is flashy jewellery with high polished surfaces (and gold), it is jewellery both because of the applied indices but also simply because of the price. 

And the font of the numbers - 3-6-9 - on the current explorer is not be to everyones taste - I for one don't like the new Rolex Explorer font, when it is not on the wing of at Star Trek fighter jet:-) I like the the Explorer 1016 font - the font of the Ranger. 

I also never liked the Mercedes hand of Rolex - I think it looks strange with that small tip at the end after a circle. 

I agree with you on the 39 mm - it is the right size for most men, they could have gotten away with 38 mm - but most will find that a 36 mm watch looks smal on a 7 inch wrist. 

I find it a bit funny, when someone wearing a dive watch - just like everybody else - says it's a bit boring. 

What is your wrist size Max?