Reply With QuoteIMO no, it's not small. Especially for a dress watch.
Hi all, a general question i suppose, and i know most will say it comes down to own personal taste and opinion, but in your opinion would 34mm case (not includeing crown) be too small for a 7.5/7.25 inch wrist?
Only reason i ask is because looking at the sinn 6000 or the 6030, i'm pondering which to get as a dress watch, and because i can't try and see i'm stuck with what i think, and i have one of those brains that don't work well at making decisions like this so i need to ask views and opinions to help me see pros and cons :D
thanks in advance
Doug
IMO no, it's not small. Especially for a dress watch.
No, it's fine. I have an 8 inch wrist and often wear smaller watches without people pointing and sniggering at me ;-)
For me, people have become obsessed with larger watches, which are more likely to look silly than a smaller one. Just my opinion of course.
Cheers
Foggy
will keep but hardly get any wrist time
With a 7.5inch wrist, I feel 34mm being too small for me is the only reason I haven't offered to buy the beautiful JLC ultra thin on SC.
In my opinion I would say yes but as you say in your OP it's down to personal taste. However, you say that you are looking at either a Sinn 6000 or 6030 and I was under the impression that these were 38.5 without crown??
No vested interest at all here. I have a JLC MUT, about the nicest piece of honest and genuine horology I have ever owned. Don't miss out if you really like it. They wear much bigger than their size would suggest. This is probably because they are so flat. I have just put on a 36mm, Movado ltd edition Perpetual calendar and it wears smaller then the JLC MUT.Originally Posted by RossC
i suppose it is down to me, i did used to wear only vintage watches, vintage hamiltons and omegas from ebay, but lately its been 44mm divers and the like.
I'm going to try it and see how it goes.
No, absolutely not - wearing this little beauty today, and is perfect at 34mm exc crown... (and I'm a large-ish fella too at 6'2 and 16 stone.... ;))
No. One of my regular wearers is a 30mm Juvenia, and that looks fine.
I have an 8" wrist, and for that very reason I sold my Air King - looked like a *child's/ladies watch.
*Delete as appropriate.
Not for me, contrary to popular opinion, I would say it's a touch too small.
Definitely not too small, got similar wrist size and a 34 mm dress watch both look and feels great
I think this is 100% down to the individual, with the proviso that dress watches often seem to be smaller than tool watches. For me personally I've settled on a size range from 39mm to 45mm - but that's me...
I don't think I would wear a 34mm watch, but I've seen others with dress watches around that size and they didn't look daft.
Simon
I wore a mid Size DJ for years. I have small wrists and it seemed the right size
Depends on the watch thickness, type, lug length etc. I think a 34mm Longines dress watch looks entirely in keeping with the design, but for a man, a 34mm dive watch might look a bit small (it would have to be powered by an undersized movement, one smaller than a typical dive-watch movement).
I have an old 36mm Tissot which sounds tiny and girly, but when it was new, it was a big, chunky watch and it's still fairly substantial today. It doesn't look small in this original ad photo, either.
...but what do I know; I don't even like watches!
IMHO this is always going to be a very subjective matter, from personal experience I would say yes it is too small but that is based on my 8 inch wrist. I also think it has a lot to do with what you are used to looking at on your wrist, being a big guy with large wrists I find all my watches are now 41-41mm and I think that they all suit me . I recently tried a 34mm De Ville on for size and to my eye it looked silly, however had I been wearing watches of that size anyway then I dare say my eyes would be used to how that size looked on my wrist.
I don't think so, as long as you wear it under a sleeve...
Here's my Air King, which is 33-34mm
And this is my 62MAS, which is a similar size, but a diver, so looks a bit bigger
BTW, I'm 6'2 and 18.5 stone, with a 7.75" wrist
No.
Dress watches usually have very thin bezels so the dial size is equal to or larger than than a 40mm dive watch. Plus white/cream/silver dials visually look larger than black.
Here's a pretty good example, a 40mm Rolex Sub 14060 next to a 34mm Omega Seamaster Cosmic. Apart from the thickness of the watch the Cosmic looks very much the equal of the Sub size wise. If anything the dial looks bigger.
Cheers,
Gary
I think it is 36mm in my eyes just cuts it
+1.......people have become obsessed by big watches and there's nothing wrong with a 34mm watch whatsoever. Oversized watches on small wrists look silly, but there's alot of folks wearing them thesedays.
Paul
Agree with Gary - dial size is really important, as is the type of watch.
There is no correct answer - it will differ from watch to watch.
Cheers
Foggy
That looks like the same model as the one I chopped in - you don't see many with 'Super Precision' on the dial.
Here's my Air King, which is 33-34mm
It was too small for me. I'm 6'3" tall, and broad. In my mind, when looking at my wrist it did look like a child's watch. I guess it is what you are used to! 44mm is the smallest I would consider.
Last edited by neebsta; 26th February 2013 at 16:37.
Another gorilla-wristed lump of a man here and I reckon 34mm is now too small for me. I used to happily sport my seiko chrono on jubilee bracelet but then discovered larger watches and now cannot wear anything smaller than my 39mm Vantage. Even that is slightly too small but being on a buttery smooth oyster bracelet gives it plenty of heft. In fact, I am now of the opinion that it isn't just the size, it is the weight of a piece that makes it for me. I missed out on a 39mm Strela recently and was then lucky enough to be offered one by a fellow forum member. A chap in the studio next to mine had one and let me try it on. I was really disappointed in the lack of weight and it was this, coupled with the smaller size that led to me turning down the offer to buy a piece that I had been lusting after for ages.
Its no more too small than 47mm is too big, its all about individual interpretation of a timepiece, some like small some prefer presence, one size does not fit all but 40mm fits the majority
RIAC
For me, it is at best borderline, and I've smaller wrists. Not unwearable, depending on what you're wearing, but I never stop wondering if it would look better a touch larger. 36mm and I'm happy. Though obviously, personal taste, times change, different styles of watch, how long is a piece of string, etc etc..
Only you can really answer that. Just remember that it looks different to you on the wrist than to others seeing you.
I always find it a little strange when people talk about "presence". If I said "Bob's tie certainly has presence" everyone would assume he was wearing some loud coloured ugly thing from the 80s. If I said "Bob's trousers have presence" everyone would probably think of MC Hammer.
Many people here use the word as a desirable quality, but with almost anything that could be worn it sounds like a negative to me.
The two Sinn watches you mention are both chronographs from the Financial District collection. The 6000 is the standard 38.5mm diameter valjoux 7750 model, while the 6030 is the smaller 34mm diameter ETA 2094 model. Nothing wrong with a 34mm simple dress watch but are you sure you'd be happy with a chronograph that size?
Regards,
Nick
Surely, and IMHO, it's a purely subjective question...no?
Well the watch in question (Sinn 6030) arrive tomorrow and i'll do a bit of a follow up on whether 34mm is too small or not. :)
It really is personal taste. I found the air king too small really, and even moved my Exp 1 on because I felt the 36mm was too small, whereas others will say it's the perfect size.
It's personal choice really, it was big enough in the past, so why not now?
As others have said, it depends on the wrist and on personal preferences. For me, 34mm is unwearable. It looks like something fished out of a box of cereal. I do have some watches that size, but I never wear them.
I was always happy with my AirKing at 34mm on a 7.25" wrist.
scooter
IMO the answer is yes. I have a 6.75 inch wrist and have worn numerous 34mm vintage watches. Dial layout, lug style and length all make a difference, with some wearing larger than others, but eventually I have moved them on wanting something slightly larger. Recently bought a Hamilton intra-matic at 38mm and the size is perfick! (for me).
Def NOT,Iv'e had a few that size and just bought an Air King and the size is just perfect.
my wrist is 7.5.
Last edited by P9CLY; 26th February 2013 at 21:58.
Depends on whether you really need to see the time as well, personally 39 mm is the smallest watch I now own. Any less and I cant see the friggin time w/out intently peering at the hands ..
No. I've had a several at 34mm, mainly with large dials so they wore nicely.
Way to small mate 42mm minimum
I would say that it might be a touch but I always think that you can't know until it is on the wrist.
32-36mm is generally about right on my 6.5 inch wrists. I have a few bigger watches, but I always wish they were smaller. Anything over 40mm just looks stupid to me.
+1
34 mm is fine for a dress watch IMHO. Here is a PP ref. 3998 on my 7 1/2 inch wrist.
JK
I've owned a lot of 33mm to 37mm watches.... But the last couple of years I kinda stick to 40-42mm's.
I've tried another 37 a couple of months ago and when you're used to 40-42, the 37 just wears too small.
(at least, that's my opinion and of course depends on your wrist size)
Posting Permissions
