...........http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/01/fa...atch.html?_r=1
I have small wrists, and have owned a 45mm Panerai and Omega PO, but find my tastes now coming down to a more sensible (for me) 38mm-40mm.
I'm fancying a Rolex Oyster Perpetual 116000 as well, which is a 36mm.
Last edited by Antony23; 13th May 2015 at 20:40.
Absolutely nothing wrong with getting a watch that fits your wrist size.
I shudder every time I see a watch that is more than the diameter of the wrist it is on. But that's just me. Arnie wears oversized watches. Not sure I'd tell him what I thought 😂
I wear a 1953 Benson tropic at work. Its 30mm. Looks cool though on my 6.75 wrist. I won't wear anything over 40mm now as I know it looks silly. Took me a while to realise.
Steve
38mm & 40mm is OK for me but I really do like 36mm - my wrist is 6.75"
My ZEX
Last edited by Velorum; 17th May 2015 at 20:00.
Nope, waaay too tiny
That's better!
Last edited by J J Carter; 14th May 2015 at 21:36.
If you like vintage watches then most are smaller than today's.
I wore a 36mm watch for the best part of 20 years and I am now regressing back towards that being my preferred size. Or am I evolving rather than regressing?
Some 42mm watches are okay on me though, as long as there's no dreaded overhang...
Have Smiths, Omega and Zenith in 35mm. I like small watches!
Dustbin lids are sooo yesterday, the smart sophisticated and stylish are all heading to 40mm and less.
I don't see how 39mm is small for a dress watch. For me, 36 or 37mm is my sweet spot, up to 40mm for a chronograph or diver because of the extra detail or bezel.
My latest acquisition is only 36mm, so I guess I must be man enough!
Wearing this as I type...
Nothing wrong with small watches, especially with my girly wrists! Part of me wanting a vintage watch...
I have seen a good number of 36mm watches I like, but on an 8" plus wrist size it just looks odd
I'm losing the battle to classify this lovely watch as a "keeper" in my collection.
Its a 36mm chronograph but with my 20.5 cm ( 8.25 inch ) wrist i am struggling to convince myself its an appropriate size for me. The beauty of the watch keeps bringing me back but i believe the romance is dying, its just 2mm too small for me !!
I fear this one will soon be on the chopping block.
Now if it was 36mm square then it might work for me. I have a Monaco and at 39mm it wears quite big
If I had girly wrists I'd wear little watches too but I'll just stick with man size thanks
Gray
Funny that the 39mm Oyster Perpetual is quoted as an example of watches getting smaller - the point is it's larger! Possibly fractionally too large for me but we'll have to wait and see.
Let me knowOriginally Posted by Darren Cal.11/12
I'm losing the battle to classify this lovely watch as a "keeper" in my collection.
Its a 36mm chronograph but with my 20.5 cm ( 8.25 inch ) wrist i am struggling to convince myself its an appropriate size for me. The beauty of the watch keeps bringing me back but i believe the romance is dying, its just 2mm too small for me !!
I fear this one will soon be on the chopping block.
.... while the smart sophisticated and stylish ladies are heading towards 40mm and greater.
The watch I wear most at the moment is a little over 34mm... fits perfectly. (Rolex Airking Explorer in case you were wondering).
You girls look great in your little watches. More power to you!
Lol, wishful thinking of wimpy wrists!!
For every watch less than 40mm at Basel, there were ten above 40
The insecurity of small watch lovers is mind boggling
Year after year they hear the death knell of 'big' watches
Why can't they be happy with their own choices instead of trying to ram it down others throats saying that is the new trend?
There are plenty of watches around 40mm that are exquisite and wearable.
It doesn't have to be a trend or the death of big watches.
Wear what you like without trying to make it sound that it is a universal or growing choice.
How very true.
Agreed on the female trend for larger watches.
For me, I have big and small. Today I'm wearing a speedbird gmt, and yesterday was a G10 so I'm not averse to smaller watches.
I've tried a few larger watches - up to 45mm, but my shrinking collection (no pun intended) is now all in the 36-42mm range.
These three are about 36mm...
But the Zeno is heading for a new home when I get back this afternoon
z
Last edited by zelig; 14th May 2015 at 07:46.
I think it's more a reflection of fashion journalists always needing a "new" trend. The article says this move to sub 40mm watches by Rolex, Omega and Grand Seiko is new, but Rolex have always had loads of watches that size, as have Omega and the vast majority of Grand Seikos are classically styled and 36-38mm. So it's all rubbish really!
There's an element of protesting too much here, but after the gentle downsizing of recent years, Basel (which is always 2-3 years behind the economy) has inflated again in step with the growing wealth of the top slice. But even brands that have hitched their wagon to the wristclock train in recent years - Glycine, Oris, Omega - are making more classically proportioned for the majority, who of course vastly outnumber people on the Internet with 9" wrists.
...but what do I know; I don't even like watches!
Fixed that for you!
This. Generally they've become more a fashion accessory than timekeeper for many in the wider world so I don't see big watches going out of style anytime soon. As for more smaller watches coming along, becoming "fashionable" I say good, more choice is always better than less.
I'm scrawny of wrist so 40mm is about my limit. A watch like a Panerai looks ridiculous on me, a Hublot beyond daft. Case and lug design comes into it too of course and as Mindforge wrote designs like chronos and divers can run larger. My largest is 43mm, but it's slim in profile and the lugs curve enough and it's a chrono. If it was a dressy type I'd look like a kid who nicked his dads watch. :)
Yep, Rolex current range from 44mm, Yachtmaster-II & DSSD, EXP-II at 42mm, DD-II and DJ-II at 41mm, the rest are 40mm or less
It is not universal, or the death of big watches, but it is a trend towards greater choice. We went through a few years when 42mm became an almost universally accepted 'standard' size, with most of the exceptions being larger. Now there are a few more models appearing which balance that out, which is a good thing. It doesn't necessarily imply a trend towards smaller watches, as even a 40mm watch may wear large on those with slimmer wrists. But it does imply a trend towards a wider range of sizes, reflecting the simple fact that not everyone is the same.
I don't own anything larger than 40mm, and have a couple of old 36mm. I don't have particularly small wrists, but just don't go for this oversize trend
My wrists are 8.25 inches so can handle big watches .I like watches around the 42mm to 45 mm range .I don't like anything really large and thick and I think really small watches look a bit daft on me.However two friends of mine have huge wrists over 9 inches and both wear small vintage watches probably around 36 mm .I don't think it suits them they look like toy watches ,but they like the style .Basically whatever you like is fine there is no rules set in stone.
In due course I think we will view watches over 40mm as we view flares ...
Being noticed for the watch you are wearing isn't a good look and I'm most comfortable wearing 36-37 mm on my 6.75" wrist.
However because I indulge in watches for their own sake, around the home I still get pleasure from wearing my Stowa MO and PRS-29B. If I never left the house, I might wear these most of the time.
I just wonder why wrists are measured in inches but watches in mm ?
Omega Speedmaster? 42mm since 1957! Looked spot on then and spot on now.
Despite my moaning and preference for smaller watches, I had a 42mm chrono arrive yesterday. It looks perfect, even on my skinny wrists!
I'll wear anything that looks and feels 'right' on me.
Yeah; perhaps 40mm is a bit of a low cut off; really I'm referring to some of the massive gongs you see people wearing ...
Fair summation and is how it should be.
As Andrew pointed out,I probably protest too much.
It was actually just under 40mm back then, although that was still bigger than almost everything else at the time (Rolex, Universal...) with the exception of the Navitimer, which needed the space for circular slide rule. I think the extra couple of mm eventually came from the beefed-up case that provided some crown/pusher protection. As the Speedmaster was aimed at motorsport, the larger case allowed for the tachymetre to be included, and easy enough to read.
...but what do I know; I don't even like watches!
I love the aesthetic of a smaller vintage Omega and was given a 50's Seamaster that my MIL found in a junkshop. Got it running with a clean and lube but I simply couldn't wear it - the diameter and strap size conspired to make my reasonably large wrists look massive! Think a 40mm is probably the smallest I'd ever feel comfortable going.
I recently picked up a 36mm GS and I love it on my 8.25" wrist.
I also see a 36mm Explorer in my crystal ball too
logic dressed up as trends.. blah.
if you've got a 30 inch waist, if you wear 50 inch jeans youre going to look like a dummy.
equally if you've got a 50 inch waist and try to squeeze it into a pair of 34's = look like a muffin.
where what's appropriate rather than what's dictated by fashion or forums.
Ironic that U-Boat Watches are all 50mm+ when the original U-Boot officers wore 31mm watches
I am surprised that over sized watch craze has lasted as long as it has. If you are a huge person then 44 mm plus is ok. With most of them though, you open the back and see a diddy little movement surrounded by a plastic spacer and a lot of air. As big I go is 40 mm, but 38 is more realistic for my wrist size
[IMG][/IMG]
I quite like a small watch, quite like a big one too though! (ooo-errr mrs)!
I wore an Oris for about 20 years which was about 36mm and was happy, I'm 6 foot so not a small guy. Started looking at this forum and now 38, 39 the norm, although they looked big to me to start with but love them now. Might go for 40mm but no bigger. As mentioned very much depends of the watch and lugs.
Square watches wear differently, but this one is 36mmx28mm. Just switched it to leather from a bracelet...
I've got small but flat wrists at 6.5".
I think 36-39mm is my ideal, but I'm comfortable and wear up to 42mm.
Last edited by nori; 14th May 2015 at 18:29.
I actually agree with much of what you say and I deleted the bit I thought was a bit daft - though I do get that it was intended to stir.
The other category of people that complete your statement are the equally insecure people who - perhaps believing they have larger wrists than they do or, even more insecure, that having average size or slim wrists is somehow a bad thing - feel the need to buy the hugest watch they can and end up with a manhole cover.
No problem at 34mm. A Nato chunks it up a bit, either way I'm good.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
