Okay... I admit. I'm past 40 and pretty much clueless when it comes to trends. My son is only 9 years old and he's not into fashion (yet).
But I haven't noticed a lot of people looking like this on the streets of Helsinki. But Sweden and Finland have traditionally gotten the newest trends last haha.
I remember the 80s well, wasn`t the best decade for style or music in my opinion, but at least the watches were sensibly sized. Quartz was still king, and slim watches were still popular. Sadly, the quality of most brands was poor by today's standards (Rolex excepted, plus the small manufacturers) and significantly worse than the 60s/70s, that didn`t change till the early 90s.
Ironically, in years gone by (50s, 60s), when 34mm was a standard size for men's watches, smaller versions were made for the Asian market, simply because a lot of Asians were of small build and were happier with 31-32mm watches! Omega certainly did this with some of the early 60s Seamasters, mid-size versions crop up occasionally and they're worth less.
One of the factors that worked against bimetal watches was price. As watch prices began to rise sharply around 2008 the steel models caught up to the price level the bimetals had sold at. Yellow gold jewellery in general declined in popularity and that's partly due to prices going up. Watch manufacturers loved this, they're now selling steel watches at elevated prices and they don`t have the costs involved with producing gold or bimetal.
The 90s in particular was awash with cheap gold plated watches, including bimetals, and they don`t age well at all. Once the plating wears they don`t look good.
As time has passed, smaller watches and bimetals are associated with older people, and that doesn`t appeal to the youngsters. A bit like wearing jeans that don`t have holes in the knees or look like their too tight on the legs......who wants to look like their dad when they can look ridiculous instead!
Yoof......you've just got to laugh at them!
Recently I've bought an Oris and a Nomos both of which are 36mm. At first they both seemed a little on the small side for my 7.25" wrist being used to wearing 40mm and over pieces. However having got used to how they look, I haven't worn anything larger for a few months. They slip under long sleeved clothing more easily and are alot more comfortable. Now when I wear anything over 38mm it just feels and looks ridiculous.
Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk
Last edited by Robert189598; 21st January 2019 at 13:13.
On one hand, with beige now being the most popular new car colour and my uber-fashionable daughter wearing flared trousers, I think the 1970's are on their way back.
On the other hand, the Mini (steering wheel picture) shows that today's versions of things tend to be quite a lot bigger.
Best exercise I know for improving wrist diameter is writing. (can't think of any others)
I personally wouldn't wear anything less than 40 /41 mm. But I have watches that belonged to both of my Grandfathers and they are around 29 -30 mm if memory serves me correctly. I'd never wear them as they are too small.
No do believe that the demand for 42mm+ case sizes are over or going out of style but there is now maybe a higher awareness of smaller case sizes as the big watch trend has been dominating social media for well over a decade.
With the mass appeal of larger wrist watches, there will always be the kick back from the wannabe style gurus of Hodinkee, GQ etc to look like they are on the cusp of setting new trends, when in reality the small cased Watch has been just as popular within the market place but was just not showing up on the wrists of the Footballers and such who were easily spotted with the large wrist flash with social media awash with the images. This maybe gave a false impression of the watch market and the diversity within because it does not show up on social media does not mean it does not exist and the demand for sub 40mm is just as in demand as it was 10/20 years ago. Some watches look good at sub 40mm and some better at 42/44mm etc.
You will have the extreme of both ends of the size scale but a lot depends on the Watch aesthetic on how well it looks on anyone’s wrist.
Gets more attention if it’s bigger?
Looks better value for money?
Makes the wearer feel more manly?
Who knows?
Jeremy Beadle wore a really small watch, but on the other hand.............
:-0
For what it's worth, that DJ36 looks perfect size wise imo. I have 7.25inch wrists and I tried a DJ41 on recently. My girlfriend said it looked 'silly'. I tried the DJ36 on and she said, 'perfect. Now you are wearing the watch rather than the watch wearing you.
If all goes well intend to. She also said that I am not elegant enough to rock a DJ (fluted bezel, white dial with romans on jubilee)..... and you know...she was right. I'm a musician with a casual style and a sports rolex best suits me. I ended up getting a GMT BLNR which she loves on me. I want to get her a 31mm DJ when the time is right. She most definitely is elegant enough to rock a DJ.
Can someone tell me where these dirt cheap datejusts are to be found? Prices have only gone up the last few years, same as all rolex. I remember buying 900£ 16030s about 4 years ago... In great nick, cant even get a 1601 wreck for that now...
I`m 61, I ceased to be elegant many years ago, I own the exact same watch! If you like the watch, just wear it, I wear mine to take the dog for a walk when I haven`t even had a shave for 3 days (that's what being retired is like). An old mate of mine, who's played in bands for years, wears a bimetal Datejust that he's owned a long time.
I reckon you can go anywhere with a Datejust, especially the pre-2006 versions.
Perhaps 'elegant' wasn't the right word. I'm not wealthy enough to justify owning multiple Rolex so, for the time being at least, I had to chose one Rolex and her point was that the sports models are more 'me' and I have to say I think she was right. She is always immaculately turned out and she looks $1m so I feel justified in taking her advice seriously on such issues. Nothing against the DJ, I've had a 1601 in the past and I do love the current 116200 and 116234 models.
I think a lot is down to personal taste.
I have a 6.75” wrist and wear my 36mm Seamaster 120m most of the time, it just feels right to me.
I’ve also got a 40mm Sub and a 41mm SMP300 which I quite happily wear for casual occasions. The larger sizes seem to match the style of these watches whereas, to me at least, the 36mm is perfect for my everyday watch.
Neither size is right or wrong, its just my personal preference.
I think this illustrates how different human beings are. I’m 6’2’’, 17 stone but my wrists are broad and flat. I can’t even get a Rolex Submariner 16610 over my hand if it’s had more than 1 link removed (well unless I undo the divers extension) On me anything under 40mm looks odd. I was at a GTG and couldn’t try on a single Rolex there as I just couldn’t get them over my hand. But if you met me, I’m not huge, I don’t have arms like Sylvester Stallone - but I just have slightly larger hands and thicker flatter wrists than most people my size and build. And wrist shots don’t really show sizes properly imho - it’s all about camera angle etc etc. I am good at arm wrestling, as is my father - must be genetic big hands and forearms - so maybe big wrists come in useful for something! (But not average sized watches!)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I was out of the watch game for quite a few years and came back in about 3 years ago. Until more recently, the last watch I had bought was in about 1989 and it was 34mm. When I started shopping around in 2015 I had a hard time finding anything under 40mm, but am very happy to see that more companies are offering 36-38mm models. I find 36mm to be a very comfortable sweet spot for me and lately I've been salivating at the sight of the 36mm Everest and PRS-29. I think if more people would wear one of these smaller watches for a week they would understand the appeal better. They sit really nicely and tuck into your sleeve much better than some of the taller 40mm+ models. To each their own, but I have several of my dad's watches and a watch from my grandfather, all are under 35mm and my grandfather was a tall and imposing figure.
What would Papa Hemingway say if you told him he was wearing a ladies watch (before he punched you in the mouth)?
Last edited by marschv; 23rd January 2019 at 03:25. Reason: additional jape
The sign for me is the number of young millennials I see wearing vintage style dress watches. Slim and small seems to be well in favour in my part of the world (inner city surburbs of large Australian cities if you’re interested).
Don’t agree with all the fashion choices but the watches are nice!
In the past ive always had big watches mainly panerai
But i must admit my watches are getting smaller
Just got an iwc heritage pilot 40mm which i admit when i first put it on felt to small
But its growing on me
Mens watches seem to be getting smaller
Womens watches are getting bigger
Panerai are obviously still championing big watches with the new Carbotech Subs @ 47mm
On the whole I think I see far fewer people wearing big TW Steel's - which is nice.
Andy
Wanted - Damasko DC57
Personally I thinks it’s some of today’s larger and more gaudy watches that will be filed alongside these looks in the not too distant future...
(More gems here)
I did go to the panerai boutique in Hong Kong to look at the 42mm due. However both male and female staff were wearing the larger 47mm 0392 and submersible. Also a lot of the customers were walking out with this size including middle aged ladies! In the end I got a pam0392 clean simple and classic and it is actually more comfortable than my bade models which are 44 mm
Black Bay 58 ..is a (marketing) move back to the earlier Sub size
The 5513 seems small when I wear it compared with my 16610 and even my SKX 007, (probably because of the thickness of the case)
I can see 36mm gold filled Dress watches coming back into fashion
Last edited by BillN; 23rd January 2019 at 15:21.
I really think it depends on the situation. I wear a seAmaster every day with my suit to work, a jlc vintage triple date as a dress watch and a zenith cp2 at weekends, all different sizes and all look good in the right setting.
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Rolex Explorer – 36mm. Perfect watch
[url=https://postimg.cc/image/g7t9dxior/]
[/url<https://s17.postimg.org/dqhi6nysf/explorer_114270.jpg%5b/img%5d%5b/url>]
I do not believe it is so much bigger watches going out of style as much as the makers realising that a significant percentage of watch buying public prefers smaller sized watches and wisely deciding to cater to them as well. And that, I feel is a welcome development. Plus, it is not just the big brands but the micro brands as well.
Diameter is not the only factor to overall size.
Some 36mm watches look smaller than others but IMHO a 36mm DD will never be out of fashion, nor in fashion. It is a timeless design.
PS my wrist size is 7.25”
WG 18039
The average size of a mans watch back in the 40's was 32mm and I doubt many here would demand we return to that size. The average size of watches has crept up just like the size of mens wrists not so much for fashion. I would not wear anything smaller than 39mm today the rest are too small and will disappear from shelves just like 32mm watches have.
think there should be all sizes to fit all, however if the only made 37mm and below sizes or over 44mm, I would walk away form buying any more watches. size I believe is like beauty , in the eye of the beholder.
Sorry but I think you will struggle to find evidence to back up these assertions.
I'd suggest the increase in the size of the average watch is mainly to do with fashion and very little to do with increases in the size of the average wrist. On this very thread we have a report that the staff - both male and female - in the Panerai boutique in Hong Kong currently wear 47mm diameter watches. I assume you would concede that the typical Chinese female wrist size in 2019 isn't larger than the typical European male wrist size was in the 1940s? More generally, you often see watches on men now which overhang their wrists in a way which can best be described as plain daft.
It is fashion gone mad, and I very much doubt it'll last for ever. More likely than sub-37mm watches disappearing from the shelves never to return is that ludicrously oversized ones will do so, once this particular fashion trend has eventually run its course. Especially so given that for most of us with wrist sizes in the average range (or smaller) they are so singularly uncomfortable as well as looking silly.
Had a trip this year to Florida and at one of the shopping malls Invicta had an outlet, they were the biggest, gaudiest watches I have ever seen, if you bought 3, 4 or 5 you would get a better deal and so on - seriously, to top it off people were buying and trying on 50+mm watches with wrists like an Asian hand model, this sort of thing -
Please mind the door handle on the way through -
Last edited by murkeywaters; 23rd January 2019 at 23:42.
Actually, if you check the facts over the last 70-80 years and before that you will see at least men have increased in both size and height Google check it for yourself. People today due to better foods, better living, better medicines have for many years steadily grown. The phenomena of the watch size has steadily increased with them as well. In the 40's-32mm was pretty much the standard size, 50's-35mm standard size, 60's moving from 36mm to 39mm and continuing from there. Based on your comments it being fashion driven is far from being accurate as we are talking about mens watches on men not women.
There aren't to many 7-1/2 inch wrists that carry a 36mm watch as well as a 40mm and you will find more people today find a watch in the 40mm to 42mm size to be their most "comfortable" size. Remember the comfortable part is personal and the comments from reading through the various watch forums for the last 15 years. If you feel wearing something the size of a dime on the wrist is the perfect size your in the minority.
Now onto Panerai this is a whole different argument and is it fashion today, maybe, but true to it's original roots as a large dive watch so it can't factor in to the argument because it has always been a large watch from its inception.
Women are an entirely different entity you are factoring in to the wrong argument. They tend to make fashion driven decisions so bringing them into an argument about the size of men's watches today and yesterday is irrelevant.
If you're saying that larger watches are due to larger wrist sizes and, using your figures, the former have increased from 32mm in the 40s to 40-42mm now then that implies that wrist sizes have increased by at least a quarter in the last 75 years. Pull the other one!
I'm afraid your impression of typical watch sizes has gone off beam as well. In the 50s the typical watch was not 35mm and in the 70s it wasn't 36mm increasing to 39mm. Until the 80s most watches were 34mm in diameter as standard, or smaller. Some 'sport' watches were a bit larger, true. For example the 1016 Explorer, in production for around 25 years from 1963, and considered a larger watch during that period, measures 36mm. Yes, there were larger 'sport' models, but my point is that anything over 34 mm was bigger than average for watches over these decades.