ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
6 May 2009, 10:56 PM | #1 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: new york, usa
Posts: 2,903
|
will rolex go......
bigger than 43mm???? i think they will.... im hoping they come out with a 45mm model??? what does everyone else think????
|
6 May 2009, 11:03 PM | #2 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2009
Real Name: Brandon
Location: Toronto
Watch: GMT-Master IIc
Posts: 71
|
Deep-Tona-Gaus II perhaps??
|
6 May 2009, 11:16 PM | #3 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Real Name: Trevor
Location: Arizona
Posts: 5,740
|
I am just fine with a 40mm watch, and the hip hop big watch trend won't last forever. Hopefully they stick with tradition and don't cave to a fashion trend.
__________________
My grails: |
6 May 2009, 11:18 PM | #4 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 9,407
|
40mm is fine
J |
6 May 2009, 11:22 PM | #5 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Real Name: James
Location: UK
Watch: AP ROC, SkyDweller
Posts: 812
|
max 41mm imo. Personally I think the DDII and DJII should have been 39mm, one under the 'sport sizes' of 40mm. DSSD is obv the exception, as it is the ultimate sport/tool watch in the line in my eyes.
I won't lose sleep over the 41mm DD and DJ II cases, but I think that 39mm may have been more appropriate for these 'dress' models. No bigger (sports or otherwise) than this though IMO |
6 May 2009, 11:29 PM | #6 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Real Name: D'OH!
Location: Kentucky
Watch: Rolex-1 Tudor-3
Posts: 36,217
|
Haven't we been here before??
dP
__________________
TRF Member# 1668 Bass Player in TRF "AFTER DARK" Bar & NightClub Band Commander-in-Chief of The Nylon Nation The Crown & Shield Club Honorary Member of P-Club |
6 May 2009, 11:32 PM | #7 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Real Name: Denis
Location: Flanders, EU
Watch: Diver watches
Posts: 2,009
|
Never (I hope) , 40 is perfect for sport , 36 for dress.
|
6 May 2009, 11:39 PM | #8 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: new york, usa
Posts: 2,903
|
i thought they would have never gone above 40mm??? but now who knows??? i dont think tradition exists anymore
|
6 May 2009, 11:44 PM | #9 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: new york, usa
Posts: 2,903
|
|
6 May 2009, 11:47 PM | #10 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Real Name: D'OH!
Location: Kentucky
Watch: Rolex-1 Tudor-3
Posts: 36,217
|
Quote:
dP
__________________
TRF Member# 1668 Bass Player in TRF "AFTER DARK" Bar & NightClub Band Commander-in-Chief of The Nylon Nation The Crown & Shield Club Honorary Member of P-Club |
|
6 May 2009, 11:48 PM | #11 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: new york, usa
Posts: 2,903
|
|
6 May 2009, 11:48 PM | #12 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Real Name: Kevin
Location: USA
Watch: the skies
Posts: 1,250
|
40-41mm is perfect for a sports watch. It is meant to perform without getting in the way. But if you use your watch as jewelry to validate yourself and need everyone to notice and hopefully comment on it, then I can understand why someone would want the size to be bigger. Unfortuntely, I don't think it really helps in compensating for other shortcomings.
|
6 May 2009, 11:50 PM | #13 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Real Name: D'OH!
Location: Kentucky
Watch: Rolex-1 Tudor-3
Posts: 36,217
|
Quote:
I think you put your finger on it. NOW TAKE YOUR FINGER OFF OF IT!!! dP
__________________
TRF Member# 1668 Bass Player in TRF "AFTER DARK" Bar & NightClub Band Commander-in-Chief of The Nylon Nation The Crown & Shield Club Honorary Member of P-Club |
|
6 May 2009, 11:51 PM | #14 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: new york, usa
Posts: 2,903
|
Quote:
|
|
7 May 2009, 12:33 AM | #15 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Real Name: Rick
Location: California
Watch: GMT II, DD, DJ II
Posts: 591
|
For my wrist 40 is perfect. I have tried on other watches that are 44 and thought it just looked too big.
|
7 May 2009, 12:47 AM | #16 |
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2007
Real Name: Matt
Location: Arlington, VA
Watch: Lange One MP
Posts: 4,043
|
I'd say they will lag behind in the size race, but if more and more people move above 40mm they have shown the willingness to adapt to the market and maybe grow too. I agree with those that say they won't be on the vanguard of change though.
Personally, if they're going to make a monster like the SDDS, they should have made the diameter a better match for the thickness (44mm?). Can't wear it with most dress shirts now anyway. It would have been in better proportion and certainly more readable. It may have very well taken back a tiny slice of the Panny market share too. |
7 May 2009, 12:50 AM | #17 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: Buz
Location: Atlanta
Watch: Rolex Tudor Pam
Posts: 5,108
|
I think eventually the average Rolex will be 50mm. But that is probably a couple of hundred years from now when the average person is 7' tall and weighs 300 lbs. So stick around and you will be a happy camper. As for me at 6' 180 lbs 36 to 40 mm is perfect.
__________________
Buz The faster you move, the slower time passes, the longer you live. Peter Diamandis |
7 May 2009, 12:53 AM | #18 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 55
|
i dont see them doing it anytime soon
|
7 May 2009, 01:06 AM | #19 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Real Name: Brent
Location: St Louis
Watch: Rolex Sub Date
Posts: 1,516
|
I just want a 40mm right now!!
__________________
16610 Submariner GMT Master II 16710 1675 |
7 May 2009, 01:06 AM | #20 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Real Name: Xenophon
Location: UK
Posts: 2,728
|
I reccently bought an Omega PO 45.5mm. It doesn't feel too large on my wrist. The reason I went for that size is because it will be more legible when diving in low light conditions as I have a problem with my eyes that limits my dark (and very bright) vision. I don't think Rolex should change their current sizing just because it's a bit of a fashionable fad at the moment.
__________________
The sea! The sea! Θάλαττα! θάλαττα! |
7 May 2009, 01:09 AM | #21 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: new york, usa
Posts: 2,903
|
Quote:
|
|
7 May 2009, 01:58 AM | #22 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Real Name: Jen
Location: Jax, FL
Watch: Sea-Dweller
Posts: 3,977
|
|
7 May 2009, 02:10 AM | #23 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Real Name: Emil
Location: Bay Area, CA
Watch: U macallit
Posts: 2,645
|
If they do, then that's the time to switch to Panerai.
|
7 May 2009, 02:14 AM | #24 |
TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron
Join Date: May 2007
Real Name: Larry
Location: Mojave Desert
Watch: GMT's
Posts: 43,515
|
I think that somebody is obsessed a bit too much with size.....
__________________
(Chill ... It's just a watch Forum.....) NAWCC Member |
7 May 2009, 02:17 AM | #25 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2009
Real Name: Mark-O!
Location: Arlington, TX
Watch: Rolex
Posts: 12,714
|
|
7 May 2009, 02:29 AM | #26 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: new york, usa
Posts: 2,903
|
|
7 May 2009, 02:32 AM | #27 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: CAN / SIN
Watch: Plat. Masterpiece
Posts: 1,959
|
I'd abandon Rolex if they got bigger than the 41mm which is already far too large and out of proportion. 39mm is my limit.
|
7 May 2009, 03:00 AM | #28 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: new york, usa
Posts: 2,903
|
|
7 May 2009, 03:59 AM | #29 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: CAN / SIN
Watch: Plat. Masterpiece
Posts: 1,959
|
Well, I meant as far as watches I would actually buy. DD, etc.
|
7 May 2009, 04:03 AM | #30 |
Fondly Remembered
Join Date: May 2005
Real Name: JJ
Location: Auckland, NZ
Watch: ALL SOLD!!
Posts: 74,319
|
42 mm at the most.....but no more than that!!
__________________
Words fail me in expressing my utmost thanks to ALL of you for this wonderful support during my hour of need!! I firmly believe that my time on planet earth is NOT yet up!! I shall fight this to the very end.......and WIN!! |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.