No More Watches > 40mm For Me.......

[Jason71]

Originally Posted by eonflux

Definitely should let go of watches, and other things, if you aren't happy with them

But hard for others to comment on whether they'd agree that watches >40mm are too big for you. Pics could help.
Otherwise it's like announcing that you're no longer wearing size L shirts when perhaps all this time, you should have been wearing M size shirts.
I don't think it'd be logical to state that a certain size watch is perfect or inappropriate for everyone/anyone.

Guys frequently wear shirts, jackets, suits that are too big (shoulders, sleeves). I see more of that than watches that are too large.

If you read what I stated though, I didn't really comment that I felt the watches 'looked' too big on me, I said that the larger watches just weren't as comfortable as my smaller watches. Therefore, I made the decision to stick with watches 40mm or smaller. Honestly.......I value the forum's input on some things, but this was a personal decision, and I could care less what the collective here thinks about my decision. (No malice intended)

[TheVTCGuy]

First of all, congrats! Whatever size, from 25mm to 67mm that feels the most comfortable and you enjoy the best, then by all means. That's the one for you. I on the other hand, am the opposite.

I had 40s for years, but gravitated towards the 41DJ II and then the 42 EX II. I find that those two sizes are perfect, in every respect. Feel, look, visibility, everything. I don't think I'll ever buy a 40 again, but that's me.

Enjoy all your 40mm watches!

[anothernewphone]

Size is relative -- a Daytona isn't going to look great on every 8" wrist, so there should be plenty of range in size offerings. I admire a lot of Panerai's offerings, but I could never wear one. My buddy was set on buying a Sky-Dweller, but it's just too large on his wrist.

I'll take 40mm all day, every day, but that doesn't mean watches that are larger are "out of style" across the board.

[filfoster]

What was the reason 36mm was the standard size for so long?

[speedolex]

Originally Posted by filfoster

What was the reason 36mm was the standard size for so long?

It wasn't actually. From the 30's to the 60's when Hamilton's were 22mm wide and Omegas were 33mm wide, Rolexes were considered large, 36mm positively enormous. By the 60's the 36mm settled in as the defacto men's size, I'm guessing because no one thought anyone would want anything bigger.

[eonflux]

Originally Posted by speedolex

It wasn't actually. From the 30's to the 60's when Hamilton's were 22mm wide and Omegas were 33mm wide, Rolexes were considered large, 36mm positively enormous. By the 60's the 36mm settled in as the defacto men's size, I'm guessing because no one thought anyone would want anything bigger.

I've heard the theory that the earlier wristwatches were small because the mfr's wanted to demonstrate that they could make smaller movements than what was used in pocket watches.

I wonder if in the '60's, those 36mm Rolexes were thought to be almost inappropriately large, as are 50mm+ watches today.

Of note, Panerai I believe was making 47mm watches in the '30's, with functionality/legibility as a significant design factor, and there have been similarly large pilot watches. Panerai's used for diving were worn over dive suits and I believe pilot watches were worn over flight jackets, so larger sizes were not a problem.

The 36mm and smaller watches do not appear to have been designed according to what would be appropriate anatomically or functionally (legibility).
I think it's hard to say what the "right" size for a watch should be.
Great that we have so many options now, and can choose what suits us all best.

[masyv6]

I've found that case diameter sizes mean less to me than lug to lug measurements and case curvature.

[busytimmy]

Originally Posted by masyv6

I've found that case diameter sizes mean less to me than lug to lug measurements and case curvature.

+1

Tried the SM300 this afternoon, and that watch, for instance, wears larger than my Sinn U1 @44mm

[masyv6]

Originally Posted by busytimmy

+1



Tried the SM300 this afternoon, and that watch, for instance, wears larger than my Sinn U1 @44mm

Hey I tried on the SM300 and thought the exact same thing about the U1 fully-Tegimented that I used to own. The saleswoman at the Omega boutique kept trying to convince me that it was a better watch than the no-Date Submariner that I was wearing, too. Rather off-putting.

[busytimmy]

Originally Posted by masyv6

Hey I tried on the SM300 and thought the exact same thing about the U1 fully-Tegimented that I used to own. The saleswoman at the Omega boutique kept trying to convince me that it was a better watch than the no-Date Submariner that I was wearing, too. Rather off-putting.

Yeah, I think it's the lugs. They're long and straight. I kinda had a feeling it wouldn't work out based on pictures I saw, and today confirmed it.

So, more important than pure case diameter, I think, are things like lug size, shape and perhaps weight and thickness.

[michaeli3]

40 is my limit, and i like that size.
i also consider the thickness of the case
My Sub C / no date, is my thickest watch, but not my only 40mm watch

[kirksingleton]

Every time I put on my Dj, it feels like I put on my wife's watch accidentally.
40-44 seems to be the right size for me.

[Wingman244]

Meh... The only reason I own a Rolex is because the Explorer II 42mm looked right and felt right on my wrist. For me (please don't forget this - my opinion only) the Sub, GMT and especially the Daytona were all too small. I have kind of turned away from considering future Rolex watches because it appears they concentrate on the 40mm and under segment. I am finding a lot to like in the Omega lineup where they seem to find their sweet spot at 42mm. I know it is only 2mm but it makes a difference for me. I just purchased a non-moon Speedmaster and am looking at either a Planet Ocean 42mm or a Speedmaster Mark II for my next watch. Different strokes for different folks.

I love this watch. (crappy iPhone photo, makes the watch look flat) For me, it's everything I wish the new Daytona was - 42mm, true Panda dial, modern update to the Daytona 6241, date complication, auto, BROAD ARROW hands!, etc. I can't take it off. My poor Polar E2 is sitting at home.

Compared to this... http://lesartisansdegeneve.com/en/25...o-daytona-6241 I think it's pretty close to perfect.

[red1108nyc]

I have a small 6.5 inch wrist but rotate between these 3 birds quite frequently so 40-42mm is definitely where my comfort level lies

[subking86]

My favorite is 40 and below. Like many have said though, it also depends on how the watch wears. I have a 44mm Breitling Colt that is pretty thin in comparison to others. It's very comfortable. Although I do notice it in the mirror as a slightly larger watch, it doesn't feel flashy.
When the funds are available, I will be trading the watch (plus cash) for either an exp II polar, either 36 or 39 mm explorer, or a yaghtmaster blue or gray. (I have a long wish list.)

[Ritch99]

Lol...To each his own.

[bostonrecruit]

I guess I will give up on the Skydweller. It just feels and looks too big on my wrist.

[Jason71]

Originally Posted by bostonrecruit

I guess I will give up on the Skydweller. It just feels and looks too big on my wrist.

I feel the same way.......and it is unfortunate because I have REALLY warmed to the aesthetics of the Skydweller model.

[ernie2]

Funny I have the same thoughs about selling all the >40mm watches.

[VXGBH]

sobering moments aye? I also went through that and sold my Pam 372 and dssd, now keeping to 40mm and below, I got no regrets.

[speedolex]

Originally Posted by VXGBH

sobering moments aye? I also went through that and sold my Pam 372 and dssd, now keeping to 40mm and below, I got no regrets.

When fashion trends die, they die quickly and they die hard.

[SeaAndSky]

Originally Posted by speedolex

When fashion trends die, they die quickly and they die hard.

Thank goodness.

[kilyung]

My range is 36 to 47

[WAK4]

Originally Posted by kilyung

My range is 36 to 47

Mike, why so narrow minded...?

[SearChart]

I own watches larger than 40mm, but I prefer 34-38mm sizes in terms of both looks and comfort.

[lhanddds]

40mm is an easy choice ( except for the super cases) in Rolex. Other brands I prefer to evaluate on an individual basis.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Investr]

No chance here! A regular DJ looks like a girls watch on me. I'm 6'0 230 lbs and 40 is the smallest I'll do. 42 is ideal

[blue lion]

Both of mine are 40mm. I want something larger and will get it at some point.

[Cimballi]

Congratulations!
It looks like you're making your way towards wisdom.

[Fleetlord]

nope.