ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Dream99 · 9 January 2013, 02:39 AM

I read lots about guys saying 40mm watches being to small for them. Do you think this is the case and will Rolex eventually realise perhaps a 42-44mm Sub would be a better watch for most or would it compete with the DSSD to much for their long term stratergy ?

Vincent65 · 9 January 2013, 02:40 AM

no - 40mm sub = perfect

Mickey® · 9 January 2013, 02:41 AM

Nope. I don't think so.
But some others will think so.
Others will also not care.

Mlpugh · 9 January 2013, 02:42 AM

Yes!

s14roller · 9 January 2013, 02:42 AM

I wear a 44mm AP on weekends. 40mm Sub still feels fine on weekdays.

Htab · 9 January 2013, 02:43 AM

I personally think its wears and looks perfect. I recently sold my deep sea because I didn't wear it and thought it wore to thick on my wrist.

Cru Jones · 9 January 2013, 02:43 AM

warren G. · 9 January 2013, 02:45 AM

I don't think the Submariner is too small. But I do have a 6.5 (.75 on a good day

) But imho, I really think a bigger Submariner will sell pretty well. Yes, I understand that the Submariner is already a great seller. But from my personal experiences with my peers and just talking to people. A lot of them really think most Rolex are relevantly small.

outlaw468 · 9 January 2013, 02:46 AM

Nope, I think 40mm is an ideal size for a sport watch.

Like To Watch · 9 January 2013, 02:51 AM

Let me think.........No!

Armyguy03 · 9 January 2013, 02:51 AM

Perfect size for me. 6.5 and up wrist (depending on the day) 6'2" and it's perfect.

financeman · 9 January 2013, 02:53 AM

I think it is the perfect size. I don't think they will ever change

Furbo · 9 January 2013, 02:55 AM

No way. 116610s are perfect.

AK797 · 9 January 2013, 02:58 AM

Subc wears like a 42mm, so with old sub at 40mm and DSSD at 44mm all wrists are catered for.

Frogman4me · 9 January 2013, 02:59 AM

Please no, 40mm is perfect. I could even live without the maxi case!

WhatTheDeuce · 9 January 2013, 03:01 AM

No!

MP5 · 9 January 2013, 03:05 AM

40 is fine but41 with old lugs would be fine too

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

thomaspp · 9 January 2013, 03:19 AM

No. Dislike the BIG 42+ trend...

tomchicago · 9 January 2013, 03:21 AM

40mm far too small. 60mm is minimum, 80-100mm much more in line, with one meter diameter cases to really become the norm.

thomaspp · 9 January 2013, 03:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomchicago

40mm far too small. 60mm is minimum, 80-100mm much more in line, with one meter diameter cases to really become the norm.

Hahah...

Ravager135 · 9 January 2013, 03:48 AM

First off, I am a firm believer that 40mm is the perfect size of a watch. Secondly, I think the 40mm SubC sets itself apart from the DSSD in the same way that I believe the 40mm GMTIIC sets itself apart from the Explorer II.

Part of the Rolex sports lineup is that there is some redundancy (albeit good aesthetics) in the varying sports models. In my opinion what helps inform a consumers decision to by one model over the other are characteristics like dial options, precious metal options, size. Yes we all know the technical specs of the DSSD over the SubC but to the general public and the average consumer one is just a bigger Submariner. Why blur that line by amping up the case size. I think Rolex already succumbed to some of that pressure with the new cases in 2008-2009, I can't see it going bigger at 42mm.

The interesting sport model to discuss a possible increase in size would be the Daytona simply because there isn't another sports model similar in the Rolex line up. I personally do not feel the Daytona should go bigger but atleast if it did it would not be competing with anything similar made by Rolex.

Mickey® · 9 January 2013, 03:55 AM

The new SubC is 40mm but looks more like 42mm to me...
We are only talking about the head right? So the Lugs and stuff can make a watch look bigger or smaller....

Auragentum · 9 January 2013, 03:56 AM

One word: No

40mm is perfect

Would also be fine with 38mm for that matter.

superdog · 9 January 2013, 03:58 AM

Sort of think the new iteration is too big at 40mm.

Silvio Mosiello · 9 January 2013, 04:02 AM

I think 48mm would be just right

beshannon · 9 January 2013, 04:04 AM

40 is a great size

Passionata · 9 January 2013, 04:22 AM

What s going on guys? It s the second thread recently complaning on Rolex sizes
All Rolexes are just perfect in size. Name: ImageUploadedByTapatalk1357669307.813346.jpg
Views: 3055
Size: 92.4 KB

Name: ImageUploadedByTapatalk1357669307.813346.jpg
Views: 3055
Size: 92.4 KB

Pls do not comment the shirt,i love it,thanks.

Best
George

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Rolexitis · 9 January 2013, 04:24 AM

Oh boy.......

Wrist Watcher · 9 January 2013, 04:27 AM

I tried on the SubC and, due to the large case, thought it felt like 42mm. Personally, given my 7"+ wrist, 42mm is perfect. That's one of the many reasons why I love the new Explorer ii and like the new SubC better than the old 40mm version. I owned a tt Sub and just didn't like the 40mm size quite as well. I like having the 42 option or larger 40 case.

Mickey® · 9 January 2013, 04:30 AM

9 January 2013, 02:39 AM	#1
Dream99 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Real Name: Alan Location: Bristol. UK Posts: 621	Is the Submariner too small? I read lots about guys saying 40mm watches being to small for them. Do you think this is the case and will Rolex eventually realise perhaps a 42-44mm Sub would be a better watch for most or would it compete with the DSSD to much for their long term stratergy ?

9 January 2013, 02:45 AM	#8
warren G. "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Real Name: Duy Location: New Orleans, LA Watch: Speedmaster 3861 Posts: 1,925	I don't think the Submariner is too small. But I do have a 6.5 (.75 on a good day ) But imho, I really think a bigger Submariner will sell pretty well. Yes, I understand that the Submariner is already a great seller. But from my personal experiences with my peers and just talking to people. A lot of them really think most Rolex are relevantly small. __________________ De gustibus non est disputandum.

9 January 2013, 02:46 AM	#9
outlaw468 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Real Name: Steve Location: Chicago Watch: Rolex and Omega Posts: 564	Nope, I think 40mm is an ideal size for a sport watch. __________________ Regards, Steve

9 January 2013, 02:51 AM	#11
Armyguy03 "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: DM[V] Watch: 16710 \| 16600 Posts: 3,546	Perfect size for me. 6.5 and up wrist (depending on the day) 6'2" and it's perfect. __________________ Member of the Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons

9 January 2013, 02:53 AM	#12
financeman "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Real Name: Heath Location: Lawrenceburg KY Watch: Submariner Posts: 3,982	I think it is the perfect size. I don't think they will ever change __________________ “You may delay, but time will not.” ― Benjamin Franklin

9 January 2013, 02:40 AM	#2
Vincent65 "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Switzerland Posts: 14,298	no - 40mm sub = perfect

9 January 2013, 02:41 AM	#3
Mickey® Banned Join Date: Aug 2011 Real Name: Mickey® Location: Atlanta, GA Watch: Swiss Made Posts: 5,801	Nope. I don't think so. But some others will think so. Others will also not care.

9 January 2013, 02:42 AM	#4
Mlpugh "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Utah Posts: 66	Yes!

9 January 2013, 02:42 AM	#5
s14roller "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: US Posts: 3,257	I wear a 44mm AP on weekends. 40mm Sub still feels fine on weekdays.

9 January 2013, 02:43 AM	#6
Htab 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Real Name: Dad Location: USA Watch: To many Posts: 1,389	I personally think its wears and looks perfect. I recently sold my deep sea because I didn't wear it and thought it wore to thick on my wrist.

9 January 2013, 02:43 AM	#7
Cru Jones 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Paris, France Posts: 35,303

9 January 2013, 02:51 AM	#10
Like To Watch "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Sydney Australia Posts: 1,196	Let me think.........No!

9 January 2013, 02:55 AM	#13
Furbo "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Slovenia, EU Watch: BLNR Posts: 1,507	No way. 116610s are perfect.

9 January 2013, 02:58 AM	#14
AK797 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Real Name: Neil Location: UK Watch: ing ships roll in Posts: 59,369	Subc wears like a 42mm, so with old sub at 40mm and DSSD at 44mm all wrists are catered for.

9 January 2013, 02:59 AM	#15
Frogman4me Banned Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Maryland Posts: 6,268	Please no, 40mm is perfect. I could even live without the maxi case!

9 January 2013, 03:01 AM	#16
WhatTheDeuce "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Real Name: Kyung Location: Anywhere? Watch: cha want... Posts: 4,488	No! __________________ Instagram: @whatthedeuce_

9 January 2013, 03:05 AM	#17
MP5 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: ATX Posts: 2,886	40 is fine but41 with old lugs would be fine too Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

9 January 2013, 03:19 AM	#18
thomaspp "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: N/A Posts: 11,137	No. Dislike the BIG 42+ trend... __________________ Instagram: @watches_anonymous

9 January 2013, 03:21 AM	#19
tomchicago Banned Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Chicago Watch: 16710BLRO, 214270. Posts: 2,717	40mm far too small. 60mm is minimum, 80-100mm much more in line, with one meter diameter cases to really become the norm.

9 January 2013, 03:48 AM	#21
Ravager135 "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: New Jersey Posts: 4,224	First off, I am a firm believer that 40mm is the perfect size of a watch. Secondly, I think the 40mm SubC sets itself apart from the DSSD in the same way that I believe the 40mm GMTIIC sets itself apart from the Explorer II. Part of the Rolex sports lineup is that there is some redundancy (albeit good aesthetics) in the varying sports models. In my opinion what helps inform a consumers decision to by one model over the other are characteristics like dial options, precious metal options, size. Yes we all know the technical specs of the DSSD over the SubC but to the general public and the average consumer one is just a bigger Submariner. Why blur that line by amping up the case size. I think Rolex already succumbed to some of that pressure with the new cases in 2008-2009, I can't see it going bigger at 42mm. The interesting sport model to discuss a possible increase in size would be the Daytona simply because there isn't another sports model similar in the Rolex line up. I personally do not feel the Daytona should go bigger but atleast if it did it would not be competing with anything similar made by Rolex.

9 January 2013, 03:55 AM	#22
Mickey® Banned Join Date: Aug 2011 Real Name: Mickey® Location: Atlanta, GA Watch: Swiss Made Posts: 5,801	The new SubC is 40mm but looks more like 42mm to me... We are only talking about the head right? So the Lugs and stuff can make a watch look bigger or smaller....

9 January 2013, 03:56 AM	#23
Auragentum "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: All over Posts: 633	One word: No 40mm is perfect Would also be fine with 38mm for that matter. __________________ They don't make people like they used to...

9 January 2013, 03:58 AM	#24
superdog 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Real Name: Seth Location: nj Watch: Omega Posts: 24,834	Sort of think the new iteration is too big at 40mm. __________________ If happiness is a state of mind, why look anywhere else for it? IG: gsmotorclub IG: thesawcollection (Both mostly just car stuff)

9 January 2013, 04:02 AM	#25
Silvio Mosiello "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Real Name: Matthew Location: Miami/NY Watch: the shoes. Posts: 3,482	I think 48mm would be just right

9 January 2013, 04:04 AM	#26
beshannon "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Real Name: Brian Location: Northern Virginia Watch: One of Not Many Posts: 17,892	40 is a great size __________________ IWC Portugieser 7 Day, Omega Seamaster SMP300m, Vacheron Constantin Traditionnelle Complete Calendar, Glashutte PanoInverse, Glashutte SeaQ Panorama Date, Omega Aqua Terra 150, Omega CK 859, Omega Speedmaster 3861 Moonwatch, Breitling Superocean Steelfish, JLC Atmos Transparent Clock

9 January 2013, 04:22 AM	#27
Passionata "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: N/A Watch: the girls Posts: 7,095	What s going on guys? It s the second thread recently complaning on Rolex sizes All Rolexes are just perfect in size. Pls do not comment the shirt,i love it,thanks. Best George Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk __________________ Best George "Also remember that feet don't get fat and a watch will always speak volumes." Robert Johnston --------------------- newhttps://youtu.be/EljAF-uddhE new http://youtu.be/ZmpLoO1Q8eQ IG @passionata1

9 January 2013, 04:24 AM	#28
Rolexitis "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2008 Real Name: Matt Location: Earth Watch: 114060 Posts: 3,203	Oh boy....... __________________ Card Carrying Member of the Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons

9 January 2013, 04:27 AM	#29
Wrist Watcher 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: USA Watch: Hulk 116610LV Posts: 1,447	I tried on the SubC and, due to the large case, thought it felt like 42mm. Personally, given my 7"+ wrist, 42mm is perfect. That's one of the many reasons why I love the new Explorer ii and like the new SubC better than the old 40mm version. I owned a tt Sub and just didn't like the 40mm size quite as well. I like having the 42 option or larger 40 case. __________________ Rolex Submariner 116610LV (Hulk) Rolex GMT Master II 126710BLRO (Pepsi) Rolex Daytona 116500LN (White)

9 January 2013, 04:30 AM	#30
Mickey® Banned Join Date: Aug 2011 Real Name: Mickey® Location: Atlanta, GA Watch: Swiss Made Posts: 5,801

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)