Why the big size hatred?

[ernie2]

it really depends on the watch. I have 6.75" wrist and my EXP II and THC does not look big on me.

[Shinsengumi]

Having small wrist prefer watch thats proportionate and sits well on my wrist . My gmt II is perfect size for me .

[judson]

I agree that 39 is the sweet spot for me, 40 is OK, 41 is pushing it and 42 is borderline too large.

It's nice to have different sizes so that we can each find something we like.

[mfer]

42mm, please..........try 47mm!


Also, your old eyes can read it even easier....

[Etschell]

i for one think girl wrists CAN pull it off.

[Vanmarsenille]

Originally Posted by Etschell

i for one think girl wrists CAN pull it off.

[thehoracle]

40-42mm is perfect for me.

[eonflux]

Originally Posted by Wingman244

Quick Photoshop shows the Explorer 2 date window is exactly the same position compared to the sub date window. It shows that Rolex perfectly scaled the E2 up. The movement was designed to be 42mm, and to show the date position in the right place.

Good idea to compare in that way.
But isn't the dial of the ExpII larger? And the case as well?
In that image, the overall size of the Sub is much bigger, which I don't think is the case.

[Mastergreenhand]

I'm good with other brands with larger sizes but Rolex for me needs to be 40mm at largest.

[silverbullet818]

Originally Posted by Mastergreenhand

I'm good with other brands with larger sizes but Rolex for me needs to be 40mm at largest.

Exactly what I said

[redsubby]

I don't really agree with classic size BS; just because it's classic size don't mean it'll look good on your wrist. It all depends on your wrist size, period.
My wrist is about 6.75 probably a bit smaller sometimes, I do 40-44mm watches. 38-39 are really pushing it, 36 and less look just silly on me. So I can't imagine someone with 8" wrist wearing a classic size DJ....

[Rocket_Man]

For me, 40mm is the sweet spot. I wore a 36mm DateJust for years. I bought a 41mm Heritage Ranger and never got used to the way it felt on my wrist. I flipped it for a 40mm GMT IIc and it fits just right. The 41mm DJII is not necessarily too big, but I don't like the proportion of the bezel. I hope they drop the DJII down to 40mm and take it all out of the bezel. If they do I'll probably be a buyer to replace my 30 year old DJ. I don't really look for watches over 40mm. I like Panerai but the 40mm models they sell are not popular, but I can't wear their normal size watch. Way too bulky for me.

[Singslinger]

In with TheVTCGuy on this - I think my 42mm white Exp 2 is by far the best fit for me.

If only Rolex had upsized the Sea Dweller 4000 to 42mm....sigh

[belligero]

Originally Posted by redsubby

[...]My wrist is about 6.75 probably a bit smaller sometimes, I do 40-44mm watches. 38-39 are really pushing it, 36 and less look just silly on me. So I can't imagine someone with 8" wrist wearing a classic size DJ....

No imagining on your part required:





Sometimes I like the understated thing when it comes to watches.

[airchitect]

I'd just like to see multiple sizes in more models. How about a 42mm gmt or sd? I mean there are 3 sizes of yachtmaster and a plethora of djs for Petes sake.

[Racerdj]

When I owner my Breitlings, I was thinking the size was not a problem. However that changed when I purchased a Sub and Daytona. Now I am in the 39-41 mm size and feel that is the sweet spot for my wrist size.

[belligero]

Originally Posted by airchitect

I'd just like to see multiple sizes in more models. How about a 42mm gmt or sd? I mean there are 3 sizes of yachtmaster and a plethora of djs for Petes sake.

What I like about the GMT and Sea-Dweller is that they're still function-first watches in essence — though I'm no fan of the GMT II's polished centre links, and I think the ceramic bezels are a step backwards in some ways.

Making them in different sizes for no functional reason is something charactericistic of fashion watches, in my opinion.

[MCO1]

It sounds like to me opinions vary greatly on this matter. I am personally in the 39mm to 42mm camp. I like the fact they upped the size of the Explorer anything less than 39mm I just can't pull off in my head. I am indifferent about the 42mm Explorer 2 to me the dimensions are just off again in my head when I try it on. I am rather partial to my 40mm Sub and GMT 2 but couldn't see the Speedy Pro as less than its perfect 42mm. Within reason I guess it is just what looks and feels right to the individual. I think in this day and age 40mm is the great all around size and Rolex wants to be the great all around watch.

[J!m]

Originally Posted by fmc000

Moreover, if the movement is the same mounted on 36-38mm watches the date window will be positioned too close to the center of the watch, just silly and bad looking IMHO.

I agree this looks silly in mid size watches like some omegas where they use a women's movement and the date is about halfway between dial edge and center....

But the Rolex movement would easily accommodate a larger date wheel but that would require a bit of re engineering. It would also afford a larger date font which would also enhance the scale overall.

It is too bad Rolex cannot afford to invest in engineering to rework the larger case watches. Beware another price increase to find R&D!

[AK797]

Originally Posted by Racerdj

When I owner my Breitlings, I was thinking the size was not a problem. However that changed when I purchased a Sub and Daytona. Now I am in the 39-41 mm size and feel that is the sweet spot for my wrist size.

Same here.

[Cru Jones]

i don't wear millimeters, i wear watches i love.

[belligero]

0

Originally Posted by J!m

[...]But the Rolex movement would easily accommodate a larger date wheel but that would require a bit of re engineering. It would also afford a larger date font which would also enhance the scale overall.

It is too bad Rolex cannot afford to invest in engineering to rework the larger case watches. Beware another price increase to find R&D!

Did you actually read the thread?

Although I'm not keen on the bloated look of the DJ II & DD II, they do in fact use a date wheel that's been scaled up in exact proportion. The same applies to the 42 mm Explorer II, as well as the new 39 mm Pearlmaster and 40 mm Day-Date.

By the way, Rolex can not only easily afford to put resources into its manufacturing capabilites, but they also consistently do so — arguably more than any other sizeable watchmaker. They just don't tend to make big deal out of it.

Perhaps you've mistaken them for a different company.

[belligero]

Originally Posted by Wingman244

Quick Photoshop shows the Explorer 2 date window is exactly the same position compared to the sub date window. It shows that Rolex perfectly scaled the E2 up. The movement was designed to be 42mm, and to show the date position in the right place.

Excellent illustration of how the date window placement is identical for the traditional dial/crystal sizes (which include the Submariner, GMT, Day-Date, Datejust and Yacht-Master, among others) and the larger ones (42 mm Explorer II, Sky-Dweller, 40 mm Day-Date, Day-Date II, Datejust II, 39 mm Pearlmaster).

[WristEnvy]

I guess I'm a clown!