ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

JJ Irani · 11 December 2007, 03:21 AM

kcmo · 11 December 2007, 03:35 AM

I agree that some of these larger watches just look ridiculous, but to each his/her own!

My PERFECT size is a 36mm for daily wear. My max is a 40mm for sure!

puffnmo · 11 December 2007, 03:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hdman1216

AT LAST, SOMEONE MAKES SOME SENSE

I am 61 Y.O. and have, and also wear on a regular basis, watches from 36mm (Vintage Rolex) to 50mm (Bell and Ross Br01-97) with a few in between.

johan · 11 December 2007, 04:26 AM

I agree 40 mm max....

joe100 · 11 December 2007, 04:36 AM

GMT II, Perfection

Regards,

J.

time · 11 December 2007, 05:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jocke

I like big ones too.

Jocke

wowwwww

funlab · 11 December 2007, 05:15 AM

this seems like a pretty "representative" group of the demographic the watch makers are trying to sell to. the concensus is clearly 40 or less amongst us. i have no interest in anything <40 and think they tend to look clownish as they get so big.

however, there are a lot of pam guys that love the big watches. and i wonder if rolex is taking a cue from the panaristi and looking to get into the larger watch market. I HOPE NOT!!!!

Launch Mini · 11 December 2007, 05:24 AM

The 47mm fad , for this watch, started in 1936. I guess 71 years for this large watch fad isn't too bad.

Heck of alot easier to see the time one something like this over a 36mm. ( yes my eyesight is poor)

f16570 · 11 December 2007, 05:35 AM

Size is so overated......

Thats what I tell the wife anyway

f

FanFromLakeMary · 11 December 2007, 05:37 AM

I'm eyeing a Panerai GMT watch (the Pam 88). But I was totally unsure how the 44mm would look. I have smallish wrists and the Rolex GMTII looks perfect at 40mm.

So I went to the local Panerai AD and tried on a Pam, and it looks sharp IMHO.

Definitely a little on the "large" side, and that makes it stand out. But I think that kind of "bling" is more subtle than diamonds on a Day Date, or Presidential. And it doesn't fit nearly as large as a Breitling. (I think a two-tone Blue Sub is about as much flash as my personality would allow - thanks JJ for all the great pics and great writeups!!

...but I digress).

So for me the SS Rolex GMTII as the daily wearer, and a Panerai as my "bling" watch...

pol · 11 December 2007, 09:47 AM

40 mm is sufficient for me...I actually like smaller watches as well...I have a 34 mm Date which looks great and my 1963 SS OD is, I believe only 31 mm, and it looks great. The larger watches are really not to my fancy, just too dang big on my smaller wrist.

frostie · 11 December 2007, 09:48 AM

I think that 40mm is just perfect for my wrist. 36mm looks too damn small for me

GrandDaddy · 11 December 2007, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by time

Me too. Finally, one agrees with me. I think 40mm is a nice and comfortable size...

If all men's Rolex were 42-44mm, would you say they're the perfect sizes?Hey, after all, they're Rolex, right?

time · 11 December 2007, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrandDaddy

If all men's Rolex were 42-44mm, would you say they're the perfect sizes?Hey, after all, they're Rolex, right?

Yes, I mean Rolex. 40mm is perfect. I havn't tried the YM II...but I will def. not buy it. A sport Rolex bigger than 40mm is too heavy compared to its bracelet. And 40mm Rolex case is the classic design. I hope Rolex does not make bigger than the sub and GMT IIc.

Cormorant · 11 December 2007, 11:27 PM

Kids today mimic popular culture dress and fashion. Watch MTV for a little while to find out what will eventually find its way to your kids wardrobe if you don't reprogram them...

I find that one of the underlying themes is to the demand for attention as a result of low self-esteem and anything that draws your eye to them becomes a tool to that end. Any fashion, behavior, or style that becomes mainstraim no longer serves its intended purpose, and a new tool is needed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by time

Hi!

Maybe I am a conservative guy.... to be >30years....

Why do "all" teenagers wear ~45mm big bling bling watches now?

Now, spec. girls?

I think the Rolex models define a very good standard. 32mm for ladies, 34mm "Boy", 36mm for men daily and 40mm for men for sport/casual.

I think (my op.) people wear a big watch (>43mm) just to "show"...Or is it? What is the point of super large watches? Hmmm

I wear Rolex and JeagerLeC daily - I never show my watch to everyone... It is under my shirt all the time. Fat watch prevents you to have it under your shirt.... My girl friend says she will never wear a large men watch.

DATEJUSTSS · 12 December 2007, 12:28 AM

I'm happy with my "tiny" 36MM TOG, thank you very much. I do want an LV, but not so much for the size. It's just a cool watch.

time · 12 December 2007, 12:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DATEJUSTSS

I'm happy with my "tiny" 36MM TOG, thank you very much. I do want an LV, but not so much for the size. It's just a cool watch.

You will smile all day when you buy a LV. I was so happy after getting the LV on my wrist. So "perfect" and so 40mm classic size.... and so "not too big".

mopsey · 12 December 2007, 03:42 AM

I have a 34mm date.
It looks fine i think.
I wouldn't mind a 40mm Explorer II though.

Paulie · 12 December 2007, 03:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrandDaddy

If all men's Rolex were 42-44mm, would you say they're the perfect sizes?Hey, after all, they're Rolex, right?

Back when they came out with 40mm, I wonder what people were saying owing those 36/32/26mm watches. "Rolex is selling pocket watches on a bracelet!"

GrandDaddy · 12 December 2007, 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paulie

Back when they came out with 40mm, I wonder what people were saying owing those 36/32/26mm watches. "Rolex is selling pocket watches on a bracelet!"

Nothing larger/bigger than 40mm for me.

SPACE-DWELLER · 12 December 2007, 06:42 AM

"BIG" is just trendy, these days. And BLING is trendy, too.

Seems that some wear BIG and BLINGY watches to get better noticed?

I for my part prefer the 40 MM Rolex Sport's watches simply because I have a large wrist. But I don't like watches much bigger than that.

GoldenBear · 12 December 2007, 06:56 AM

I have big wrists and hands, so the bigger sports models like the Subs and Breitling Emergency (which is, I believe, 42mm) look "normal" on me. Just like my SUV, it's not sending any message, it's just something that at 6' 4 275. fits me comfortably.

dman · 13 December 2007, 02:59 PM

I literally LMAO at the trendy statement when referring to the size and fad of Panerai. If you research the Submariner when it came out people were appalled that it was that big, said it would never work. It was clownish in many peoples eyes.

And c'mon people be clear, a 44mm Luminor is not bling, a 44 Jacob and CO. is bling.

I wear watches that range from 36 to 47mm on a daily basis and like the differences of each.

I often wonder more why people give a s**t what size my watches is. Wear what you like, enjoy it and smile. If you don't like what me or someone else is wearing, don't buy it.

Unregistered · 13 December 2007, 06:25 PM

I'm just beyond a teenager (18) but I've been wearing a full size Submariner since I was...17?

And I'm a little 5'7 asian guy.

GR8YT · 13 December 2007, 11:32 PM

For me, the Sea-dweller, the 42mm Omega Planet-ocean and the IWC Aquatimer 42mm is the upper limit. The lower limit is the Air-king. Personally, I feel that my Explorer II is the perfect watch for me!

Haroldglen · 14 December 2007, 02:24 PM

I concur with many of these comments. I prefer the new 07 Air King. It is 34 mm and, although that is as small a watch as I would want to wear, it or a 36 mm DJ (which is just slightly larger) is a good size, especially for those with small to average size wrists. If someone had Mickey Mantle size wrists, that is another story! For him, the Sub date. As for the Air King......the redesigned 07 Air King, because of its design, seems to look larger than 34 mm. It is a classy watch and as much a Rolex as the Sub no date (same movement, I have heard). A Rolex is a Rolex. The best watch made!

sharif · 14 December 2007, 02:42 PM

I agree with the statements about variety, and finding a size that YOU like. I also agree that Rolex has also been on the conservative side of trends, and it takes them about 10 years to catch up. That's Rolex...and that is why we love them so much.

Depending on your wrist side, a 36mm DJ could look huge and clownish! On the wrist of Barry Bonds, a 40mm Sub would look childishly small. Go with what you like, and what looks best on you.

I really think Rolex is heading in the right direction, with same sized faces, but beefing up the case, braclets, and clasps...ala GMTIIc. For my pesonal wrist size, I can do 36mm DJ all the way up to 44mm PO. I hope the sport line of Rolex stays in the 40-42mm max range. Just my .02 :)

GoISU · 14 December 2007, 09:05 PM

I want a BIG watch because I have a BIG wrist. 40mm would be my bare minimum now that I have worn the YM for awhile.

11 December 2007, 03:21 AM	#31
JJ Irani Fondly Remembered Join Date: May 2005 Real Name: JJ Location: Auckland, NZ Watch: ALL SOLD!! Posts: 74,319	__________________ 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!!

11 December 2007, 05:24 AM	#38
Launch Mini "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Real Name: John Location: Canada, eh Watch: can I? Posts: 6,240	The 47mm fad , for this watch, started in 1936. I guess 71 years for this large watch fad isn't too bad. Heck of alot easier to see the time one something like this over a 36mm. ( yes my eyesight is poor) __________________ Something witty to go here. Member # 293

11 December 2007, 09:47 AM	#41
pol "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2007 Real Name: Joe Location: Missouri, USA Watch: YG Day-Date/SS Sub Posts: 273	40 mm is sufficient for me...I actually like smaller watches as well...I have a 34 mm Date which looks great and my 1963 SS OD is, I believe only 31 mm, and it looks great. The larger watches are really not to my fancy, just too dang big on my smaller wrist. __________________ Rolex...the only way to go...

12 December 2007, 06:42 AM	#51
SPACE-DWELLER "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Real Name: Bo Location: Denmark Watch: Rolex, of course! Posts: 22,436	"BIG" is just trendy, these days. And BLING is trendy, too. Seems that some wear BIG and BLINGY watches to get better noticed? I for my part prefer the 40 MM Rolex Sport's watches simply because I have a large wrist. But I don't like watches much bigger than that. __________________ With kind regards, Bo LocTite 221: The Taming Of The Screw...

12 December 2007, 06:56 AM	#52
GoldenBear "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: San Francisco Watch: Submariner Posts: 2,480	I have big wrists and hands, so the bigger sports models like the Subs and Breitling Emergency (which is, I believe, 42mm) look "normal" on me. Just like my SUV, it's not sending any message, it's just something that at 6' 4 275. fits me comfortably. __________________ ____________________________________________ Rolex Blue TT Submariner Rolex SS Submariner Breitling Emergency Mission They are just watches, wear 'em. ____________________________________________

11 December 2007, 03:35 AM	#32
kcmo "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Real Name: Karis Location: USA Posts: 19,377	I agree that some of these larger watches just look ridiculous, but to each his/her own! My PERFECT size is a 36mm for daily wear. My max is a 40mm for sure!

11 December 2007, 04:26 AM	#34
johan "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Real Name: Johan Location: vancouver Watch: rolex, Posts: 194	I agree 40 mm max....

11 December 2007, 04:36 AM	#35
joe100 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Real Name: Joe Location: New Mexico Watch: Explorer Posts: 12,840	GMT II, Perfection Regards, J.

11 December 2007, 05:15 AM	#37
funlab "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Real Name: David Location: US Posts: 347	this seems like a pretty "representative" group of the demographic the watch makers are trying to sell to. the concensus is clearly 40 or less amongst us. i have no interest in anything <40 and think they tend to look clownish as they get so big. however, there are a lot of pam guys that love the big watches. and i wonder if rolex is taking a cue from the panaristi and looking to get into the larger watch market. I HOPE NOT!!!!

11 December 2007, 05:35 AM	#39
f16570 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Real Name: F Location: Scotland Watch: Exp II White Face Posts: 4,272	Size is so overated...... Thats what I tell the wife anyway f

11 December 2007, 05:37 AM	#40
FanFromLakeMary Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: FL Posts: 73	I'm eyeing a Panerai GMT watch (the Pam 88). But I was totally unsure how the 44mm would look. I have smallish wrists and the Rolex GMTII looks perfect at 40mm. So I went to the local Panerai AD and tried on a Pam, and it looks sharp IMHO. Definitely a little on the "large" side, and that makes it stand out. But I think that kind of "bling" is more subtle than diamonds on a Day Date, or Presidential. And it doesn't fit nearly as large as a Breitling. (I think a two-tone Blue Sub is about as much flash as my personality would allow - thanks JJ for all the great pics and great writeups!! ...but I digress). So for me the SS Rolex GMTII as the daily wearer, and a Panerai as my "bling" watch...

11 December 2007, 09:48 AM	#42
frostie 1,000,000th PostMember Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Earth Posts: 14,048	I think that 40mm is just perfect for my wrist. 36mm looks too damn small for me

12 December 2007, 12:28 AM	#46
DATEJUSTSS Banned Join Date: May 2007 Real Name: Jesse Location: Central FLA Watch: GMT IIC Posts: 447	I'm happy with my "tiny" 36MM TOG, thank you very much. I do want an LV, but not so much for the size. It's just a cool watch.

12 December 2007, 03:42 AM	#48
mopsey "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Real Name: Martin Location: London Watch: Sub,Exp2,BlkBy,SD Posts: 1,258	I have a 34mm date. It looks fine i think. I wouldn't mind a 40mm Explorer II though.

13 December 2007, 02:59 PM	#53
dman Lifetime TRF Patron Join Date: May 2005 Real Name: Daren Location: Austin Watch: the road Posts: 13,585	I literally LMAO at the trendy statement when referring to the size and fad of Panerai. If you research the Submariner when it came out people were appalled that it was that big, said it would never work. It was clownish in many peoples eyes. And c'mon people be clear, a 44mm Luminor is not bling, a 44 Jacob and CO. is bling. I wear watches that range from 36 to 47mm on a daily basis and like the differences of each. I often wonder more why people give a s**t what size my watches is. Wear what you like, enjoy it and smile. If you don't like what me or someone else is wearing, don't buy it. __________________ You either get it or you don't, if you have to ask, YOU DON'T!! I really hope that midget cop doesn't find me in Kokomo.

13 December 2007, 06:25 PM	#54
Unregistered "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Hong Kong/Canad Posts: 12	I'm just beyond a teenager (18) but I've been wearing a full size Submariner since I was...17? And I'm a little 5'7 asian guy.

13 December 2007, 11:32 PM	#55
GR8YT Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sweden Posts: 174	For me, the Sea-dweller, the 42mm Omega Planet-ocean and the IWC Aquatimer 42mm is the upper limit. The lower limit is the Air-king. Personally, I feel that my Explorer II is the perfect watch for me!

14 December 2007, 02:24 PM	#56
Haroldglen "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Real Name: Harold Location: Ohio Watch: Rolex Datejust Posts: 75	I concur with many of these comments. I prefer the new 07 Air King. It is 34 mm and, although that is as small a watch as I would want to wear, it or a 36 mm DJ (which is just slightly larger) is a good size, especially for those with small to average size wrists. If someone had Mickey Mantle size wrists, that is another story! For him, the Sub date. As for the Air King......the redesigned 07 Air King, because of its design, seems to look larger than 34 mm. It is a classy watch and as much a Rolex as the Sub no date (same movement, I have heard). A Rolex is a Rolex. The best watch made!

14 December 2007, 02:42 PM	#57
sharif Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: South East USA Posts: 671	I agree with the statements about variety, and finding a size that YOU like. I also agree that Rolex has also been on the conservative side of trends, and it takes them about 10 years to catch up. That's Rolex...and that is why we love them so much. Depending on your wrist side, a 36mm DJ could look huge and clownish! On the wrist of Barry Bonds, a 40mm Sub would look childishly small. Go with what you like, and what looks best on you. I really think Rolex is heading in the right direction, with same sized faces, but beefing up the case, braclets, and clasps...ala GMTIIc. For my pesonal wrist size, I can do 36mm DJ all the way up to 44mm PO. I hope the sport line of Rolex stays in the 40-42mm max range. Just my .02 :)

14 December 2007, 09:05 PM	#58
GoISU Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: IL Watch: Yachtmaster Posts: 146	I want a BIG watch because I have a BIG wrist. 40mm would be my bare minimum now that I have worn the YM for awhile.

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