Explorer 1 39mm vs Sub 116610 for small wrist

[NachoNeal]

I also have a similar size wrist.
The older sub (14060) fits me good.
Even the DJ41 fits well.
But I felt like the new sub wore too large for me.
And I also realize it's all pretty subjective, so you really can't go wrong!

[djyolky]

Originally Posted by AJMarcus

Looks great on you! Love my Explorer.

Thanks AJ!

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[Frits1980]

Both should work on 6.5. Right on the limit i would say. I would try them first do and if possible try an exp 36 and a 14060m as well.

[acheronsgrief]

Personally I think dial size is a bigger factor than we think. The DJ41 and OP39 dial make the watch feel bigger than a Sub C to me, even when looking from far away in a mirror. Perhaps consider an OP36 black dial to get the explorer style look with a better size for you?

[MHB]

I’ve owned both and kept the explorer. I prefer the exp in terms of both looks and comfort.

[Irydium]

I loved the Explorer I when I first saw it in photos and Rolex's website. It was so simple, so elegant. So I went to the AD to try it on but it looked oversized to me on my 6.3" wrist. I tried to justify the way it looked on my wrist but just couldn't. It felt like a dinner plate on my wrist, slight exaggeration...

Then I tried a subC on and it looks much better to own eyes, the trick was that the dial was quite a bit smaller so it gave the illusion of a smaller watch. I find with my wrist size dial size of 29-31 works best from an aesthetic viewpoint.

my only complaint with the subC is that the thick case back doesn't sit on a small wrist as well as the flat case backed Explorer I. The glidelock clasp is also too long for a small wrist.

I'm gravitating towards an Oyster Perpetual 36 with the blue 3-6-9 dial. Seems to be the closest to a modern 36 mm Explorer I.

[timemaestro]

The Sub is definitely my best choice.

[Ny325]

Originally Posted by watchshot94

I agree.

Or this if you like

Very nice. That’s a winner, and a classy timepiece.

[DG123]

Originally Posted by Irydium

I'm gravitating towards an Oyster Perpetual 36 with the blue 3-6-9 dial. Seems to be the closest to a modern 36 mm Explorer I.

Buy that watch

[JohnnyBer]

Had an Exp 1 and can confirm the same proportional issues as stated. Never had a Submariner, but have a SD4K and the Glidelock is definitely long on a small wrist. I procured a 1/2 link and moved it to 6 o’clock side to center the clasp.

Just bought a GMTIIc and must say with the flatter caseback and smaller dial, it’s proportionately perfect and amazingly comfortable on my 6.5” wrist.

Btw, still love the idea of an Exp 1, so got a 36mm. It’s truly a GADA watch.

[illiguy]

Both are classic and look good on a small wrist. I’d personally go sub.

[HForrest]

Originally Posted by Irydium

I'm gravitating towards an Oyster Perpetual 36 with the blue 3-6-9 dial. Seems to be the closest to a modern 36 mm Explorer I.

The blue dial is stunning; this seems like it may be the way to go if you want a 36 mm!

[WatchThinker]

Originally Posted by WatchNutcase

Can anyone chime in on which model would be best for a smaller wrist, either the Explorer 1 39mm or Sub 116610?

It looks like the Explorer 1 would be slimmer but will have a very large looking dial, while the sub is chunkier but will have a smaller appearing dial due to the bezel.

Does anyone own both?

Thanks to quarantine and burning off stress on the treadmill, my wrist size is down a bit from just under 7” to more like 6.75”. I routinely wear my Sub C and, even now, I would never consider it to be too large for my wrist. I also wear an Omega Speedmaster Pro - a larger watch presentation with a face similar to the Exp I without a second thought.

I’m currently trying to get ahold of an Exp I for my next watch ( or a Hulk, if lighting strikes ) and I am incredibly confident that will be fine on my wrist.

I think this are both great choices and I don’t think your wrist size should drive the decision - just your emotions.

[Oyster Sauce]

I agree with earlier opinion(s) that for a 6.5” wrist, the classic 36 mm Exp or the five-digit Sub are the optimal for proportion. The current iterations of either will just wear bigger than optimal. That’s not to say that they will look bad; I think that many have already demonstrated that it can look good. Just not optimal, IMO.

Since your desire is to buy new from AD (which I understand and respect), between the two I lean slightly toward the Sub. I think the dial won’t look as big on the Sub because of everything around it, and thus it’ll look better proportioned. Keep us posted!

[AF_Rob]

For a small wrist, I wouldn’t get either. I’d look at the Yacht Master or a DateJust, if you going modern.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[javier]

Originally Posted by WatchNutcase

I also have a 6.5. I've seen some pics where the new Sub looks great on a 6.5, but the new explorer always seems to have this large almost "plate like" looking dial.

Were they both that bad on your wrist?

Not thaaaat bad in fact, but it always made me the noise "it is big for my wrist" "it is big for my wrist"... you know ruminating at yourself

[WatchNutcase]

Originally Posted by Oyster Sauce

I agree with earlier opinion(s) that for a 6.5” wrist, the classic 36 mm Exp or the five-digit Sub are the optimal for proportion. The current iterations of either will just wear bigger than optimal. That’s not to say that they will look bad; I think that many have already demonstrated that it can look good. Just not optimal, IMO.

Since your desire is to buy new from AD (which I understand and respect), between the two I lean slightly toward the Sub. I think the dial won’t look as big on the Sub because of everything around it, and thus it’ll look better proportioned. Keep us posted!

Yes leaning towards the Sub for your mentioned reasons. An oversized looking dial on the Expl 1 would bother. Of course will be trying on all watches before purchase to verify.

[Oyster Sauce]

Cool -- will be interested to see what you land on when it's all done!

[shaunylw]

My wrist is around 6.75, i hope this helps!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Brny11]

Originally Posted by WatchNutcase

Can anyone chime in on which model would be best for a smaller wrist, either the Explorer 1 39mm or Sub 116610?

It looks like the Explorer 1 would be slimmer but will have a very large looking dial, while the sub is chunkier but will have a smaller appearing dial due to the bezel.

Does anyone own both?

Owned both. Explorer was more comfortable BUT took a while to get there. In the beginning subC glidelock allowed for a near perfect fit. Explorer just couldn’t get right. Once I did, Explorer is def lighter.

Size on wrist is not drastically different as the asthetics will play a trick on your eyes. The explorer will 100% fit better (lugs vs wrist), but the dial in person looks a bit disproportionatly large with the small bezel. The dial is much larger than Subs and it give appearance of a larger watch. The Sub dial is smaller and looks much better with the ceramic bezel, but the lugs are large and it wears bigger on the wrist. Basically, one is larger and the other appears larger.

I loved the Explorer, but did not enjoy wearing it and ultimately sold it.

For smaller wrists OP black is best, or DJ41 and 36 look great. That might not make sense (as OP and Exp are same size and DJ41 is a bit larger, even though it is NOT 41mm). But go try them on and you will see what I mean!

5 dig sub is also an option, but IMO the “cheaper” build quality (still not exactly cheap, but compared to modern) was not something I could entertain after owning 6dig references.

[XplusYplusZ]

I was in a very similar predicament. Unsure how big the new 39mm explorer would be. All the photos and everyone comparing it to the old 36mm made it sound and look huge. But it fits absolutely perfectly on my 17cm / 6.69inch wrist. Photos tend to make the watch appear bigger because it’s inherently a little closer to the camera than the wrist it sits on.

I don’t have a sub to compare it to, but the face is a little smaller, with a slightly thicker bezel which make them look a little smaller than they are in my opinion. I’m sure a sub would look perfectly fine on a 6.5.

[Onetwobit]

I have exactly a 6.5 inch wrist, and honestly, my SubC it fits well. Definitely max size, but looks great. I find that pictures make watches look a lot bigger than they actually are.

[JamyMC]

Originally Posted by WatchNutcase

Can anyone chime in on which model would be best for a smaller wrist, either the Explorer 1 39mm or Sub 116610?

It looks like the Explorer 1 would be slimmer but will have a very large looking dial, while the sub is chunkier but will have a smaller appearing dial due to the bezel.

Does anyone own both?

Yes...you just gave a better explanation for both.....make a choice then or own both.