Guess my wrist size

[faimag]

6.5? Your wrists are pancakes? My guess would be >7

[madsitalia]

Originally Posted by tony_leotardo_jr

Hey everyone, I am curious to see what everyone on the forum thinks my wrist size is and how the 41mm submariner wears on my wrist. What do you all think?

Dunno but fits great

[East of Eden]

Same size as mine, I think it looks too big on you

I have no idea why Rolex doesn’t make the Sub in two sizes like Tudor and everybody else does

[worldofoyster]

6.5 and it looks good on you

[Watchsprings]

Looks good to me… enjoy that beauty!

[KatGirl]

Not to worry! Your watch looks great on your wrist. In fact, your pics show me that I could rock it, were I so inclined.

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[tony_leotardo_jr]

Originally Posted by faimag

6.5? Your wrists are pancakes? My guess would be >7

Haha, I guess maybe it’s the deadlifts and farmer carries that have helped a bit

[tony_leotardo_jr]

Originally Posted by SAP7

Ideal is 2/3 of the wrist lug to lug.
It’s too big for your wrist which is 6.75 I guess.

But it’s acceptably too big as they refuse to make a 39. About the same as me and I’ve accepted it’s a little more than I’d want, but there isn’t a choice (don’t want an older one).

For me I think 2/3rd - 3/4ths on a dress watch and 3/4ths to 7/8ths on a sports bezel or chronograph watch are ideal. Agreed though a 39 would be great

[tony_leotardo_jr]

Originally Posted by brandrea

You must’ve used calipers

Looks good

Guilty as charged!

[tony_leotardo_jr]

Thanks everyone for your feedback, this has been extremely helpful. A lot of good thoughts here and perspectives. I’ve got two other references, the 16570 40mm explorer 2 black dial, and the 126622 yachtmaster rhodium dial. Those probably fit me better with their lower lug to lugs - especially given the lug size on the explorer is smaller and on the ym curve down like the Daytona. But the green submariner 16610lv was something I always wanted, I just don’t personally love the old bracelet on my 16570 which would be the same on the 16610lv. When they released the updated mark ii dial in the 126610lv I knew I had to have it. Overall the watch feels like it fits like a glove 80% of the time but sometimes there’s certain angles / times I do feel it wears big. That being said no watch is perfect and as mentioned here it’s a real shame that Rolex does not opt for a 39mm size for sports watches which would probably fit most everyone’s wrist in a more flattering way unless you’re 7.25inches or above. The only current models that wear close to a 39 are the yachtmaster 40 and the Daytona which have a ~47mm lug to lug and are ~49 when it includes the outer portion of the links with the case

[jacksot]

Originally Posted by tony_leotardo_jr

Thanks everyone for your feedback, this has been extremely helpful. A lot of good thoughts here and perspectives. I’ve got two other references, the 16570 40mm explorer 2 black dial, and the 126622 yachtmaster rhodium dial. Those probably fit me better with their lower lug to lugs - especially given the lug size on the explorer is smaller and on the ym curve down like the Daytona. But the green submariner 16610lv was something I always wanted, I just don’t personally love the old bracelet on my 16570 which would be the same on the 16610lv. When they released the updated mark ii dial in the 126610lv I knew I had to have it. Overall the watch feels like it fits like a glove 80% of the time but sometimes there’s certain angles / times I do feel it wears big. That being said no watch is perfect and as mentioned here it’s a real shame that Rolex does not opt for a 39mm size for sports watches which would probably fit most everyone’s wrist in a more flattering way unless you’re 7.25inches or above. The only current models that wear close to a 39 are the yachtmaster 40 and the Daytona which have a ~47mm lug to lug and are ~49 when it includes the outer portion of the links with the case

Another option to consider would be fitting a 97200 glidelock to a 16610LV or to your 16570.

See this thread for the sub and this for the Explorer II details.

[tony_leotardo_jr]

Originally Posted by jacksot

Another option to consider would be fitting a 97200 glidelock to a 16610LV or to your 16570.

See this thread for the sub and this for the Explorer II details.

Thats a pretty cool idea, I’ll check it out for the explorer 2

I might add the 16610lv down the road, would be cool to have next to the ceramic 41mm green

[Akacoke]

Does size matter? Asking for a friend

[jacksot]

Originally Posted by tony_leotardo_jr

Thats a pretty cool idea, I’ll check it out for the explorer 2

I might add the 16610lv down the road, would be cool to have next to the ceramic 41mm green

Nice! Btw, also in the camp that thinks the 41mm fits you fine, not that you should base your decision on the opinions of random people on the internet.

[tony_leotardo_jr]

Originally Posted by jacksot

Nice! Btw, also in the camp that thinks the 41mm fits you fine, not that you should base your decision on the opinions of random people on the internet.

Thanks, it’s occasionally nice to get the validation lol

Even with really nice things we need it

[JSCP]

Looks great to me. But I’d would wear it a little looser; but your size vs watch looks very good to me.

Unfortunately, as we don’t like to share full body pics, it’s hard to fully see how it’s proportion with height, etc.

[hojlund]

6.1 inches

[tony_leotardo_jr]

Originally Posted by JSCP

Looks great to me. But I’d would wear it a little looser; but your size vs watch looks very good to me.

Unfortunately, as we don’t like to share full body pics, it’s hard to fully see how it’s proportion with height, etc.

Thanks, for your reference I’m 6’2 just over 200 pounds, 6.6 inch wrists roughly. I wore it slightly tighter to show how the lug to lug looks vs my wrist

[alphadweller]

Seems fine, totally wearable on your wrist.

[madsitalia]

Originally Posted by jacksot

Nice! Btw, also in the camp that thinks the 41mm fits you fine, not that you should base your decision on the opinions of random people on the internet.

Who are you calling random people??

[PandaLover]

Originally Posted by kevin of larchmont

there is no objective science to wrist size versus case size since individual wrists having the same circumference can be shaped differently. Only two things matter: Is it comfortable and do you like it. You say you like it and you reference the glidelock which is related to comfort. You say the watch is at the outside of your range; my wrist is 6.75” and my range is 36-44mm and all of my watches fit well and are comfortable. Proper fit has nothing to do with what others define and everything to do with what the watch feels like to you.

+1

[Watchdog]

You are going to get so many opinions about this. Women wear many that look too big to some, and men wear many that look too small to some (and vice-versa). Some hate bracelets that squeeze into the wrists so tightly that the skin (fat?) puffs out until it appears swollen while others dangle like stockbrokers from the 80s.

It really isn’t the size of the wrist as much as the shape, no matter what the round-wristers claim. Truth is the flat wrists are a bit more versatile and even larger watches can wear well. Your size is objectively (my objectively as much as possible and based on years on this forum) looks pretty good. Would I go larger? Probably not, but this looks fantastic on you.

And if others don’t like it and you do, then who gives a rat’s ass about people you don't know at all, people—frankly—you might think are nuts in real life and dismiss the opinions of faster than it takes an AD to laugh and say “No GMT Pepsi for you.”

[tony_leotardo_jr]

Originally Posted by Watchdog

You are going to get so many opinions about this. Women wear many that look too big to some, and men wear many that look too small to some (and vice-versa). Some hate bracelets that squeeze into the wrists so tightly that the skin (fat?) puffs out until it appears swollen while others dangle like stockbrokers from the 80s.

It really isn’t the size of the wrist as much as the shape, no matter what the round-wristers claim. Truth is the flat wrists are a bit more versatile and even larger watches can wear well. Your size is objectively (my objectively as much as possible and based on years on this forum) looks pretty good. Would I go larger? Probably not, but this looks fantastic on you.

And if others don’t like it and you do, then who gives a rat’s ass about people you don't know at all, people—frankly—you might think are nuts in real life and dismiss the opinions of faster than it takes an AD to laugh and say “No GMT Pepsi for you.”

+1

Very well said, and I agree with this. There’s a lot of discourse on this topic in the forums and now also Reddit, with everyone saying the trend of ‘big watches’ is a trend that should go away, etc.

It’s hard to objectively define what a ‘big watch’ is - there’s some that are just huge, but there’s a subsect which are probably borderline. To your point it’s very subjective