Rolex too big and heavy?

[CPTL]

I'd say you have two options in Rolex world:

A 5-digit professional model (16710 GMT-II or 16570 EXP-II) or a 6-digit 36mm DJ. The 116200 on oyster with domed bezel is a very light, comfortable everyday watch, but still gives you aspects you want from a professional Rolex (WR, durability, etc). Even better, it costs about the same as a routine service on your PP.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by lapince

Ok don't start throwing sticks and stones at me, I love ROlex, had a few, sub c LN and LV, daytona 116515 and Batman, now I have only 2 Pateks and was thinking maybe adding a Rolex as a daily wearer, so I went to my local AD, and he made me try a few, Datejust II, Sea Dweller, sub c no date and a daytona, all of them seemed too big and heavy for me, of course when you are used to Patek, very thin esp the 5712 and very light, the other watches are hard to put, I thought I might get a date just but even that one felt too big, the SD is great but man is that thing thick, can't imagine wearing it as the thickness is basically like my wrist, too bad as it really looks cool.

I know the trend is now to bigger and bigger watches but I for one prefer thinner and lighter pieces, after 5 minutes I forget that I'm wearing one of mine because the weight is light and the comfort is incredible.

Does anyone else here feel that the Rolex modern pieces are a little too big and heavy?

Well is not being bigger and heavier always better,after reading the millions of posts on this forum I was made to believe this was so.Or perhaps this only appliers to the bigger heavier is always better OCD watch brigade.Or are we going to see a new trend where bigger heavier is not always better, much like I have been stating on forum for the past ten years.

[CPTL]

Originally Posted by padi56

Well is not being bigger and heavier always better,after reading the millions of posts on this forum I was made to believe this was so.Or perhaps this only appliers to the bigger heavier is always better OCD watch brigade.Or are we going to see a new trend where bigger heavier is not always better, much like I have been stating on forum for the past ten years.

I'm with you. Bigger does not automatically equal better. I can see absolutely no functional reason for Rolex to double the thickness of the lugs from the 16610/16710 to the 116610/116710. Likewise the new 42MM models are bigger simply for the sake of being bigger. I, for one, am quite happy to enjoy a much cheaper selection of the 5-digit professional models which feel much lighter and more comfortable, particularly when going for a run or a long swim.

[datejust24]

My 14060M out of the 12 Rolex I've owned is hands down the most comfortable...A good buddy of mine has a platinum Masterpiece that yes, is gorgeous in every aspect, but damn it's heavy! Almost too heavy IMO..

[thlax]

I just switched from a PP5167 to a WG Sub Smurf which weighs 3x as the PP. Once it's on you're wrist you don't notice (if it is an evenly balanced watch).

[ec51]

14060 disappears on my wrist...either with the oyster or a NATO, I often forget Im wearing it.

[AK797]

Arnaud in fact today I am wearing my YG Subc on one wrist and my friend's SS Nautilus on the left, because I have the RG Nautilus on my brain as you know, and until I read this thread I forgot I was wearing a watch at all... I always quickly forget I am wearing my gold watch even when the weights are so different like today!

[AL7273]

i walk past the ladies counter when i go into a rolex shop.

[Friar]

I certainly didn't feel that my polar 216570 was too large or too heavy. But when I put my Explorer (214270) on, it feels lighter and more comfortable--and harder to read at a glance :-)

[Flintstone]

It balances out. Your wrist gets heavier and your wallet lighter.

[kilyung]

Rolex big and heavy? Nah...