ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

TimeOnHand · 11 June 2013, 11:55 AM

Hello everyone....

I wanted to ask for your honest opinion regarding the beautiful 47mm 422. I have smaller wrists 6.5" and feel that the 47mm 422 might look a bit out of place on my wrists! So I am posting a few photo's I took with it on and also have included a few photos of the 233 for comparison...

I love the 422 but don't want to get it if I look silly wearing it!!!

I am sitting on the fence with this one...

MY 233...

422...

Thank you in advance...

kilyung · 11 June 2013, 12:00 PM

Too funny, Kevin. I'm considering a 372 or 422 and have EXACTLY the same concern. The 233 fits perfectly. The 422 may be a smidge big but I think it can work... at least I keep telling myself that.

zlin08033 · 11 June 2013, 12:31 PM

422 is nice, bit IMHO, it looks a bit too big on you.

toulouse · 11 June 2013, 01:29 PM

The 233 looks perfect on you. The 422, in my opinion, looks way too big. I have 6.5 wrists too and purchased a 372 last year. It was a great watch, I loved it, and tried to tell myself it wasn't too big, but alas, it was. The fact I had to keep asking myself that question meant the answer was right in front of me.

wingku · 11 June 2013, 01:29 PM

I think it looks great!

toulouse · 11 June 2013, 01:32 PM

Kilyung, for some reason I think you can get away with the 372. Maybe it's the angle of the photo. I'd have to see the same angles as the OP provided for further study.

Robbie68 · 11 June 2013, 01:48 PM

Too big I'm afraid, 233 looks great.

Cru Jones · 11 June 2013, 02:59 PM

Kevin - it's close, but, depending on your style, height and build, I think it could definitely work. Wrist shots are tough without context. 422 is sweet.

Mike - based on that picture alone, it doesn't look like a good fit, but, it's probably just the picture, since you sport the BP FF with no issue. Maybe post a few pix like Kevin (straight on, not zoomed in)?

TimeOnHand · 11 June 2013, 03:35 PM

Thanks everyone... yes the 422 is indeed beautiful and that's why I think I am trying to convince myself that it look good on me... but I think best to pass on this one...

Mike...

the 372 is beautiful... and from what I recall your wrist is same as mine 6.5"... If you get a chance do take some more photo's of the watch straight on... might give us a better perspective.

Glenn422 · 11 June 2013, 04:15 PM

I think it looks good on your wrist :) Cant see clearly, but is the lug to lug length wider than your wrist?

TimeOnHand · 11 June 2013, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glenn422

I think it looks good on your wrist :) Cant see clearly, but is the lug to lug length wider than your wrist?

Yes the lug is just a wee bit wider than my wrist!

travisb · 11 June 2013, 07:03 PM

It's a big watch, but I think you can pull it off. (And Mike too)

My wrist is 6 3/4" and love the 47s. The caseback of the 422 / 372 conforms nicely for a good fit. More comfortable than the 1950s case imo.

TimeOnHand · 11 June 2013, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by travisb

It's a big watch, but I think you can pull it off. (And Mike too)

My wrist is 6 3/4" and love the 47s. The caseback of the 422 / 372 conforms nicely for a good fit. More comfortable than the 1950s case imo.

Yes, I agree the fit of the caseback is very comfy

TimeOnHand · 11 June 2013, 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kilyung

Too funny, Kevin. I'm considering a 372 or 422 and have EXACTLY the same concern. The 233 fits perfectly. The 422 may be a smidge big but I think it can work... at least I keep telling myself that.

That's a nice looking watch mate... from the angles I can see, I say it looks good! But get us some straight on shots!

nick c · 11 June 2013, 09:44 PM

Hi Kevin and Mike the fit is perfect

dmesserly · 12 June 2013, 03:33 AM

My personal measure to determine if a watch is too big is if the lugs extend beyond my wrist when looking directly at the watch. I have a 7.25 wrist and the 422 is just smaller than the width when looking directly at the face. The shape of the wrist will also matter as well as the size.

That's my personal view. Others will differ.

Survivor · 12 June 2013, 03:34 AM

Beautiful watches.........way too big for both of your wrists......

TAKUYA · 12 June 2013, 03:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Survivor

Beautiful watches.........way too big for both of your wrists......

Agreed! same happen with my 6.5 inches wrist too:

F.Works · 12 June 2013, 04:02 AM

No doubt , the 233 is better for your wrist , furthermore the 233 is more simetric .The 422 have the second hand instead the 9 and for me is a fault.

Friedl41 · 12 June 2013, 04:22 AM

Me, too, 6.5 and my 372 wears as good and better than my former 002 ... And much smaller than my IWC Big Pilot.

advocatia · 12 June 2013, 05:01 AM

It's a close call. The 422 wears very comfy. I agree with the earlier post though which said that if the lugs extend beyond your wrist, it probabaly is too big on you. Here are a few pics of my 422 on me. My wrist is nearly 8".

subtona · 12 June 2013, 05:24 AM

Anyway you slice it 47mm is a big watch

Friedl41 · 12 June 2013, 06:17 AM

By the way ... I very much like the look of this watch looking big. It is meant to hang over, it is part of the look. You don't need 8 inch wrists to wear it... There will always be people, who say it looks too big ... But there will be many who say 44mm look too big, or 42mm ... The truth is Guido Panerai and Rolex wanted these watches to look big. They put a pocket watch on a strap ... I is meant to be oversized ... How can it look oversized if you have gigantic wrists?

Travelller · 12 June 2013, 07:23 AM

I had the same exact dilema; I love the fit of my 233 (on my flat 6 3/4" wrists), I love the look of the 422! So when one of my ADs called me up to tell me they had a 422, I was eager to try it! I had been down with a bug and managed to loose a couple of Kgs so when I tried it on, it just looked too big... so I walked out without "my" 422...

In the end, I guess it's up to your own personal taste; a little overhang is ok, a lot is not - that's my humble opinion

Quote:

Originally Posted by Friedl41

...It is meant to hang over, it is part of the look... The truth is Guido Panerai ... wanted these watches to look big. They put a pocket watch on a strap ... I is meant to be oversized ...

Err... yes and no; Panerai wanted it to be easily readable underwater, wearing a mask, etc. and a big dial needs a big case...

Not to mention these guys were wearing wet suits...
...but agreed; the last thing I want to see is a 38mm PAM... hell, there's roughly 60(!) 40mm PAMs out there...

TimeOnHand · 12 June 2013, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dmesserly

My personal measure to determine if a watch is too big is if the lugs extend beyond my wrist when looking directly at the watch. I have a 7.25 wrist and the 422 is just smaller than the width when looking directly at the face. The shape of the wrist will also matter as well as the size.

That's my personal view. Others will differ.

That works!

TimeOnHand · 12 June 2013, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by advocatia

It's a close call. The 422 wears very comfy. I agree with the earlier post though which said that if the lugs extend beyond your wrist, it probabaly is too big on you. Here are a few pics of my 422 on me. My wrist is nearly 8".

The 422 looks perfecto on you!!!

mfer · 12 June 2013, 09:36 AM

A thick strap with tail will also make it look smaller. Not a formal meeting watch but a great watch.

6.5" for the record.

DiverAsia · 12 June 2013, 12:01 PM

I don't get it, do we all have 6.5 wrists?
I do. This is mine.

ray0750 · 12 June 2013, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimeOnHand

Hello everyone....

I wanted to ask for your honest opinion regarding the beautiful 47mm 422. I have smaller wrists 6.5" and feel that the 47mm 422 might look a bit out of place on my wrists! So I am posting a few photo's I took with it on and also have included a few photos of the 233 for comparison...

I love the 422 but don't want to get it if I look silly wearing it!!!

I am sitting on the fence with this one...

MY 233...

422...

Thank you in advance...

i would say you can handle it. go ahead and take 422! nice piece!

jvo300 · 12 June 2013, 11:07 PM

I also have 6.5inch wrists. Lets face it. The 233 is a big watch for us, but it works. I'm afraid the 422 just approaches the comical. Might as well get a 60mm PAM341 and go all in if you want that look.

11 June 2013, 11:55 AM	#1
TimeOnHand "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Real Name: Kevin Location: Hong Kong Watch: Rolex Air-King Posts: 4,468	Please give some feed back... PAM422 Hello everyone.... I wanted to ask for your honest opinion regarding the beautiful 47mm 422. I have smaller wrists 6.5" and feel that the 47mm 422 might look a bit out of place on my wrists! So I am posting a few photo's I took with it on and also have included a few photos of the 233 for comparison... I love the 422 but don't want to get it if I look silly wearing it!!! I am sitting on the fence with this one... MY 233... 422... Thank you in advance... __________________ Instagram: timeonhand1010

11 June 2013, 03:35 PM	#9
TimeOnHand "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Real Name: Kevin Location: Hong Kong Watch: Rolex Air-King Posts: 4,468	Thanks everyone... yes the 422 is indeed beautiful and that's why I think I am trying to convince myself that it look good on me... but I think best to pass on this one... Mike... the 372 is beautiful... and from what I recall your wrist is same as mine 6.5"... If you get a chance do take some more photo's of the watch straight on... might give us a better perspective. __________________ Instagram: timeonhand1010

12 June 2013, 04:22 AM	#20
Friedl41 "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2010 Real Name: SLF41 Location: Spain Watch: Changes Posts: 1,053	Me, too, 6.5 and my 372 wears as good and better than my former 002 ... And much smaller than my IWC Big Pilot. Attached Images __________________ Sea Dweller 16600, Submariner 14060m SUB 5513 meter first (1968) Air King 5500 (1980) GMTc NR, Explorer 1 & II 14270 & 16570 PP 5065a

12 June 2013, 05:01 AM	#21
advocatia Banned Join Date: May 2005 Real Name: Andy Location: Florida USA Watch: PAM 422 GMTIIC Posts: 868	It's a close call. The 422 wears very comfy. I agree with the earlier post though which said that if the lugs extend beyond your wrist, it probabaly is too big on you. Here are a few pics of my 422 on me. My wrist is nearly 8". Attached Images

12 June 2013, 05:24 AM	#22
subtona "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Real Name: gus Location: East Coast Watch: APK & sometimes Y Posts: 26,599	Anyway you slice it 47mm is a big watch __________________

11 June 2013, 12:00 PM	#2
kilyung 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Cave Watch: Sundial Posts: 33,940	Too funny, Kevin. I'm considering a 372 or 422 and have EXACTLY the same concern. The 233 fits perfectly. The 422 may be a smidge big but I think it can work... at least I keep telling myself that.

11 June 2013, 12:31 PM	#3
zlin08033 "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: PA Posts: 1,034	422 is nice, bit IMHO, it looks a bit too big on you.

11 June 2013, 01:29 PM	#4
toulouse Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Real Name: Tony Location: USA Watch: 210, GMT2C Posts: 499	The 233 looks perfect on you. The 422, in my opinion, looks way too big. I have 6.5 wrists too and purchased a 372 last year. It was a great watch, I loved it, and tried to tell myself it wasn't too big, but alas, it was. The fact I had to keep asking myself that question meant the answer was right in front of me.

11 June 2013, 01:29 PM	#5
wingku "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Real Name: Wing Location: Calgary,AB,Canada Watch: the World unfold Posts: 1,019	I think it looks great!

11 June 2013, 01:32 PM	#6
toulouse Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Real Name: Tony Location: USA Watch: 210, GMT2C Posts: 499	Kilyung, for some reason I think you can get away with the 372. Maybe it's the angle of the photo. I'd have to see the same angles as the OP provided for further study.

11 June 2013, 01:48 PM	#7
Robbie68 "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: NH Watch: SD4K Posts: 492	Too big I'm afraid, 233 looks great.

11 June 2013, 02:59 PM	#8
Cru Jones 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Paris, France Posts: 35,300	Kevin - it's close, but, depending on your style, height and build, I think it could definitely work. Wrist shots are tough without context. 422 is sweet. Mike - based on that picture alone, it doesn't look like a good fit, but, it's probably just the picture, since you sport the BP FF with no issue. Maybe post a few pix like Kevin (straight on, not zoomed in)?

11 June 2013, 04:15 PM	#10
Glenn422 "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: TRF Posts: 721	I think it looks good on your wrist :) Cant see clearly, but is the lug to lug length wider than your wrist?

11 June 2013, 07:03 PM	#12
travisb 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Real Name: Travis Location: FL / NYC Watch: Yes.. Posts: 33,493	It's a big watch, but I think you can pull it off. (And Mike too) My wrist is 6 3/4" and love the 47s. The caseback of the 422 / 372 conforms nicely for a good fit. More comfortable than the 1950s case imo.

11 June 2013, 09:44 PM	#15
nick c Banned Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Canada Posts: 26,846	Hi Kevin and Mike the fit is perfect

12 June 2013, 03:33 AM	#16
dmesserly "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Virginia Watch: GMT II Coke Posts: 9	My personal measure to determine if a watch is too big is if the lugs extend beyond my wrist when looking directly at the watch. I have a 7.25 wrist and the 422 is just smaller than the width when looking directly at the face. The shape of the wrist will also matter as well as the size. That's my personal view. Others will differ.

12 June 2013, 03:34 AM	#17
Survivor Banned Join Date: Feb 2012 Real Name: Rob Location: Thousand Oaks Watch: DSSD Posts: 1,017	Beautiful watches.........way too big for both of your wrists......

12 June 2013, 04:02 AM	#19
F.Works "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Spain Watch: PAM 343 Posts: 102	No doubt , the 233 is better for your wrist , furthermore the 233 is more simetric .The 422 have the second hand instead the 9 and for me is a fault.

12 June 2013, 06:17 AM	#23
Friedl41 "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2010 Real Name: SLF41 Location: Spain Watch: Changes Posts: 1,053	By the way ... I very much like the look of this watch looking big. It is meant to hang over, it is part of the look. You don't need 8 inch wrists to wear it... There will always be people, who say it looks too big ... But there will be many who say 44mm look too big, or 42mm ... The truth is Guido Panerai and Rolex wanted these watches to look big. They put a pocket watch on a strap ... I is meant to be oversized ... How can it look oversized if you have gigantic wrists? __________________ Sea Dweller 16600, Submariner 14060m SUB 5513 meter first (1968) Air King 5500 (1980) GMTc NR, Explorer 1 & II 14270 & 16570 PP 5065a

12 June 2013, 09:36 AM	#27
mfer "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Real Name: Mik Location: USA Posts: 13,724	A thick strap with tail will also make it look smaller. Not a formal meeting watch but a great watch. 6.5" for the record. __________________ member#3242

12 June 2013, 12:01 PM	#28
DiverAsia "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Real Name: Rich Location: Taiwan Watch: 16014 16610 372 Posts: 1,044	I don't get it, do we all have 6.5 wrists? I do. This is mine. Attached Images __________________ He's a rebel and a runner He's a signal turning green He's a restless young romantic Wants to run the big machine

12 June 2013, 11:07 PM	#30
jvo300 "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: TX Posts: 1,897	I also have 6.5inch wrists. Lets face it. The 233 is a big watch for us, but it works. I'm afraid the 422 just approaches the comical. Might as well get a 60mm PAM341 and go all in if you want that look.

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