Bracelet sizing for small wrists: 14060M vs. 16610 vs. SubCs

[Lionel Hutz]

Hi all,

I have been shopping for a Sub for a few weeks now. My wrists are on the smaller side, and I am trying to figure out the bracelet sizing issues that I have read about.

As I understand it, the 14060M bracelet cannot be made small enough for some people without knocking out one of the permanent endlinks. I'd rather not do this. Does the 16610 have the same issue with bracelet design? I like the look of the ND better, but it doesn't make sense if it won't fit properly. I can't find either a 14060M or a 16610 locally to see if I can get the bracelet to fit.

Finally, it sounds like the SubC bracelet fixed this issue by adding more removeable endlinks. Is that right? Any folks with SubCs and small wrists want to weigh in on fitment and appearance? I tried a SubC at an AD and wasn't sold on how the big lugs wear.

[kimnkk]

My wrists are pretty small, about 6.25-6.50" and i fit into the SubC with no problems.
In fact, I still have to use 2 removable links as my glidelock adjustment is usually on the tightest positions.
I'm quite confident even my girlfriend could wear it if i took out the last 2 links.

[Lionel Hutz]

Originally Posted by kimnkk

My wrists are pretty small, about 6.25-6.50" and i fit into the SubC with no problems.
In fact, I still have to use 2 removable links as my glidelock adjustment is usually on the tightest positions.
I'm quite confident even my girlfriend could wear it if i took out the last 2 links.

Do the lugs extend past the edges of your wrist? Do you mind that look?

[Tools]

Originally Posted by Lionel Hutz

. . .

As I understand it, the 14060M bracelet cannot be made small enough for some people without knocking out one of the permanent endlinks. I'd rather not do this. Does the 16610 have the same issue with bracelet design? I like the look of the ND better, but it doesn't make sense if it won't fit properly. I can't find either a 14060M or a 16610 locally to see if I can get the bracelet to fit.

Finally, it sounds like the SubC bracelet fixed this issue by adding more removeable endlinks. Is that right? Any folks with SubCs and small wrists want to weigh in on fitment and appearance? I tried a SubC at an AD and wasn't sold on how the big lugs wear.

Yes that is correct. All Rolex watches have used the permanent-link removal for small wrist as part of their fitting. It is not something unusual or a thing to shy away from - It's not an "issue" it's normal and that is how they have been fitted for decades.

Yes, the latest bracelets have recognized a changing market where more and more smaller wrists (ladies included) wear larger men's watches and have changed all of their bracelets to have an additional removable link on each side.

It's up to you, but if I had small wrists I wouldn't say "I can only buy newer watches with the additional removable link" because I know that the older bracelets can be fitted easily.

[Urosfan]

6.5 here and my hulk fits fantastic no issues what so ever

[AboutTime]

My wrists are small, somewhere in the 6 - 6.25 inch range. My SubC fits fine with one removable link remaining in the bracelet. I did move the half-link from the 12-o'clock side to the 6 o'clock side of the clasp to center the clasp on the bottom of my wrist. I have no experience with the fit of older Sub bracelets on small wrists but have read about the same issues that you mentioned.

[tkerrmd]

Originally Posted by Urosfan

6.5 here and my hulk fits fantastic no issues what so ever

Same here

[HogwldFLTR]

My 14060 fits my 6.5 inch wrist without issue. I am going to put it no a Nato regardless.

[kimnkk]

Originally Posted by Lionel Hutz

Do the lugs extend past the edges of your wrist? Do you mind that look?

Doesn't hang over my wrists although may look it at some angles.