Why the big size hatred?

[TheVTCGuy]

Maybe it's me..... but it seems like there is a backlash against 42MM watches on here lately. I have posted a couple threads about how I would like to see a 42 GMT, a few responders agreed but the majority said bad things about my mother. I have heard a lot about how great it was the day-date was returning to 40MM (from 42), the hope that the DJ would be downsized from 41 to 40, other posts stating unequivicably that 40MM should be the max size for any Rolex. Now, I am not one that agreed with those grandfather clocks people wore on their wrists a few years ago, the 55mm and above, but one of the things I like most about my EX II 42 is the size; i.e. it's easier for my old and tired eyes to read then a standard 40. To each his own, and whatever size works for you is the best, but what would be wrong if a lot of Rolex models were offered in 42? I would like to see the GMT, the YM, the DJ, maybe even a Day Date (again) in 42. Seriously, anything wrong with that?

[Tseg]

A lot of girly-wristed posters?

[Le Chef]

Rolex is a global business and if you look across all markets chances are that 40mm is the "Goldilocks" size. You can go bigger but you lose SE Asia. Go smaller and you lose USA. I personally think they're doing the right thing. Rolex is not a fashion watch so they don't need to follow trends, just be aware of them, and make small adjustments - nothing more or less.

[EdipisReks]

I have an 8 inch wrist. My largest watch is 43. I wish it were smaller. My Premoon Speedy is a good size, but it wears smaller than it is. I love my 40mm Rolexes, and I wear my 36mm DateJust often. Big watches don't fit well under cuffs, and are often tacky.

[HogwldFLTR]

My two most recent acquisitions were both 42mm Tudors. I'm more than happy with them. I also am quite fond of the DJII even if it is only 41mm. Frankly the only discussion I hear against larger sized watches is from those who think that the 41mm DDII was too large and feel vindicated in their perspective by Rolex's retreat to 40mm. I've not heard any words said against the size of the ExpII. I like the 40mm one for reason other than size.

[Punishher7]

Big watches go in and out of style like anything else. There are time I wish my subc was a touch larger and times I think it's perfect. The exp II is on my list for two reasons... The white face and the wrist presence. I will be well covered with both sizes not to mention the GMT function.

[asleep]

Originally Posted by Tseg

A lot of girly-wristed posters?

That's me.

[wehttaM]

As someone with a smaller wrist I personally don't think it looks great when a watch consumes the entire top of the wrist when it's worn. I mean you said it, "To each his own, and whatever size works for you is the best" and some people here don't seem to like with bigger watches.

[Chadridv]

I think there is a difference between liking big watches (Rolex of others) and wanting to see classic models increase in size, for example the GMT. That's not to say such angry backlash is appropriate in anyway, but I can understand why the idea would displease some purists.

Personally I would love to see a 42mm GMT, and Daytona for that matter. I'm loving my YM2 at 44mm! Although if you're having issues with reading the dial, the YM2 is pretty damn busy and took my 20/20 eyes some getting used to. Probably not the best choice for you. Anyway, I personally love the 40-44mm range!

[DCheeta]

Originally Posted by Tseg

A lot of girly-wristed posters?

For me, personally, this is the reason.

[themaninblack]

It's personal taste and depends on the design. Some watches look good big. Rolex are a classical sport/professional watch size and I think the general 36-41mm suits the design and intent. I like most of them but I think the Deepseadweller should be 45mm+ and have a bigger dial. If you are going to have a ridiculously over-spec watch with a whole essay written on the dial and then it might as well be big too.

[cornerstore]

39 mm is the sweet spot .

[zama]

I have nothing bad to say about your mother, but I am happy in the 36-40mm range..... with a 7.25in wrist. I don't have issues with people liking larger watches, but I have definitely seen some postings of people with small wrists wearing watches that are way oversized for them.

[Rock]

For me, it's not so much about the wrist-size, it's more about how a watch sits on your wrist and whether it flops about, catches on things, and generally makes it's presence felt.
IMHO, a good size is one that is functional but not intrusive.
Some will prefer larger, some smaller, but there is usually a 'happy compromise' that suits the majority.
Unless your arms are 2 metres long or you are blind, you should be able to read a watch that is never more than about a foot from your eyes.
It's more about dial/marker colour/style than size. I find my Sub very easy to read but my DJ with its gold Roman markers on a white face much harder.

[joeswatchstraps]

Originally Posted by cornerstore

39 mm is the sweet spot .

Agreed. 40mm non-supercase is a close second. All personal preference when it comes to siz

[Solicitor]

It really depends upon the watch. For me, the perfect size for Rolex Datejust and Day Date is 36mm....I can't warm up with the 41 or 42 mms Daydates and DJs.

I love my IWC Pilot at 42mm but stopped wearing it when I got the IWC BP at 46 mm.

Also, I love the 1950s case of PAMs but detest the 40 mms. It's really personal preference and watch style.

[Andad]

It's just you.

[vman]

Originally Posted by tseg

a lot of girly-wristed posters?

+1

[scooba]

I don't know what size is correct but clearly there is room for all sizes and a need as well, I am a manual worker and have large wrists this summer I bought a 6263 from a Accountant and needed to add 3 links !, The watch looked amazing in the photos but being 37.5mm now looks a little lost on my wrist.

My 42mm Explorer 2with white dial is now with my father he is in his 70s and finds the dial easy to read being white and large ,He has the early stages of Cataract as well

My Vintage 1680,1665,5513 seam to fit me perfect so I'm at 40mm and actually find that perfect

So if you want my opinion every size has a wrist or use for it.

[1flossedm3]

I prefer larger watches (40mm+) wish Rolex would go a tad bigger.

[fmc000]

For me it's because the vast majority of watches over 40mm look horrible on the vast majority of the wrists, simply as that. Moreover, if the movement is the same mounted on 36-38mm watches the date window will be positioned too close to the center of the watch, just silly and bad looking IMHO.

[withthesword]

a 40mm watch on my 8 to 8.25" wrist just looks right. it has that classic size kinda like a 36mm watch on a normal wrist, proportionally.

i'd be interested to see how a 42mm rolex would look on my wrist, but i'm not really all that excited about the concept. 40mm is perfect for me!

[pol3259]

Like you say...to each their own. I almost always wore bigger watches...47mm Pams, 45mm Planet Ocean...48mm Breitling SA...and my daily wearer is the 40mm GMT TT. For me, I wish Rolex made the SD4000 in 42mm with a cyclops (yes I know, not practical for diving..but really how many wearers go diving?). If Rolex can offer size variations for the Datejust and DJII, why not offer some "up sized" versions as well?

[drfaulkner]

IMO it depends on your wrist size. I have larger wrist and my collection of 41-43mm watches fit just right. 40mm or smallert looks too small...on me.

[Rolextix]

I love my 41mm DJII, beautiful proportions in my eyes


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kobin]

I don't hate it, I just don't like it. 40 is enough for me.

[Paul_81]

Originally Posted by Tseg

A lot of girly-wristed posters?

Yep that's me but love my pick

[bayerische]

How I see it, watch design should be more than just pulling a corner in Photoshop to make it bigger.

The AP ROO line was designed big from the get go. Great line. Then AP messed up with the 15400. They simply made a bigger case of the 15300. The date aperture on the 15400 looks disproportionally small. So do the position of the date.

If Rolex was to up their sizes, they'd need to completely re-design the watches, and preferably creating a bigger movement too to help position the date at the correct place. The new Explorer 2, although a good looking watch also has its date wrongly positioned IMHO.

[airchitect]

Personally, I don't consider anything under 44mm large. I mean have you seen some of the 50+ beast out there? For my wrist 42 is perfect and anything under feels wrong. Wish it didn't....but it does. Can't wait for the dj40.

[fmc000]

Originally Posted by bayerische

The new Explorer 2, although a good looking watch also has its date wrongly positioned IMHO.

Yup, sadly floating in the white ocean hoping one day to reach its place between the indexes.

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk