ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

mrchrisx69 · 29 February 2016, 04:26 PM

After looking at the watch on my wrist I was thinking it's too small. Wiah it was the size of my DJ2. Anyone other GMT owners agree?

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Ruud Van Driver · 29 February 2016, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrchrisx69

After looking at the watch on my wrist I was thinking it's too small. Wiah it was the size of my DJ2. Anyone other GMT owners agree?

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

The DJII is 41mm and the GMT II is 40mm. To each is own but I can't imagine too many people getting bent out of shape over 1mm.

You have a photo of the GMT on your wrist?

japenney · 29 February 2016, 04:33 PM

The GMT is very popular so im sure most people would say the size is perfect at 40mm. This question is also very subjective.

flv112 · 29 February 2016, 06:58 PM

I have both a GMT II C and a DJ2. Size difference is hardly noticeable. I have a 6.75in. wrist. If you really want larger, you may want to consider an Explorer 2 at 42mils.

RRGHOST1 · 29 February 2016, 07:07 PM

I thought similar about my Pepsi GMT to be honest. Lovely watch but needed more heft and size.

BiG JeEzY · 29 February 2016, 07:24 PM

I rotate between my 36mm Datejust, my 40mm GMT and Explorer 2, and my 43mm Seiko 6138 chronograph regularly and in my opinion, 40mm is still the perfect size. Even on my 7.5 inch wrist.

On a different note, I kinda wish my Datejust was 38mm. That 2mm increase from 36mm would make it the perfect dressy watch size I think. I've tried the 41mm Datejust II before and find them a good size too. They wear a little larger than the GMT mainly because the bezel on the GMT is slightly wider therefore making the dial appear smaller.

Mick P · 29 February 2016, 07:33 PM

Chaps

I have a wrist of 7" and I find anything between 36mm and 40mm to be perfect.

I would rather wear a watch that is too small than one which is to big. Small looks discreet, big looks loud.

I am currently wearing a 39mm Explorer and it looks spot on.

Regards

Mick

ppalasthira · 29 February 2016, 08:03 PM

I own the GMT2C and used to own the DJ2. Size wise, i think the GMT2C is perfect. The DJ2's case alone took up most of my wrist! I have 6.25 inch wrists.

Furbo · 29 February 2016, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrchrisx69

After looking at the watch on my wrist I was thinking it's too small. Wiah it was the size of my DJ2. Anyone other GMT owners agree?

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

No. GMT2C is a pretty big watch, all watches of Rolex professional line are.

And nobody cares from which device messages are sent.

Auerr · 29 February 2016, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick P

I would rather wear a watch that is too small than one which is to big. Small looks discreet, big looks loud.

This.

beshannon · 29 February 2016, 11:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrchrisx69

After looking at the watch on my wrist I was thinking it's too small. Wiah it was the size of my DJ2. Anyone other GMT owners agree?

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Nope!

mrchrisx69 · 1 March 2016, 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruud Van Driver

The DJII is 41mm and the GMT II is 40mm. To each is own but I can't imagine too many people getting bent out of shape over 1mm.

You have a photo of the GMT on your wrist?

Name: uploadfromtaptalk1456757368847.jpg
Views: 1628
Size: 55.8 KB

Name: uploadfromtaptalk1456757392509.jpg
Views: 1632
Size: 51.2 KB

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Joearch · 1 March 2016, 01:03 AM

I agree with op related to my 16710. It does seem a bit a small to me compared to my GMT IIC and my SubC. But am happy with the size of the GMTI C size compared to my DJII.

kilyung · 1 March 2016, 01:24 AM

Nope. Try gold. Doesn't feel small at all.

cdmorenot · 1 March 2016, 01:30 AM

I tried to love the DJII and it did not look nearly as good on my wrist as the smaller 40mm cousins.

1mm ins't much but can be the difference between perfect placement versus average comfort.

kunlun · 1 March 2016, 01:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RRGHOST1

I thought similar about my Pepsi GMT to be honest. Lovely watch but needed more heft and size.

Future 47mm Panerai owner!

Or Hublot!

kunlun · 1 March 2016, 01:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrchrisx69

Attachment 716033 Attachment 716034

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

If the lugs extend beyond your wrist, then the watch is too big for you and you look like a boy wearing a man's watch.

It looks like the GMT is almost too big for you as it is.

jnkay · 1 March 2016, 05:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beshannon

Nope!

Nice wrist shot!

AK797 · 1 March 2016, 05:28 AM

The ceramics do wear larger, I felt the older models were a bit small on me, but then I had a DSSD and AP ROO at the time.

Galion · 1 March 2016, 05:32 AM

I have a 7 1/4 wrist and yes, GMTc looks small.
My Datejust II wears noticeable larger, there are a few threads with pics on TRF regarding this.

Rolexsmolex · 1 March 2016, 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrchrisx69

Attachment 716033 Attachment 716034

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Honestly it looks too big!

mrchrisx69 · 1 March 2016, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Galion

I have a 7 1/4 wrist and yes, GMTc looks small.
My Datejust II wears noticeable larger, there are a few threads with pics on TRF regarding this.

Yes ill will take pics and show. Big difference.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Ste_J · 1 March 2016, 09:46 AM

That GMT2C is about as big as you want to go IMO. A 5 digit may fit better

Le Chef · 1 March 2016, 10:39 AM

38 - 40mm works just fine for me. Anything much bigger begins to look trashy. So GMTII works really well.

MickCollins1916 · 1 March 2016, 10:44 AM

I've owned a 1675, 16750, 16753, 16700, and 116713. I like the size of the last three, which I still have, but I think the ceramic wears bigger. All have sat on my wrist nicely in any case.

Between 38-42mm is my sweet spot. I've gotten rid of all my bigger and smaller ones.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

busytimmy · 1 March 2016, 10:56 AM

Nope - it's perfect!

Mr Kram · 1 March 2016, 10:58 AM

had a GMT II two tone, rootbeer for 10 years until last week. fit and looked great to me.

watchwatcher · 1 March 2016, 11:17 AM

In your pics it looks fantastic! Not too small at all...

Colin10101 · 1 March 2016, 11:43 AM

No way man! Look at this beauty. The proportions are perfect.

Name: IMG_20151216_084322.jpg
Views: 643
Size: 80.1 KB

Name: IMG_20151216_083102.jpg
Views: 635
Size: 65.9 KB

Name: IMG_20151214_123116.jpg
Views: 634
Size: 65.2 KB

Name: IMG_20151229_195128.jpg
Views: 629
Size: 106.2 KB

Coubs · 1 March 2016, 12:18 PM

op great pics of the 116710LN! Too small, no way. Any larger would look too big on you IMO.

29 February 2016, 04:26 PM	#1
mrchrisx69 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2016 Location: San Diego Posts: 189	GMT Master II too small on the wrist? After looking at the watch on my wrist I was thinking it's too small. Wiah it was the size of my DJ2. Anyone other GMT owners agree? Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

29 February 2016, 07:07 PM	#5
RRGHOST1 "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Real Name: luke standing Location: england Watch: Rolex TT SubC Blue Posts: 3,997	I thought similar about my Pepsi GMT to be honest. Lovely watch but needed more heft and size. __________________ RRGHOST1

29 February 2016, 07:24 PM	#6
BiG JeEzY "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Real Name: Jerome Location: N. California Watch: GMT I/EXP II/DJ Posts: 3,351	I rotate between my 36mm Datejust, my 40mm GMT and Explorer 2, and my 43mm Seiko 6138 chronograph regularly and in my opinion, 40mm is still the perfect size. Even on my 7.5 inch wrist. On a different note, I kinda wish my Datejust was 38mm. That 2mm increase from 36mm would make it the perfect dressy watch size I think. I've tried the 41mm Datejust II before and find them a good size too. They wear a little larger than the GMT mainly because the bezel on the GMT is slightly wider therefore making the dial appear smaller. __________________ -Rolex Explorer II Black dial 16570 (circa 2001) -Rolex GMT Master I Pepsi 1675 (circa 1978) -Rolex Datejust TT Champagne 16233 (circa 1991) -Vintage Longines Automatic La Grande Classique -Vintage Seiko 6138 Automatic Chronograph with "Kakume" Dial

1 March 2016, 01:30 AM	#15
cdmorenot 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Jun 2015 Real Name: Carlos. Location: NNJ - MDE Watch: = Want them all. Posts: 3,700	I tried to love the DJII and it did not look nearly as good on my wrist as the smaller 40mm cousins. 1mm ins't much but can be the difference between perfect placement versus average comfort. __________________ \| Breguet \| Cartier \| Casio \| Hublot \| IWC \| Omega \| Rolex \| Seiko \|

1 March 2016, 10:39 AM	#24
Le Chef "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Chicago Posts: 2,005	7 3/4" 200mm wrist 38 - 40mm works just fine for me. Anything much bigger begins to look trashy. So GMTII works really well.

29 February 2016, 04:33 PM	#3
japenney "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Real Name: Josh Location: Canada Watch: undecided Posts: 4,777	The GMT is very popular so im sure most people would say the size is perfect at 40mm. This question is also very subjective.

29 February 2016, 06:58 PM	#4
flv112 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Real Name: flv Location: asia Posts: 241	I have both a GMT II C and a DJ2. Size difference is hardly noticeable. I have a 6.75in. wrist. If you really want larger, you may want to consider an Explorer 2 at 42mils.

29 February 2016, 07:33 PM	#7
Mick P Banned Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: UK / Spain Watch: 39mm Explorer Posts: 1,990	Chaps I have a wrist of 7" and I find anything between 36mm and 40mm to be perfect. I would rather wear a watch that is too small than one which is to big. Small looks discreet, big looks loud. I am currently wearing a 39mm Explorer and it looks spot on. Regards Mick

29 February 2016, 08:03 PM	#8
ppalasthira Banned Join Date: May 2007 Location: ASK Watch: SubC.5711.D500 Posts: 2,236	I own the GMT2C and used to own the DJ2. Size wise, i think the GMT2C is perfect. The DJ2's case alone took up most of my wrist! I have 6.25 inch wrists.

1 March 2016, 01:03 AM	#13
Joearch 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Real Name: Joe Location: Los Angeles Watch: Daytona + GMT BLNR Posts: 4,852	I agree with op related to my 16710. It does seem a bit a small to me compared to my GMT IIC and my SubC. But am happy with the size of the GMTI C size compared to my DJII.

1 March 2016, 01:24 AM	#14
kilyung 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Cave Watch: Sundial Posts: 33,940	Nope. Try gold. Doesn't feel small at all.

1 March 2016, 05:28 AM	#19
AK797 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Real Name: Neil Location: UK Watch: ing ships roll in Posts: 59,369	The ceramics do wear larger, I felt the older models were a bit small on me, but then I had a DSSD and AP ROO at the time.

1 March 2016, 05:32 AM	#20
Galion "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: PE - BR Posts: 558	I have a 7 1/4 wrist and yes, GMTc looks small. My Datejust II wears noticeable larger, there are a few threads with pics on TRF regarding this.

1 March 2016, 09:46 AM	#23
Ste_J "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2013 Real Name: Ste Location: Merseyside Posts: 380	That GMT2C is about as big as you want to go IMO. A 5 digit may fit better

1 March 2016, 10:44 AM	#25
MickCollins1916 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Jan 2014 Real Name: Bill Location: Baltimore, MD Watch: 116600 SD4K Posts: 3,285	I've owned a 1675, 16750, 16753, 16700, and 116713. I like the size of the last three, which I still have, but I think the ceramic wears bigger. All have sat on my wrist nicely in any case. Between 38-42mm is my sweet spot. I've gotten rid of all my bigger and smaller ones. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

1 March 2016, 10:56 AM	#26
busytimmy "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: Sydney, Australia Watch: ing the detectives Posts: 3,745	Nope - it's perfect!

1 March 2016, 10:58 AM	#27
Mr Kram "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2016 Real Name: Mark Location: Los Angeles Posts: 876	had a GMT II two tone, rootbeer for 10 years until last week. fit and looked great to me.

1 March 2016, 11:17 AM	#28
watchwatcher "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Larry Location: Kentucky Watch: Yes Posts: 35,047	In your pics it looks fantastic! Not too small at all...

1 March 2016, 11:43 AM	#29
Colin10101 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2014 Real Name: Colin Location: Toronto Watch: 16710 Posts: 1,336	No way man! Look at this beauty. The proportions are perfect. __________________ Rolex GMT-Master II 16710 "Z" Serial COKE Montblanc 1858 Iced Sea *BLACK*

1 March 2016, 12:18 PM	#30
Coubs "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: New Hampshire Watch: 116710 Posts: 305	op great pics of the 116710LN! Too small, no way. Any larger would look too big on you IMO.

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