The EX II staying 42MM, does this mean the GMT will stay 40?

[TheVTCGuy]

I probably need to explain my title. I absolutely love the 41MM size of my Sub. I loved the size of my 41MM DateJust. Yeah yeah, I know, there is really not that much difference between the 40MM sub and my 41, but I swear, I can see and feel the difference. The proportions just look better to me, it lays a little “flatter?” on my wrist. So, moving on... I was really hoping Rolex would release the 50th Anniversary model in a 41MM case. I also thought 41 would become the new standard of sport models, and eventually take over the Sub, EX, and GMT. Remember, at one time, they were all the same size at 40MM.

Needless to say, I was disappointed when described EX II was not revealed, it looks like Rolex will keep it at 42. For those of you that prefer the current size, congrats and I hope you like the changes that were made.

Why wouldn’t Rolex go back to merging these three models in to all the same size case? They used to all be 40, the EX and the GMT adopting the new sub 41 case they would all be the same size again. Wouldn’t this streamline and ease the production process? Doesn’t it make sense?

Honestly, I would love to have the functionality of a GMT in the size (41) of my Submariner. Since it doesn’t look like Rolex will change the size of the EX, does that mean the GMT will stay at 40? Or is there hope they will eventually adopt a 41 case?

[SPMN]

I think keeping the GMT Master at 40mm gives them ammunition against the purists who don’t like bigger watches. As a “dressier” sport watch than the sub or Exp II, I bet they’ll keep it that way for a long time. To me, the 41mm size is so weird. 42mm has become such a standard size for big, but acceptably sized watches that it makes more sense to me than 41. I’m sure they didn’t want to get too close to the Seamaster, but that was historically 40 as well, so who cares if they’re close again?

[PJitz]

Originally Posted by SPMN

I think keeping the GMT Master at 40mm gives them ammunition against the purists who don’t like bigger watches. As a “dressier” sport watch than the sub or Exp II, I bet they’ll keep it that way for a long time. To me, the 41mm size is so weird. 42mm has become such a standard size for big, but acceptably sized watches that it makes more sense to me than 41. I’m sure they didn’t want to get too close to the Seamaster, but that was historically 40 as well, so who cares if they’re close again?

Some would argue the new 41 sub wears smaller than the outgoing 40. What's weird is the obsession over the claimed diameter number, rather than the holistic design and how the watches actually feel on the wrist.

[ROLEX*]

Dude, you have to understand there is the Asian market (typically smaller wrists) and Europe/US market that Rolex is busy catering and satisfying too.

[Slider817]

As a longtime Rolex owner and collector, it used to be very confusing which model to buy, all the sport watches were around the same size, just very minor differences (at least when I was new to watches). Now, although the Rolex aesthetic is pretty consistent, the various models all come in different sizes, much better for the consumer.

I have only 3 Rolex watches at the movement, DD 36, Milgauss 40mm and Explorer II 42mm, I like having a variety of size watches depending on what I’m doing or wearing.

[Malum]

I prefer larger watches . Waiting on AD for new Exp. II . Currently DSSD , SD43 , Omega Mark II 2014 reissue , Pelagos , BB Steel and Breitling Aviastar . I love that Rolex is embracing larger watches than in the past . Sold my GMT II it just felt so petite .

[RTG]

Foolish to keep so many watches the same size. Sure great for some, but most don’t want one-size-fits-all.

I am one of the lucky Explorer II lovers who would have been seriously disappointed if they shrank the watch. Nothing in the watch industry fits my wrist, or my eye, like Rolex 42mm. They are all I wear, and all I want to wear any more.

[PJitz]

Given the recent refinement of the GMT case, I'd expect it to remain as-is for a while.

[Rori]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

I probably need to explain my title. I absolutely love the 41MM size of my Sub. I loved the size of my 41MM DateJust. Yeah yeah, I know, there is really not that much difference between the 40MM sub and my 41, but I swear, I can see and feel the difference. The proportions just look better to me, it lays a little “flatter?” on my wrist. So, moving on... I was really hoping Rolex would release the 50th Anniversary model in a 41MM case. I also thought 41 would become the new standard of sport models, and eventually take over the Sub, EX, and GMT. Remember, at one time, they were all the same size at 40MM.

Needless to say, I was disappointed when described EX II was not revealed, it looks like Rolex will keep it at 42. For those of you that prefer the current size, congrats and I hope you like the changes that were made.

Why wouldn’t Rolex go back to merging these three models in to all the same size case? They used to all be 40, the EX and the GMT adopting the new sub 41 case they would all be the same size again. Wouldn’t this streamline and ease the production process? Doesn’t it make sense?

Honestly, I would love to have the functionality of a GMT in the size (41) of my Submariner. Since it doesn’t look like Rolex will change the size of the EX, does that mean the GMT will stay at 40? Or is there hope they will eventually adopt a 41 case?

One thing is sure or more probable to hopes. Case design will change following the new sub and SD43 proportions. By doing so they can make the new GMT case 41mm while making it wears as a 40mm.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RRGHOST1]

I always thought that my GMT 16710 Pepsi was a bit small and think making the GMT with a 41mm case, would be a step up.

[Brich436]

I measured my 16570 and came up with 39mm!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[1665fan]

The 40mm case for pre ceramic is 39mm and the 41mm ceramic sub is 40.3mm....doesn’t matter what they say Rolex cannot measure shit correctly

[watchwatcher]

My take is this, Paul. I don't see Rolex trying to unify watch case sizes, rather, it looks to me as if they're trying to spread them across a wide range, i.e, a veritable smorgasbord of watch sizes.

In other words, something for everyone.

[Asumer]

I think this is one of rolex's long term goals acheived, look back 12-14 years and the gmt master ii, expii and sub (and sea dweller) were all 40mm and roughly have the exact same case, only differential was the bezel(sub and seadweller had thicker cases). By moving each into their own size and the gmt getting the jubilee bracelet you now have watches that to a bystander look rather different from each other. In addition a majority are now larger as people in general are bigger than they were 20-30 years ago, also people want more wrist presence nowadays.