Reply With Quotenothing.
your tastes are evolving/changing/settling/whatever.
the kind of watch that appealed to me a couple of years ago, panerai etc.. i probably wouldnt wear now.
i wouldnt worry about it
Over the years of my watch illness (aprox 18 years) I have always gone for the slightly larger watch 40-44mm Breitling, Panerai, tuna to name a few but recently I've found myself going for something a tad smaller.
It started with a few cwc G10's and a CYMA WWW watch, recently I purchased a Tudor prince at 34mm without crown approx 37mm with and it feels great.
I've still got a few biggies the largest being a citizen 300m ecozilla but in 2 years ownership I have only worn it 4-5 times I've even found my speedy mark II a bit uncomfortable on the wrist.
Is it my maturing age well I'm 44 or am I at the forefront of a new watch fad TBH I don't think watches can get Mutch bigger than some of the monsters hitting the market today.
The last thing is I'm not a small guy, I'm a 6'1" 17 stone stocky karate black belt that should be wearing a lump of steel on my wrist.
I've recently become a convert to quartz and gold now I'm downsizing what's happening?
nothing.
your tastes are evolving/changing/settling/whatever.
the kind of watch that appealed to me a couple of years ago, panerai etc.. i probably wouldnt wear now.
i wouldnt worry about it
Find 37mm to 39mm to be best for me and I have been buying more quartz recently but only digitals!!!!!!!!!!!!!.
Fed up with the big watch thing, getting to look like you strapped a wall clock on your wrist.
Everyone has their groove, and that groove evolves over time as tastes change (age, wisom, WISdom, etc.). Part of what makes this so fun I suppose.
39-42mm is the magic range for me. I can deal with a dressy watch or something clean, elegant, and functional (like my PRS-53) down to 36mm or so. Smaller or bigger than that and I struggle.
This said, it's always fun to strap on Ecozilla once in a while.
39-42: bingo! Dress = 39mm; dive = 40mm; Chrono = 42mm. Perfect.
I have a couple of plus 42, but for me 39/40 is perfect
I think ultimately its lug to lug more than case dia that makes the appearance, no?
Size is immaterial. At least that's what I claim.
I wear what I like, and it turns out I like a range of sizes. Today I'm wearing my Proteus at 45mm wide and 17mm tall, yesterday I wore my relatively small Pobeda, and the day before that I wore a tiny 1920s Sackville.
Variety is good.
Some pretty pics...
I happen to like my smaller mechanical watches. I look at my 35mm constellation chronometer and I think, that's the same movement they put in the seamaster professional. What a lot if wasted space it must have.
Whenever I see pictures of ultra thins with movements that stretch to the very limits of the case I envy them.
If bigger watches had bigger movements and larger power reserves then I could understand it but most don't. They have a normal movement with a spacer and a very long stem!
Form fits function so yes I totally understand the appreciation of the smaller watch.
Very true I can remember seeing a review of the Tudor Heritage and being very disappointed with the amount of spacer used, very small movement in a large case. TBH that's wht the wife says about me lolOriginally Posted by unwittingaccomplice
My taste is now more in the 42mm down to 38mm size these days, but I still want the watch to have a bit of height to it.
Never been able to see the appeal in very large watches, 40-42mm is the "sweet" spot as far as I'm concerned. Having said that, not too keen on small watches either unless they are classic/vintage then I'm perfectly happy with the smaller size.
Fickle lot we WIS, are we not?
Downsizing to even 34mm I can understand. I have to admit I have gone down the same slope. And I do own a quartz for a grab and go watch. But gold...no way!!
I'm an all stainless steel man till the day I die.
Must say I have gone the same way recently acquiring a 34 MM Air King which I am in love with but still own a 42 MM Chrono, I think like someone else said it is a case of evolving and perhaps age as I am 45! Oh dear!
Oddly enough I'm the same age and build and am also having a small epiphany, but on the G side. Flipped this:
For this:
And am loving it, not been off my wrist for 3 weeks. Mind you my TSAR rubber giving up the ghost the night before a week long biz trip didn't help, so GW5610 with Suunto backup it is.
I don't get this "I can't wear a big watch/small watch" thing. I have watches of different sizes and I enjoy the novelty of changing them around in rotation every few weeks.
F.T.F.A.
Ive also changed from liking chronos at 43-44mm like Breitlings to non chrono 40-42mm like Subs and POs, altho as others have said its nice to have both for some variety.
I do love these 5600'sOddly enough I'm the same age and build and am also having a small epiphany, but on the G side. Flipped this:
For this:
And am loving it, not been off my wrist for 3 weeks. Mind you my TSAR rubber giving up the ghost the night before a week long biz trip didn't help, so GW5610 with Suunto backup it is.
Whilst I have a few larger watches that I feel suit my wrist better, I do have a few smaller watches and wear my 36mm DJ a lot more than I ever imagined! I sold my 38mm aqua-terra because I thought it was just slightly too small though.
For me 39-42 is the sweet spot with only a few watches larger or smaller getting a look in.
It's just a matter of time...
^^^^^ WHS. I find I enjoy the contrast of going from a 45mm Orient to a little g10
So you gave it the chop then?
Rod
I appreciate each size for what it is, if you are wearing a Panerai it has to be 47mm, but I equally love a 40mm Rolex Sports or a 39mm AP RO. I think having the range and variety is great as you never tire of the metal
RIAC
My old Sackville! looks good too!
Size is immaterial. At least that's what I claim.
I wear what I like, and it turns out I like a range of sizes. Today I'm wearing my Proteus at 45mm wide and 17mm tall, yesterday I wore my relatively small Pobeda, and the day before that I wore a tiny 1920s Sackville.
Variety is good.
Some pretty pics...
ktmog6uk
marchingontogether!
Just got a vintage zenith on order and looking forward to a try of something sub 36mm
personally i'm starting to find very large watches slightly ridiculous, and i think the trend for such watches is slowly subsiding. maybe just wishful thinking on my part but i'm hopeful
Normal watches 38-40mm for me. Chronographs 42-43mm.
I have an Enicar Ensonic, a Tudor Oyster Royal (really tiddly), PRS-10 and a Seiko Sportsmatic Silverwave at the small end and a range of 70s and 80s chronographs culminating with a Tutima Military Bund at the other. Very fond of all of my watches and I like to have a choice of large and small so that I can wear what I feel like when I feel like it. Have to say that the face of the Enicar is very clear and one of the most legible watches I own.
Ah yes, so it is! :-)My old Sackville! looks good too!
It's a lovely watch and the gold plating looks much better in person than in the photos.
Anything 38mm and above is a big watch, in my book. I have one 40mm and one 39mm, otherwise I much prefer the 34mm to 36mm size range. Here's my latest, a beautiful 1940s or 1950s Eterna (will try to date it more accurately), on my 6.5 inch wrist:The size? 23mm across, 35mm lug to lug, 16mm lug width. And it's in perfect proportion and doesn't look small on the wrist.
Last edited by iml; 11th November 2012 at 13:04.
That is something we have not addressed in this thread, how well a rectangular watch can look on the wrist. Apart from a new appreciation for smaller watches, I would add that we should break with the current preference, that any watch must be round.
Big watches are for manly men.
The bigger, the better.
This 36mm is just fine for me
But if you flap your arm hard enough, you might develop enough lift to get yourself airborne
I prefer smaller watches too. There's fashion in everything- at the minute its for large watches but our time will come!
Now that's what I'm talking about, try to make that classic design bigger and it just doesn't work.This 36mm is just fine for me
These two look too big for your wrist, the lugs overhang.Big watches are for manly men.
Ditto... and I would certainly never dismiss a watch as a potential purchase because it happened to be 1mm smaller or larger than what's currently available to me.
Gray
Oh yes, I do like that Ennebi.Big watches are for manly men.
Slightly OT - but how do you measure a watch ?
I have always thought it is widest part of the case, but do you include the winder also ?
^^
Widest part of the case not including the crown. Which makes some watches wear much bigger if they have a large sticking out crown a la Panerai
I'm a 6'1" 17 stone karate black belt if I put a splash of old spice on I don't need a big watch :-)
I prefer the smaller watches. I don't like the idea of having a lot of empty space in a watch.
I recently bought myself a Hamilton 34mm which is quite nice but I think it is a bit small, I have to put on my special glasses on to read the time.
I'm thinking 36-37mm is the way to go, certainly no larger than my Breitling at 40mm.
I agree that our minds and feeling changed over time..
Lump of steel.....I'm getting bigger and BIGGER..after wearing the Aquadive with 2CM in height, the Seiko Monster has been kid's watch to me.
I hated gold, at least couple of decades ago, but started to buy in recent years.
I'm delighted to see ladies with big watch..pic from Internet
Still refrain from quartz...
Last edited by seikomatic; 12th November 2012 at 08:29.
Yup, big watches on slim female wrists look very appealing imo.
Have been drawn to a number of big (44mm or bigger) watches over the years, particularly of the dive variety - Seawolf, Chrono Avenger M1, Ocean7 LM2-C, B&M Capeland XXL etc.
Wore all of them pretty happily. The nominal diameter is, of course, only one of the variables. I found lug shape and size to be as much of a contributor to how the watch felt as anything else.
As it happens, my collection is now all at 40mm or below.
I'm sure I'll buy something bigger again though, GS diver maybe...
Why in gods name are they on your wrist then?????Big watches are for manly men.
The bigger, the better.
Daddel.
Got a new watch, divers watch it is, had to drown the bastard to get it!
...I've recently realised that big looks daft on me. I've also started to dispense with gratuitous hands, dials, windows, buttons and bezels.
This means no more chronos, divers, pilots etc. I have now settled happily with three delicious Omegas (Railmaster, AT and 63 Seamaster date) a Nomos Tangente date and a G for gardening, DIY and cycling.
And much happier for it!
So far......
I went into goldsmiths and the young lady serving me wore a submariner she was petite and it looked great.
My wife is only 5'3 and quite often wears my watches to be honest my 1972 vintage 14k Rolex 1500 looked amazing on her, shame its a rivet bracelet and not easy to remove links.
When I go mountain biking it used to be a g-shock now I wear one of my G10 beaters, I have a Tudor date and a Rolex date both near perfect I am considering purchasing a datejust or my dream is too get another 5513 submariner but I think that's as large as I will go.
I have a few biggies a citizen ecozilla I have worn this 3 times, a speedmaster mkii this does wear great but still gets no wrist time. A few G-shocks a few vintage seiko divers, a few vintage divers etc none get worn but I appreciate them all but they never get worn.
Over the years I found myself looking at watches like explorers, iwc mark series and vintage military watches but always felt sad that they where too small and not right on a big fellah like me. But just like cutting down on the sugars in your tea eventually you get used to the new size, I've gone back down bits at a time until I put on my speedy and thought blighmy that's big lol.
I agree 34-40mm
Most assuredly a convert to both quarz and smaller watches here also.
I dont know what happened either, LOL - I had for years been wearing big manual PAM watches and other big watches (I have owned four or five PRS-20 Italians). Typically 44mm and 47mm.
I would hiss and sputter at the quarz abominations popping up on the forum never being able to fathom, why anybody would deprive themselves of the joy of winding a manual watch in the morning, LOL.
I even had myself convinced, that 'accuracy is just not that important to me.' ;-)
Then one day, I went back to quarz and got a watch in a good deal. I fully believed, I would only wear it for kayaking and other activities of that ilk, but to my surprise, I found myself liking the watch a good deal and then bought some more quarz watches.
Maybe I just grew up! ;-)
Thats of course just a joke, as I have other types ofwatches.
I still have a handful of manual and automatic watches and still wear them. I just discovered, that there were other watches out there too.
Besides, I not only turned to the dark side and bought a smaller quarz, I also wear a digital on a regular basis too. Something I never thought I would wear outside of kayaking etc.
So a convert to smaller watches, quarz and digital too.
I win!
(not really....).
In the nature of the forums, many will of course belive that wearing watches like that is blasphemy. Some because they truly belive it and others because, that is the thing to do on the forums because some voice that opinion.
Personally, I dont see why manual and automatic watches cant co-exist (I hesitate to say 'in a collection,' because I dont consider myself a collector, as there is no red thread to the hundreds of watches, that I have owned and sold over the years (mostly manuals/automatics)). I wear both quarz and manuals/automatics. Im still very fond of my manual watches. I just dont wear them as often as before, because I also own quarz watches.
However I draw the line at gold watches. Gold hands and maybe even gold markers in a watch, which yhou really like, but not gold case, bezel and bracelet.
Not now, not ever.
I.will.never.wear.a.gold.watch.EVER!
Again, to each his own. Others can wear what they like of course and I do realize that gold watches are perfectly acceptable else where.
That has been my pet peeve with automatic watches for years = small movement, large case. Some are able to look beyond that and that is fine, but Im not.
I remember cracking open a Dievas within hours of receiving it and seeing that mile long stem and a tiny movement floating in a huge plastic spacer.
Ive never flipped a watch as fast as that one.
The only watch that I have with iffy movement to case ratio, is the JSAR.
But that watch is not only quarz but also ugly and bulky to begin with, that it doesnt matter to me. As the watch is cheap and well built, I consider it a 'fun' and quirky watch. I quite like it for that and occasionally wear it.
.....it has a certain something.
Last edited by WatchScout; 12th November 2012 at 12:57.
Ditto. I have a few chronos, but prefer simple 'less is more' watches.
No seconds hand, no day/date window, no numbers - as simple and sterile as possible.
Yes, the same with me except the gold itch !!.
My wrists are 18 cm.
Could never feel confortable with a watch above 40 mm.
The ideal watch diameter, for me, is 37 - 39 mm.
And I understand the quartz love. I am becaming very lazy with my automatics ( put it on the winder, take it out, put it back on the winder ... take it out .... ).
Quartz is more confortable when you look at your watch box, it's ready to go with you and the minute and hour hand are on the correct position !!.
I'm 56 years old, maybe this is an age itch ??.
Posting Permissions
