Sub, to small.........quite possibly the most ridiculous thing i've read today, and I've just posted a reply in the Swiss Watch Trader thread!
Totally agree with you, current sub, whilst a really nice watch is just too small for me, the explorer in 42mm is ideal, i am hoping that they will put it in the 42mm case one day, they could then sell both the 40mm and the 42mm, other makes do it and rolex do it with the datejust range so i am hoping one day that they realise they are missing a trick and do something about it, Mark
I have a Sub LV and a Seamaster GMT. The GMT is a daily wearer. The LV comes out very rarely, but when it does no way does it feel or look small. IMO. Its a more comfortable wearer though. I subscribe to the theory that size doesnt matter as well, good job really !!
Stuart
It is the perfect size for my taste.
I do find them slightly small but that is probably because of what I normally wear. Think if I'm ever in the position to get a Rolex it would have to be the 42mm Exp II as that is just right (for me).
I think the sub would be a great addition to any collection. I have an Omega PO which is slightly too big to wear in EVERY situation- I don't think I could be a one watch guy with it. However, the sub size would be juuust right for most situations IMO
I have 7.5 wrists. Last year some time and in a fit of pique, with an empty credit card, I decided to replace my Steinhart Ocean 1 Black with a new 14060.
The glamorous assistant in the AD bought out the sub on a lovely velvet Rolex green tray, and I tried it on. Then to her horror I asked "where is the rest of the watch?"
It felt so wrong, it certainly did not feel like 4+K's worth of watch steel on my wrist.
I bought a Mont Blanc sport for under 2k.
And I still wear the Ocean 1 Black, which feels and looks the business, for about £300!!
Rolex is hype, isnt it????
What do I know.........
How heavy is 4ks worth of steel then? ;-)
It's not a diving weight mate. It's a Tool watch that is designed for purpose.
I very much doubt that "it must weigh loads" was in the design brief when creating the original Sub.
Lots of people seem to think that weight has some sort of relationship with quality where as for me that is a very uninformed opinion.
It seems strange to me that (nearly) everyone appears to believe there is an ideal size for a watch.
Would you believe there is an ideal size for shirts? Or that they should fit the wearer?
It makes more sense to believe that different size watches suit different people.
Well putOriginally Posted by seffrican
RIAC
No, I think that's the Deep Sea.
My wrist is about 19,5 cm. I think this one's the perfect sized Rolex for everyday life.
For the heftier look, this one will do nicely ;)
40 mm is the perfect size for a dive watch for my wrist, even my 41 mm SMP looks a little large sometimes.
Then again I think the SMP wears a little bigger than it's designated size.
Last edited by JeremyO; 24th May 2013 at 17:05.
In my opinion the sub is the ideal size. The fad for large watches is already over.
I have to agree with others who say the new subs seem bloated with the big cases and thin bracelets. Vintage subs are another story. At 40mm, or 39 to be exact, they are a joy to behold on a persons wrist. The perfect balance of case and bracelet. The maxi dial is also a plus, making the watch seem larger than what it is. Personally I like to own 40 and 45mm watches at the same time. They really seem to compliment each other.
The newer subs wear larger than their diameter due to the lug size, that people don't like the relationship between the case and the bracelet is a matter of personal preference but if you think back to bullhead watches of the seventies it's not a new concept, the earlier sub design ie the 14060, looks more classy and refined but it's a professional series watch not a dress watch and imho rolex have addressed this with the newer design
I wear an 'all-dial' 38mm Nomos and a thick-bezeled 44mm Dievas diver. They have the same dial openings - 35mm each. This, for me, is what makes a watch wear big or small. The dial on the 40mm Sub is smaller than both of the aforementioned and therefore I find it wears too small for me, which is a shame as I really want one!
Last edited by geoffbot; 25th May 2013 at 15:52.
Sub too small in your opinion??? Well luckily for you there is the Deepsea :)
Actually I've seen a few people wearing Deepsea's and they don't look much bigger than a sub - they just look a LOT thicker and the bracelet looks a little odd. I tried one on and in comparison to, say, a 44mm Panerai it really looked very 'small but too tall'
Really?? I mean, really??
When you get used to a PAM (which some would argue are comically oversized) most semi-normal sized watches look small.
I have four 47mm PAMs but still find DSSD to be a very substantial watch and not just because of height.
That's very interesting. I've observed a strong correlation between wearing a PAM and thinking the DSSD isn't unreasonably big. When I tried it on it seemed fairly long, lug-to-lug, but so incredibly thick.
Maybe for you, but in the rest of the world it clearly isn't. Just look in the window of any high street jeweller...
Rolex sub = Perfect size!
39/40mm is the way to go!
I went into an AD wearing a 44mm Pam and tried on a DSSD - and it looked very tall and ungainly in comparison to the Panerai. Surprised me too but the AD agreed. The DSSD had just come out and the salesman and I were both amazed how large it looked on the wrist. I think a 44mm Panerai wears quite low and flat and the 24mm lugs balance that too. In comparison the spindly bracelet looked very odd and the DSSD looked a lot thicker. I've never looked at the DSSD again, really didn't like it.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
