well that didn't work out as I expected!
Discussion
decided to get a fairly plain non-ceramic Rolex as they seem to be increasing in price and I've umm'd and aahhh'd about it for a while.
so arranged to look at a Sea Dweller this morning and also considering a Pepsi GMT ....
it felt like putting on a childs watch; due to getting used to larger watches the SD felt tiny. Really disappointed as I'm not a fan of the Deepsea bracelet proportions, but have now put that whole idea to bed.
tried on the ceramic Sub and it just felt so much better despite having the same basic 40mm diameter. amazed at how differently 2 similar watches can feel; now might as well hold out for the blue/black gmt, as the pepsi will probably feel the same as the SD.
having watches ranging from 40mm up to 48mm and getting used to those proportions has probably excluded quite a few potential watches from my sights.
anyone else found this to be a problem?
so arranged to look at a Sea Dweller this morning and also considering a Pepsi GMT ....
it felt like putting on a childs watch; due to getting used to larger watches the SD felt tiny. Really disappointed as I'm not a fan of the Deepsea bracelet proportions, but have now put that whole idea to bed.
tried on the ceramic Sub and it just felt so much better despite having the same basic 40mm diameter. amazed at how differently 2 similar watches can feel; now might as well hold out for the blue/black gmt, as the pepsi will probably feel the same as the SD.
having watches ranging from 40mm up to 48mm and getting used to those proportions has probably excluded quite a few potential watches from my sights.
anyone else found this to be a problem?
I went from a 45mm planet ocean and likewise felt the SD was too small. Still bought it as it's one I have hankered after and had a few worrying weeks thinking I made a mistake. But now I'm fine with it. It's just a trick of the mind after having a far bigger watch. The SD is nicely proportioned whereas the larger PO was awkward to wear due to the size. No regrets from me and I will get a 42mm PO next time, whilst keeping the SD.
mikeveal said:
I personally believe that BIG watches are a fad, and will look dated in ten to fifteen years. Whether or not you agree, and whether or not you worry is a matter for you.
But haven't watches gotten bigger over the years, i.e., a mens watch from the 1960s in terms of size could be deemed as "girly".Mind you, we could all be wearing this in the future:
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/aug/20/...
Edited by MYOB on Wednesday 21st August 14:53
True, they certainly have. I have a Hamilton Darwin from 1967 that's 25mm square. Its a gents watch. My MIL has a 30mm square quartz fashion thing that looks almost identical.
But people are now strapping 50mm plus watches to their wrists. Very few people have wrists large enough to carry this off. We're now at the stage where the watch is often bigger than the wrist it's worn on.
Whilst this is clearly fashonable, I don't think that this is practical. My guess is that there will be a backlash at some point and the trend will go back to sub 40mm watches. Lets face it, the current trend can not continue, or we'll be attaching straps to long case clocks, so saying that watches are likely to get smaller again is a pretty safe bet. Especially if think that they can't get much larger than they currently are!
Personally I draw the line at 43mm (round case) watches as I have a 7 1/4" wrist. People with bigger wrists can clearly get away with a little more.
But people are now strapping 50mm plus watches to their wrists. Very few people have wrists large enough to carry this off. We're now at the stage where the watch is often bigger than the wrist it's worn on.
Whilst this is clearly fashonable, I don't think that this is practical. My guess is that there will be a backlash at some point and the trend will go back to sub 40mm watches. Lets face it, the current trend can not continue, or we'll be attaching straps to long case clocks, so saying that watches are likely to get smaller again is a pretty safe bet. Especially if think that they can't get much larger than they currently are!
Personally I draw the line at 43mm (round case) watches as I have a 7 1/4" wrist. People with bigger wrists can clearly get away with a little more.
All my biggest watches (excluding a couple of quartz ones) are fairly old.
The Navitimer was always a big watch and the Speedmaster (though not BIG by today's standards) was thought of as large when released.
The Seiko 6138 must have seemed huge next to most 70's watches, it still looks big today.
So, whilst the stupidly big (45mm+) things are probably a fad, large watches have been around quite a while, so I don't see them vanishing and a return to sub-40mm watches as the norm, personally.
M.
The Navitimer was always a big watch and the Speedmaster (though not BIG by today's standards) was thought of as large when released.
The Seiko 6138 must have seemed huge next to most 70's watches, it still looks big today.
So, whilst the stupidly big (45mm+) things are probably a fad, large watches have been around quite a while, so I don't see them vanishing and a return to sub-40mm watches as the norm, personally.
M.
I'm not really a fan of large, in your face watches and (IMO) very few people can carry them off. Most of my watches are older ones, but my daily beater is a 40mm Seiko, so when I stick on a nice vintage watch it can look tiny for the first 10 mins, but after a while you just get used to it.
Coincidently there's a thread running over on the Seiko forum saying show your largest/smallest watches together, and the difference can be huge......My watches range from a 43mm Chronosport chrono, to a tiny 32mm garrard.
Coincidently there's a thread running over on the Seiko forum saying show your largest/smallest watches together, and the difference can be huge......My watches range from a 43mm Chronosport chrono, to a tiny 32mm garrard.
i've always steered towards larger watches as i'm 6'5" and whilst not chunky feel that the larger watch looks reasonable. I think the larger form will remain popular but have to agree that some i've seen are like wall clocks!
i see my brother in law (5'9") in the same daytona as mine and it looks bigger on him.
my larger watches are a breitling superocean heritage at 46mm (non chrono) and an all black corum at i think 48mm, but neither are too busy imho. the rest range from 40mm (rolex) up to 42-44mm and these all feel about right with the Rolex taking a couple of days to feel right after wearing one of the bigger fellas.
whether the height of the SD is misleading remains to be seen, the guy selling the Pepsi has mentioned that as a flatter watch it probably wears a bit larger; will soon find out!
i see my brother in law (5'9") in the same daytona as mine and it looks bigger on him.
my larger watches are a breitling superocean heritage at 46mm (non chrono) and an all black corum at i think 48mm, but neither are too busy imho. the rest range from 40mm (rolex) up to 42-44mm and these all feel about right with the Rolex taking a couple of days to feel right after wearing one of the bigger fellas.
whether the height of the SD is misleading remains to be seen, the guy selling the Pepsi has mentioned that as a flatter watch it probably wears a bit larger; will soon find out!
westberks said:
i've always steered towards larger watches as i'm 6'5" and whilst not chunky feel that the larger watch looks reasonable. I think the larger form will remain popular but have to agree that some i've seen are like wall clocks!
i see my brother in law (5'9") in the same daytona as mine and it looks bigger on him.
my larger watches are a breitling superocean heritage at 46mm (non chrono) and an all black corum at i think 48mm, but neither are too busy imho. the rest range from 40mm (rolex) up to 42-44mm and these all feel about right with the Rolex taking a couple of days to feel right after wearing one of the bigger fellas.
whether the height of the SD is misleading remains to be seen, the guy selling the Pepsi has mentioned that as a flatter watch it probably wears a bit larger; will soon find out!
I couldn't decide.... So got both! Here's my 83 (birth year) 16750 matt dial.i see my brother in law (5'9") in the same daytona as mine and it looks bigger on him.
my larger watches are a breitling superocean heritage at 46mm (non chrono) and an all black corum at i think 48mm, but neither are too busy imho. the rest range from 40mm (rolex) up to 42-44mm and these all feel about right with the Rolex taking a couple of days to feel right after wearing one of the bigger fellas.
whether the height of the SD is misleading remains to be seen, the guy selling the Pepsi has mentioned that as a flatter watch it probably wears a bit larger; will soon find out!
andy tims said:
Yes.
The one above is my 2nd 16600 & I also had this
Now that is gorgeous!! I wanted a vintage one, but also something I could wear everyday. I feel with the 16600 and 16750 I have that in two watches rather than one older SD!The one above is my 2nd 16600 & I also had this
There is something about matt dials, non white gold surround and faded Trit that makes them look so much softer
I just picked up a new Rolex Explorer 1, at 39mm I was a bit worried it would look too small, I spent ages looking at pics on Google images and it always seemed to look a reasonable size on the wrist.
I am used to wearing 2x 50mm watches, a TW Steel and a Nixon 51-30, so on initial trial it looked a bit small, I took a few pics on my phone and it was bizarre that looking at the pics on my phone it looked a "normal" size.
I have had it slightly less than a week and my eyes seem to have aclimatised to it and it just looks "normal" to me now.
I did originally buy an Omega PO Chrono in 45mm but had to return it as it kept stopping, I then bought a Rolex GMT, "Coke" with Jubilee bracelet but it had undisclosed damage, also the bracelet felt really light, flimsy and cheap.
3rd time lucky certainly strikes true for me, I did end up spending quite a bit more but have finally got a watch I love and can keep forever.
Charlie
I am used to wearing 2x 50mm watches, a TW Steel and a Nixon 51-30, so on initial trial it looked a bit small, I took a few pics on my phone and it was bizarre that looking at the pics on my phone it looked a "normal" size.
I have had it slightly less than a week and my eyes seem to have aclimatised to it and it just looks "normal" to me now.
I did originally buy an Omega PO Chrono in 45mm but had to return it as it kept stopping, I then bought a Rolex GMT, "Coke" with Jubilee bracelet but it had undisclosed damage, also the bracelet felt really light, flimsy and cheap.
3rd time lucky certainly strikes true for me, I did end up spending quite a bit more but have finally got a watch I love and can keep forever.
Charlie
ditchvisitor said:
andy tims said:
16600 SD is perfect for my 7.25" wrist
[/IMG]
Snap! Awesome watches aren't they! [/IMG]
marcosgt said:
So, whilst the stupidly big (45mm+) things are probably a fad, large watches have been around quite a while, so I don't see them vanishing and a return to sub-40mm watches as the norm, personally.
M.
'Fad' possibly started by the re-birth of Panerai..? My thread on finding my IWC after being lost for 6-7 years highlighted one thing to me, watches got very big very quickly! It's 38mm and almost looks wrong these days; my daily is a 45mm Fifty Fathoms.M.
I still say optimum is about 40-42mm, some 45mm pieces get away with it, some just don't on normal people! Mechanical watches are bought >mostly< by those who want to be seen in them (let's face it) and want it to be seen. Therefore big makes sense.
That also means the fad may not go away until either the mechanical watch is replaced, and I don't think that will ever happen for many people or men wear an alternative form of jewellery/statement.
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff