Bloody silly sized watches
Discussion
Is it just me having a rant, or has the current fashion for huge, conspicuous watches got utterly out of hand?
I may have slim wrists, but so do a lot of guys. We're not all gorillas - a colleague of mine (also a watchaholic) is considerably bigger than me (I'm 5'11" and 11 stone, no fat) and has similarly slim wrists. Lots of guys I know have similar sized wrists - the bodybuilder types may have large biceps and forearms but the wrists stay more or less the same unless you're naturally big.
And, IME, 40mm is the best size for my (and most of my colleagues') wrists. Any bigger than that and the watch becomes bigger than your wrist, and can look utterly ridiculous, especially if it's really tall as well.
The tall watches then have a problem fitting under your shirt sleeve which means instant 'look at me'.
Obviously it's just an opinion - and loads of people must want these super-size watches, or manufacturers wouldn't be making them - but how many people here have seen a new watch released at SIHH, Baselworld, etc. and thought 'I'd love that' - then to find out that it's a 48mm monster and practically unwearable, and been disappointed? I have, and I'd like to know whether it's just me.
And it's *everyone* doing this now - it's not as if the watches have to be big because the movements are large (other than Franck Muller ultra-complications) - the ETA-and-brand-name boys must have to use spacers inside the watches...
As a result, it's second hand watches only in most cases for me now. The Sea Dweller is a case in point - the 'old' one is marginal (height and cuff size) but fits reasonably well on my wrist - the Deep Sea will not. And going forward, are they going to become bigger and bigger? All this smacks of 'bling' - the markets are most certainly not feeling that confident, so it'll be interesting to see whether next year's crop of new arrivals get even bigger, or become a reasonable size again.
I may have slim wrists, but so do a lot of guys. We're not all gorillas - a colleague of mine (also a watchaholic) is considerably bigger than me (I'm 5'11" and 11 stone, no fat) and has similarly slim wrists. Lots of guys I know have similar sized wrists - the bodybuilder types may have large biceps and forearms but the wrists stay more or less the same unless you're naturally big.
And, IME, 40mm is the best size for my (and most of my colleagues') wrists. Any bigger than that and the watch becomes bigger than your wrist, and can look utterly ridiculous, especially if it's really tall as well.
The tall watches then have a problem fitting under your shirt sleeve which means instant 'look at me'.
Obviously it's just an opinion - and loads of people must want these super-size watches, or manufacturers wouldn't be making them - but how many people here have seen a new watch released at SIHH, Baselworld, etc. and thought 'I'd love that' - then to find out that it's a 48mm monster and practically unwearable, and been disappointed? I have, and I'd like to know whether it's just me.
And it's *everyone* doing this now - it's not as if the watches have to be big because the movements are large (other than Franck Muller ultra-complications) - the ETA-and-brand-name boys must have to use spacers inside the watches...
As a result, it's second hand watches only in most cases for me now. The Sea Dweller is a case in point - the 'old' one is marginal (height and cuff size) but fits reasonably well on my wrist - the Deep Sea will not. And going forward, are they going to become bigger and bigger? All this smacks of 'bling' - the markets are most certainly not feeling that confident, so it'll be interesting to see whether next year's crop of new arrivals get even bigger, or become a reasonable size again.
My wrists are of a reasonable size but I wouldn't wear anything bigger than 44mm(though my Aeromatic GMT is a bit bigger). I particularly hate those ridiculous U-Boat watches, the major selling point of which appears to be the fact that they are some of the biggest watches you can buy... Also, I liked the sound of the new Hamilton Below Zero and thought it's not a bad looking watch but then I saw that you can only get the PVD version in 48mm which is ridiculous for a chunky square watch. I remember trying on a B&R and it was almost comical.
cyberface said:
but how many people here have seen a new watch released at SIHH, Baselworld, etc. and thought 'I'd love that' - then to find out that it's a 48mm monster and practically unwearable, and been disappointed? I have, and I'd like to know whether it's just me.
I've lost count the number of times I've seen a gorgeous watch to find its only 38/40 mm which looks silly on my wrists. I also have a real problem, buying second hand cos many watches don't have big enough bracelets/straps.Having said that I wouldn't like to meet someone in a dark ally whose wrists suit a 48mm monster.
Well my 2p's worth is, 44mm is the largest that looks good on my wrist (imo of course) That said i only like the bigger dial to acheive clearer numbers or markers, to allow my aging dodgy eyesight to 'read' the time without fumbling for spec's. So it's not all fashion orientated, not at all in my case anyway 
I met with a Dutch colleague the other day who is getting on for 7ft tall, and built like a brick proverbial.
He wore a giant watch, similar to U boat although I didn't make the designer.
Even with his frame it still looked over sized and made me think carefully about any over size watch.
It just feels like a blingy fashion fad that will go away . . Or at least big for the sake of big rather than for the sake of movement etc.
He wore a giant watch, similar to U boat although I didn't make the designer.
Even with his frame it still looked over sized and made me think carefully about any over size watch.
It just feels like a blingy fashion fad that will go away . . Or at least big for the sake of big rather than for the sake of movement etc.
I think it will get to the same point that mobile phones did in the late 90's early 00's. They were getting smaller and smaller untill they became practically unusable for the sake of the fasion at the time. Now phone manufactures have realised that there is a perfect size for a phone and all the current ones are bigger, and better for it than they were about 8 years ago.
This will probably happen to watches, they will get bigger and bigger untill they are practically unusable and uncomfortable.
I really like the Stowa Seatime but it is 42mm and i've heard it wears larger than it is, the annoying thing is that they are direct order only so it's a hassle to order one only to send it back if it's too big.
This will probably happen to watches, they will get bigger and bigger untill they are practically unusable and uncomfortable.
I really like the Stowa Seatime but it is 42mm and i've heard it wears larger than it is, the annoying thing is that they are direct order only so it's a hassle to order one only to send it back if it's too big.
I am a fan of big watches owning a Panerai and and IWC Portuguese. I have to say that I am now used to seeing and feeling a 44mm watch on my wrist and anything under 40mm actually feels very effeminate and unsubstantial. It is amazing what you can get used to!
On the other hand I do groan when I see the big Uboats or Jacob and Co watches. I do believe that those watches are all about "look at me!!!"
I think to claim big watches are a fad is a bit unfair. There has been a trend to bigger watches over the last couple of decades which make it a little more than a fad. I think we may see a resurgence to smaller watches at some point but I cannot imagine we will ever get back to 34mm as the mens standard.
On the other hand I do groan when I see the big Uboats or Jacob and Co watches. I do believe that those watches are all about "look at me!!!"
I think to claim big watches are a fad is a bit unfair. There has been a trend to bigger watches over the last couple of decades which make it a little more than a fad. I think we may see a resurgence to smaller watches at some point but I cannot imagine we will ever get back to 34mm as the mens standard.
dbroughton said:
I am a fan of big watches owning a Panerai and and IWC Portuguese. I have to say that I am now used to seeing and feeling a 44mm watch on my wrist and anything under 40mm actually feels very effeminate and unsubstantial. It is amazing what you can get used to!
On the other hand I do groan when I see the big Uboats or Jacob and Co watches. I do believe that those watches are all about "look at me!!!"
I think to claim big watches are a fad is a bit unfair. There has been a trend to bigger watches over the last couple of decades which make it a little more than a fad. I think we may see a resurgence to smaller watches at some point but I cannot imagine we will ever get back to 34mm as the mens standard.
34mmm I agree with - but I feel that for the average bod, 39/40mm is a classic size.On the other hand I do groan when I see the big Uboats or Jacob and Co watches. I do believe that those watches are all about "look at me!!!"
I think to claim big watches are a fad is a bit unfair. There has been a trend to bigger watches over the last couple of decades which make it a little more than a fad. I think we may see a resurgence to smaller watches at some point but I cannot imagine we will ever get back to 34mm as the mens standard.
Luckily, they make them all shapes and sizes for everyone's taste
I'm a fan of the new fashion for larger watches as I have large wrists and find anything under 40mm case too small.
I certainly see many people wearing watches that look a bit big for them though. How often on tz-uk or timezone do you see wristshots that look odd. I've seen loads of photos where the lugs are even overhanging the end of the wrist which has to be too big in anyone's books.
I certainly see many people wearing watches that look a bit big for them though. How often on tz-uk or timezone do you see wristshots that look odd. I've seen loads of photos where the lugs are even overhanging the end of the wrist which has to be too big in anyone's books.
dbroughton said:
I am a fan of big watches owning a Panerai and and IWC Portuguese
....
I think to claim big watches are a fad is a bit unfair.
....
I think to claim big watches are a fad is a bit unfair.
Particularly in the case of Panerai, unless a style that goes back 70-odd years can be described as a 'fad'.Altough I'd agree that there's a difference between watches that are big because they've always been big, and watches that have recently become big because that's what the market wants.
There is though the other side of the coin. Getting older means that short sight is difficult without wearing reading glasses. Reading a watch in anything but good light becomes impossible. I therefore bought an IWC Spitfire Chrono at 42mm but not without trying it on and it doesn't look too big although I am 5' 8" on a good day and can wear ladies gloves! It is the limit though at 42mm and certainly wouldn't go further than that. I tried on a Seiko Monster the other day and that was really silly on me!
jamieboy said:
dbroughton said:
I am a fan of big watches owning a Panerai and and IWC Portuguese
....
I think to claim big watches are a fad is a bit unfair.
....
I think to claim big watches are a fad is a bit unfair.
Particularly in the case of Panerai, unless a style that goes back 70-odd years can be described as a 'fad'.Altough I'd agree that there's a difference between watches that are big because they've always been big, and watches that have recently become big because that's what the market wants.
But Panerai's early watches were 40mm. Their current offerings are 44mm and 47mm. They made different sizes. Just like Franck Muller, whose Curvex line comes in both 32/38 and 'monster' size as evidenced by my 'small' FM which looks f
king lovely and fits my small wrist perfectly, and my FX trader cousin's 'monster' sized (same watch) which is huge and I can't fit under my cuffs. Which means, as a recent convert to FM, I can look for his earlier watches and ask for the 32/38-40 size (it's taller than wide) and be perfectly chuffed, whereas the 'look at me' crowd can buy his BIG versions of the same watch (they have the same movement, as do the 40 and 44 versions of the Panerai. I presume the 44mm uses a spacer like the FM?).So Panerai are a bad example, because they did make 40mm - IMO the ideal men's wrist size, because lugs and height can make one 40 mm watch wear a lot bigger than another (compare a Patek Calatrava with a 40mm Sea Dweller, for instance).
My Breguet Type XX transatlantique is 40mm and wears bigger than the Daytona I had before... but both are sublime and suit me perfectly. I really wanted an AP RO with chronograph but found it damn hard to find a chrono that wasn't a ROO and needed gorilla arms. As one of the big three I was tempted, a wise man here pushed me in the direction of the Vacheron Overseas but the Maltese lugs and design didn't appeal, and Patek don't make a sports steel watch that I'd be seen wearing... so fortunately the Breguet is lovely (regardless of movement, Breguet have the best history of them all IMO - just a shame my Type XX isn't fully in-house, but that will come in time).
But I've got a real dilemma with the classic non-sports watches. I absolutely LOVE Asterix's GO. But, along with Lange, their movements are big and the watches are big. I'm not sure I could carry a Panomatic off, even on a strap. And the lesser German manufactures (who follow the same aesthetic, which I do like TBH) like Union Glashütte and Dornblüth both use the Unitas movements and end up with 42mm watches.
Fighting a rising tide methinks, which is a shame, there are really beautiful watches being made these days that are simply too big for me - even the 'sensible' stuff (I'm discounting Hublot and AP ROOs right away). The one manufacture that seems to be keeping small-ish but being absolutely beautiful is bloody Richard Mille and I can't damn afford his watches. Arrrggghhh.
By the time I can afford a Richard Mille, they'll be 25 cm across and come with armbands. Harrumph.
cyberface said:
jamieboy said:
dbroughton said:
I am a fan of big watches owning a Panerai and and IWC Portuguese
....
I think to claim big watches are a fad is a bit unfair.
....
I think to claim big watches are a fad is a bit unfair.
Particularly in the case of Panerai, unless a style that goes back 70-odd years can be described as a 'fad'.Altough I'd agree that there's a difference between watches that are big because they've always been big, and watches that have recently become big because that's what the market wants.
But Panerai's early watches were 40mm. Their current offerings are 44mm and 47mm. [url]They made different
From here it says "The first prototype watch, using a 47mm Rolex case", and the official Panerai site quotes "1938: Production of Radiomir watches begins for the Italian Navy, with a large (47 mm in diameter) cushion-shaped case"
So, 70 years ago they introduce a 47mm case. Today, they sell 44mm and 47mm. You're free to disagree (and write as long an essay as you choose
) but that doesn't seem, to me at least, that they're following a fad.I wouldn't disagree on the continuous heritage, not sure which way to go on Anonimo.
jamieboy said:
Not sure I need 'picking up'.
From here it says "The first prototype watch, using a 47mm Rolex case", and the official Panerai site quotes "1938: Production of Radiomir watches begins for the Italian Navy, with a large (47 mm in diameter) cushion-shaped case"
So, 70 years ago they introduce a 47mm case. Today, they sell 44mm and 47mm. You're free to disagree (and write as long an essay as you choose ) but that doesn't seem, to me at least, that they're following a fad.
I wouldn't disagree on the continuous heritage, not sure which way to go on Anonimo.
Bad choice of words. Apologies.From here it says "The first prototype watch, using a 47mm Rolex case", and the official Panerai site quotes "1938: Production of Radiomir watches begins for the Italian Navy, with a large (47 mm in diameter) cushion-shaped case"
So, 70 years ago they introduce a 47mm case. Today, they sell 44mm and 47mm. You're free to disagree (and write as long an essay as you choose
) but that doesn't seem, to me at least, that they're following a fad.I wouldn't disagree on the continuous heritage, not sure which way to go on Anonimo.
But that site you reference - the 47mm case was a prototype and only one was built. The first picture of the three wrist instruments shows the classic Panerai design in the middle, and no way is that 44 or 47 mm unless the other two are for wearing round your legs. So they made ONE 47mm prototype, and then continued to make watches that were smaller.
Given that they used cases and movements made by Rolex in the early days, it's fair to assume that the early watches were 40mm since Rolex didn't get bigger than that until recently. But the prototype was a Rolex-made case, and 47mm
So when *did* they sell the 40mm watches? My timezone reference reckons the 40mm are still available, but not being one of the Paneristi I'm not intimately familiar with what's on offer at the ADs. The vintage ones appear to be ONE 47mm and then a load of 44mm watches (which, I admit, are big).
Come on, spill the beans. It's a slightly different case with vintage Panerais because they could never be a 'fad' back then, because they weren't sold to the public (correct me if I'm wrong), whereas I'm ranting about fashion pushing watches too big - and Panerai got bought by Richemont anyway who lucked out with a distinctive design that was historically a large watch. So maybe the 'new' retail Panerai started the fad... they sure as hell aren't following it, I'll agree with you there. But their vintage history is hardly swimming against the tide... their owners now can just turn out 'homage' watches of the vintage designs and be contemporary in size...
cyberface said:
jamieboy said:
Not sure I need 'picking up'.
From here it says "The first prototype watch, using a 47mm Rolex case", and the official Panerai site quotes "1938: Production of Radiomir watches begins for the Italian Navy, with a large (47 mm in diameter) cushion-shaped case"
So, 70 years ago they introduce a 47mm case. Today, they sell 44mm and 47mm. You're free to disagree (and write as long an essay as you choose ) but that doesn't seem, to me at least, that they're following a fad.
I wouldn't disagree on the continuous heritage, not sure which way to go on Anonimo.
Bad choice of words. Apologies.From here it says "The first prototype watch, using a 47mm Rolex case", and the official Panerai site quotes "1938: Production of Radiomir watches begins for the Italian Navy, with a large (47 mm in diameter) cushion-shaped case"
So, 70 years ago they introduce a 47mm case. Today, they sell 44mm and 47mm. You're free to disagree (and write as long an essay as you choose
) but that doesn't seem, to me at least, that they're following a fad.I wouldn't disagree on the continuous heritage, not sure which way to go on Anonimo.
cyberface said:
But that site you reference - the 47mm case was a prototype and only one was built. The first picture of the three wrist instruments shows the classic Panerai design in the middle, and no way is that 44 or 47 mm unless the other two are for wearing round your legs. So they made ONE 47mm prototype, and then continued to make watches that were smaller.
Have you got a reliable reference that says they made them smaller? The Panerai site says "production begins" of the 47mm Radiomir. I've not seen anything, anywhere, that suggests that the prototype was bigger than the production pieces.cyberface said:
Given that they used cases and movements made by Rolex in the early days, it's fair to assume that the early watches were 40mm since Rolex didn't get bigger than that until recently. But the prototype was a Rolex-made case, and 47mm
It's not really fair to assume that at all, when Panerai themselves say that in 1938 'production begins' of the 47mm watch.cyberface said:
So when *did* they sell the 40mm watches? My timezone reference reckons the 40mm are still available, but not being one of the Paneristi I'm not intimately familiar with what's on offer at the ADs. The vintage ones appear to be ONE 47mm and then a load of 44mm watches (which, I admit, are big).
Have a look at www.panerai.com - it'll tell you more than I could, I'm not pretending to be any kind of expert. I know they make 40mm and 44mm right now, I thought they still made a 47mm but I can't see it at first glance on the site. cyberface said:
So maybe the 'new' retail Panerai started the fad... they sure as hell aren't following it, I'll agree with you there.
Yes, the Panerai brand (regardless of owner or internals) kept on doing what it always did - big watches - and perhaps people suddenly noticed them, and assumed they were a new thing simply because they didn't know much about their history.I agree, and it's not just the size or thickness, it's the ruddy weight, I can't understand how people enjoy having a heavy lump clanking around on their wrist with usually loose bracelet's as well.....
Weight issue is one of the reasons (along with less bling factor) that I bought the titanium version of the Seamaster at the end of last year.
Weight issue is one of the reasons (along with less bling factor) that I bought the titanium version of the Seamaster at the end of last year.
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff