Are small men's watches done?

[bsmall]

I also have to work hard to find suitable watches because of my small wrists. I bought this Alfred Sung in the mid 80s. It’s tiny and thin yet still manly enough. This one was marketed as a mens item but these days womens’ watches can be an option since many are simply scaled down mens models. The trick is to find small watches that have straps nearly as wide as the case. If the proportions are good most people won’t notice the smallness since it will be in proper scale to the wrist it’s on.



26mm wide, 28mm tall, 5.8mm thick. Movement made in W. Germany: strap in France.

 

[DJosef]

I see the trend moving back to medium (42mm) and smaller (36mm) vintage watches.

42 is "medium"? Wow.

 

[Cuttingboard]

What do you consider 42mm? 42 is as large as I wear and only during a casual environment. I have a couple vintage Omegas that are 36mm that I normally wear to work.

 

[Cuttingboard]

What do you consider 42mm? 42 is as large as I wear and only during a casual environment. I have a couple vintage Omegas that are 36mm that I normally wear to work.

 

[Cuttingboard]

What do you consider 42mm? 42 is as large as I wear and only during a casual environment. I have a couple vintage Omegas that are 36mm that I normally wear to work.

 

[Cuttingboard]

What do you consider 42mm? 42 is as large as I wear and only during a casual environment. I have a couple vintage Omegas that are 36mm that I normally wear to work.

 

[rnguy001]

It's one thing to make a judgement about a person's taste in clothes or watches and at best generalize it to their style. Given as that's subjective anyways, all you're really doing is looking at other dudes the way catty women look each other over. Yeah, you're THAT guy. If that floats your boat then go nuts. My contention is that if you take it a step further and judge someone's actual character based on what they're wearing - then to me that's the ultimate sign of douchery. You actually think you're better than another person because you've convinced yourself that your 36 mm watch on your 6" wrist represents the epitome of style?

Hey I get what you're saying. You definitely can change the way people perceive you to a large degree by creating as much of an image as you can. But I'd probably guess for you it's to make up for some inadequacy or shortcoming that IS out of your control - whether you've always been the shrimp, the pudge, the bald-y. You're the guy in the corner seething that everyone else still undervalues you no matter how many different patterns of plaid and tweed you've managed to put together today. Maybe you've been judged your whole life based on getting the short end of the genetic stick, and now you're just a walking Napoleon complex. And I'm sure while you're secretly giving these other guys (with the 44mm watches) the stink-eye from a distance and the frequent drubbing on whatever forum you're on, never would you have the sack to actually say it in person.

So it's totally cool you think my watches are ugly, they're not for everyone. We can agree to disagree. I'm sure you have some great timepieces that I may or may not like, but I wouldn't make a judgement about you based on that - it would be the other crap you're representing that really seals it for you.

and to keep it topical - I think 40-44 mm is where the popular size will remain. There are clearly amazing watches that are outside that range of course

The things you choose to represent yourself outwardly are often a pretty good indicator of your personality. Even if you're not a douchebag or a boor (though self reporting on that is pretty inaccurate), your watch is hideously ugly.
Oh, and you do judge people on their outward appearance. Everyone does, it's hardwired into our brains. Your first and strongest opinion forms a few milliseconds after you look at a person, a rather useful trait evolutionarily. I try to get my brain to process things like watches that people choose for themselves rather than things like height and beauty that they can't. Be conscientious of what your mind is doing unconsciously, and you can modify those behavior and manipulate the impressions others have of you. I choose to have a bias against people who choose to wear giant things that other people can't help but see in a transparent attempt to make the people who do see them impressed with the purchase, and thus the wearer. Damn right I'm going to favor those who wear a watch that may be expensive, but is tastefully styled in a way that doesn't expect every person within a 50 yard radius to be staring at it and its wearer.
A gold tank watch is probably going to be my next watch, though it's not an urgent need. And I don't expect that I'll ever feel the need for a ridiculously expensive automatic. Nothing an auto can do that a decent quartz can't, and since my primary focus with a watch is to tell time, not to act as a piece of jewelry. I won't wear an ugly watch, but I don't feel the art for the sake of art flaunting wealth attitude that many buyers of multi thousand dollar watches seem to exhibit.

 

[Badandy]

Watches are an accessory. When they become so large that they dominate your upper body and become the focal point of your entire outfit, it's in bad taste IMO.

 

[DJosef]



What do you consider 42mm? 42 is as large as I wear and only during a casual environment. I have a couple vintage Omegas that are 36mm that I normally wear to work.

I consider it large. Sure it's relative, but 40mm watches as medium are a culture schock comparable to "chinos are semi-formal".
It may be based in reality, but just doesn't feel true.

It's one thing to make a judgement about a person's taste in clothes or watches and at best generalize it to their style. Given as that's subjective anyways, all you're really doing is looking at other dudes the way catty women look each other over. Yeah, you're THAT guy. If that floats your boat then go nuts.

This is not about judging others, it's about first impressions. I beleive the real importance of learning style is the ability to control that first impression, to use your looks to communicate something.
If a certain object (like a 40mm+ watch on an average or smaller-than-average wrist) potentially communicates insecurity, boorishness or insophistication, then I think there is little evil in saying this out loud.
Sure, you can use items like oversize watches as part of a whole to make a positive statement, but that requires knowing all the undersides of each part, and balancing them correctly. And let's be honest, most people don't do it right.
Today's average man dresses and accessorizes like a self-conscious (and inexperienced) teenager. Huge watches fit perfectly into that trend.
That's all we were saying.

And even if you argue that big watches are too ubiquitious to communicate anything, the I say that on the flip side, small watches are far from "done", on the contrary, they DO communicate style and sophistication, and are thus superior.

 

[dddrees]

As time has gone by, and we get bigger more watches have gotten bigger as well. But this is the truth for quite a few other things as well.

At 6' 3", a little over 200 lbs, and older eyes I am happy there are a number of options larger than 36mm.

Personally however I do find that a 40mm watch and less work just fine for me as I really don't mind wearing something I can almost forget I am wearing until I need it to tell time or just wish to stare at it for awhile.

So personally I find a PP 5711, a PP 5167, or even an AP15300 work just fine for me.


I also prefer Rolex 16610 over a Rolex 116610.


So I am perfectly content wearing a Rolex 1680 Red on a nato strap, but to each his own.

 

[RogerP]

I am SO willing to risk that.

Judging someone to be a boorish fratboy douchebag for wearing a 44mm watch is about as asinine as judging someone to be an effete purse-toting girly-boy for wearing a 34mm watch. In both cases, more is revealed - and with greater clarity - about the person presuming to pass judgment than on the person they presume to judge.

The big watch "trend" has been in effect since at least the early nineties. People have been predicting it's iminent demise almost as long. Like the crazy dude at the bus station ranting that 'the end is near!' - they are probably wrong.

. I will judge you as a boor or a fratboyish douchebag if I see you wearing a giant 44mm piece of bling, no ifs, ands or buts.

 

[RogerP]

rnguy001 - love the look of that Speedmaster 9300 on the croc strap. I have mine on the bracelet and have been wanting to try it on a strap. The OE strap / deployant is a bit on the pricey side, though.

 

[rnguy001]

Exactly my point.

RogerP - when I ordered the 9300, I made sure to get it on the bracelet, and added the strap secondarily. I'll probably rotate to the bracelet over the summer

I am SO willing to risk that.

Judging someone to be a boorish fratboy douchebag for wearing a 44mm watch is about as asinine as judging someone to be an effete purse-toting girly-boy for wearing a 34mm watch.  In both cases, more is revealed - and with greater clarity - about the person presuming to pass judgment than on the person they presume to judge.

The big watch "trend" has been in effect since at least the early nineties.  People have been predicting it's iminent demise almost as long.  Like the crazy dude at the bus station ranting that 'the end is near!' - they are probably wrong.

 

[L.R.]

Despite being rather muscular, I have incredibly thin wrists (as well as long fingers), and I find oversize watches look ridiculous on me. Mind you, I think I would maintain that opinion even if I had a larger wrist. I think taste should be subtle. Large watches have their place, but it's limited, and rarely pulled off well.

 

[rnguy001]

we can agree to disagree about tastes and watch size and lapel width and tie patterns all day long. That was never the issue. But it's the blanket judgement statements about someone in general due to their watch size I found extremely douchey.

to consider anyone wearing anything 44mm and above to be boorish or douchey no ifs and or butts? Seriously? You're cool man. But everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Sure I may see someone wearing "X" on their wrist and lament on how that may or may not look good - hell it may even look ridiculous to me. But that's all it is - their opinion of style. And while I may, in a moment of weakness, be so arrogant to think I might have better taste or style than that person with "X" on their wrist, I don't take it that extra step and think that this stranger is below me, nor a douche nor a boor based on his watch. I'm not 14.

First impressions not withstanding, letting yourself believe you're better than someone else based on a brief glimpse of their timepiece or wardrobe is just something I don't agree with. And I'm sure there are those that agree, and those that disagree. If you agree with that kind of thing, then good luck in life, it's going to be a bumpy and probably shallow ride for you. But that's just my view. It's a forum and just my opinion. I base character judgement on how people act, conduct themselves, and treat others - not on their clothes or possessions. I guess that's just how I was raised.

and to be clear - there are definitely distasteful watches in all sizes. And yes, many times the watch size/design may be in-congruent with what we think is acceptable. And I hate to repeat it here cause it's so cliche, but truly - wear what you like.

Despite being rather muscular, I have incredibly thin wrists (as well as long fingers), and I find oversize watches look ridiculous on me. Mind you, I think I would maintain that opinion even if I had a larger wrist. I think taste should be subtle. Large watches have their place, but it's limited, and rarely pulled off well.