[piratfisk]

Originally Posted by piratfisk

Given the option of either looking possibly too small or possibly too large, I'd opt for small. The 36 works perfectly, I think. The 40 is a bit too "teacup saucer" for me. 40 is a fine size for a watch with a more prominent bezel (i.e.: Sub), but the Exp40 looks too big & flat for me.

Alternatively, maybe consider an Explorer 2 in 40 that has a more pronounced bezel & is still utilitarian? Or a Sub (no Date)?

Originally Posted by xrole

It's only 1mm bigger than the OP39mm, which was the 'perfect' sized watch. Having tried on both 36 vs 40 in an AD I can tell you that the 36mm looks like a womans watch on a 6.5"+ wrist (I am 7"), it looks so small as to be proportionally uneven. This means that other people are also going to think it looks too small.

40mm is hardly a true "saucer" vs the MANY big 42mm+ watches within the industrym so lets not exaggerate that it looks 'oddly large' on a decent-sized wrist, because that is simply not true. Unlike the 36mm, the 40mm looks proportionally correct.

Please see that I bolded/underlined/italicized key parts of my quote which you have missed. Thank you for sharing your opinion.