ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
|
View Poll Results: Smallest wrist for 42mm EXP II | |||
7.75" / 19.7 cm | 0 | 0% | |
7.5" / 19.0 cm | 6 | 10.17% | |
7.25" / 18.4 cm | 5 | 8.47% | |
7.0" / 17.8 cm | 19 | 32.20% | |
6.75" / 17.1 cm | 10 | 16.95% | |
6.5" / 16.5 cm | 9 | 15.25% | |
6.25" / 15.9 cm | 10 | 16.95% | |
Voters: 59. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
8 September 2015, 09:19 PM | #1 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Real Name: Tom
Location: World Traveler
Watch: GMT Master II BLNR
Posts: 1,583
|
Smallest wrist for 42mm EXP II
Maybe there is right and wrong, maybe not, but certainly there can be group think based on our observations of the modern 42mm EXP II on others' wrists.
This survey may help inform the unknowing and those new to watches where to begin and what others think (understanding all watch owners rarely care what others think based on everyone's posts). |
8 September 2015, 09:28 PM | #2 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2015
Real Name: Kris
Location: Holland
Watch: me go
Posts: 730
|
I'd say 6,5 but its all relative and what you like...
__________________
Instagram watchpage: k99app, feel free to follow me ;) 17014 - oysterquartz Corniche Mistral40 Regards. |
8 September 2015, 09:30 PM | #3 |
TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Adam
Location: Far East
Watch: Golden Tuna
Posts: 28,794
|
I voted 7 because it looked and felt just about ok on me and I'm 7.25.
|
8 September 2015, 09:37 PM | #4 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Home
Posts: 1,438
|
I'd say 7 as well. I've got a 6.75 and I think the explorer 2 looks really big on my wrists.
To me the Daytona is perfect while the ceramic sub is borderline for me
__________________
Royal Oak 15500ST Master Calendar METEORITE Q1552540 | Luminor GMT PAM 00335 Aquanaut 5167A-001 | Nautilus 5712/1A-001 Cosmograph DAYTONA 116520 | DEEPSEA 126660 | Explorer 214270 | GMT Master II BLRO 16710 | GMT Master II VTNR 126720 | Submariner LV 16610 | Sky-Dweller 326139 | Prince Oysterdate 90630 |
8 September 2015, 09:52 PM | #5 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: down by the river
Posts: 4,926
|
As much as it shames me to say it, the lugs of the Explorer II protruded over the edges of my dainty 6.5" wrist. Even the salesman trying to sell me the watch admitted it was too big.
|
8 September 2015, 10:26 PM | #6 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: England
Watch: Exp 2 polar white
Posts: 1,147
|
Just under 6.5 and it doesn't bother me. I like it up against my hand so don't know if that makes difference..... it's my rolex I'll wear it if I want
|
9 September 2015, 12:12 AM | #7 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Real Name: Tom Corkery
Location: westchester ny
Watch: ap ro 15400
Posts: 502
|
|
9 September 2015, 12:42 AM | #8 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: England
Watch: Exp 2 polar white
Posts: 1,147
|
|
9 September 2015, 12:08 AM | #9 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: RI
Watch: blusylvx2blnrsmpbb
Posts: 723
|
6.5
|
9 September 2015, 12:11 AM | #10 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Real Name: Randy
Location: USA
Watch: Rolex
Posts: 1,925
|
I voted 7.5" because I had one and flipped it because, on my 7" wrist, it looked like the watch was wearing me.
|
9 September 2015, 12:15 AM | #11 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Real Name: Can you guess?
Location: Texas
Watch: 116610LV
Posts: 409
|
7. The lugs are too long for anything smaller.
__________________
"Comparison is the thief of joy." Theodore Roosevelt 116710LN 116610LV |
9 September 2015, 12:30 AM | #12 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 4,222
|
I'm a 7.5. I think the watch looks perfect on me from a size standpoint. My 40mm watches also look good but they have the maxi case and the Explorer II has more tapered lugs so the difference isn't a whole lot noticeable. My 44mm Luminor Marina wears just a tad too big. I'm alright with that because that's the intended look with Panerai. I think I've found that 40-44mm is the right range for me.
|
9 September 2015, 12:31 AM | #13 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: NYC / Milan
Watch: 6263
Posts: 3,938
|
I voted 7, although with wrist size I think it does depend on build, overall style etc.
For me with a 6.5 inch wrist, 42mm pieces just don't look good. I think 7 is the beginning of the sweet spot for 42mm. And even better at 7.5+. |
9 September 2015, 12:46 AM | #14 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Cambridge, NY
Posts: 1,089
|
I think anything under 6.75" is probably pushing it but I also think wrist shape comes into play. My wrist is 7" but is a wide oval and flat on the top so the lugs don't look like they hang over the edge. There are perspective issues as well. If you look at your watch in a mirror, you will have a better idea of how it looks to others. Looking at a watch on your wrist when it is only a foot or two away may make it seem larger. Put the watch on and try the mirror test.
|
9 September 2015, 12:55 AM | #15 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Real Name: Keith
Location: NYC
Watch: AK 126900/SM 300M
Posts: 1,664
|
Its entirely dependent on shape of the wrist. If it's flat, it fits a small wrist just fine. Beyond that, its personal preference.
Mine are flat 6.75, and this is my grail. I've tried it on many times, and love the visibility and how low and flat it sits on the wrist. It's a brilliant size for what it is- a watch designed for ruggedness and visibility in harsh environs. I don't think the size was a "fad-ish" choice on ROLEX's part at all. It's a brilliant, well thought out piece, size and all. |
9 September 2015, 01:02 AM | #16 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Real Name: Larry
Location: Kentucky
Watch: Yes
Posts: 35,002
|
Quote:
|
|
9 September 2015, 12:56 AM | #17 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Pacific NW, USA
Watch: Root Beer
Posts: 719
|
I am at 7.6 inch wrist and I almost think that is not big enough. Ask me this same question 3 months ago and I would have not agreed, then I saw a sweet little Omega Speedmaster Automatic Reduced at about 38mm case width. I thought it was a joke when I first put it on, but it grew on me to the point at which I do not look at the 38mm case as being too small, I acutally feel it fits better than my 42mm Polar E2. Now whenever I put on my 42mm Polar E2 I feel it may be just too big... I can't believe I am saying this but maybe 40mm is the best size - but please keep the maxi hands.
BTW, my boss is a 6'5" football player type build and probably has 8+ wrists and wears a 45mm Omega OP and it looks way too big on him. Untitled by Kurt Klimisch, on Flickr |
9 September 2015, 01:41 AM | #18 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 513
|
Quote:
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.