At what age would we consider the smaller, thinner models?

[GMTMasterNJ]

Question for this group of people who share a common interest--
As we grow older, at what age might you consider the smaller, thinner models?

I have a chunky Deepsea and a Planet Ocean in addition to other pieces. I did wonder at what age I may think to consider the Datejusts, Day Dates, older Aqua Terras, thinner JLCs, etc. as I grow older.

Obviously, those with 7.5 to 8" wrists may have a different story. As I *could* be an AARP card-carrying member (I'm not) I wonder at what age I stop wearing the chunky models and look at the thinner, lighter models.

Just throwing it out there for the group.
"If you have it wear it!"

[Stan Cooper]

For me, never. I'm eighty and have worn GMT-Masters (1675 and 16710) for decades and can't imagine wearing a smaller, thinner watch. For one thing, I'm far sighted after my cataract surgery and need either progressive lenses or reading glasses for near vision. With a smaller dial, I probably wouldn't be able to see the time without glasses.

[Medtech71]

Once I hit 50 I got tired of the ss hockey pucks on my wrist, but it’d different for eveyone.

[johnk]

144

.

[DJ2020]

Originally Posted by Medtech71

Once I hit 50 I got tired of the ss hockey pucks on my wrist, but it’d different for eveyone.

Same for me. +1, I just got tired of the unneeded weight of a dive watch that has a depth rating 10x deeper than I or anyone else can physically achieve. This does not mean I no longer like them of course. I just don't wear them anymore.

I find the DJ a welcome replacement and more than capable of anything I will put it threw. Sleek and very comfortable is the name of the game for me. The explorer 2 is the heaviest watch I own and it's still in the 12mm thick range as is 168000 sub I have. I truly love the DJ though for it's attributes alone. I made this decision around 50 also

[AF_Rob]

Once I entered my late 30s, I leaned hard into smaller sizes and moved most pieces larger than 40mm.

[JRell]

Never liked smaller watches, never will. Have a tag that I still have from when I was younger, it looks so small to me now.

[rohada]

My watches are below (may not be able to see them in the app or on your phone) and they range from 34mm to 44mm. At 58, I'm not looking to transition away from the larger ones anytime soon.

[~JJ]

For me it has nothing to do with age and more around having a diversified collection so I can wear different types of pieces when the feeling arises. It’s funny, many say AP is a one trick pony with the RO design, but no one’s says the same regarding Rolex Oyster.

Find a thin piece that you like and give it a try. Remember, you can always sell it.

[S’portEye]

Depends on what you call small. 39-41 has always been a sweet spot on my wrist. I generally have more issues with thicker watches now. 14 is definitely too thick for my tastes as I got older. Really like 12 or less now. I’m 50.

[Guppydriver]

I find the older I get , the larger I need them to compensate for my decreasing performance.

[Malum]

I like large and thick watches , 42 mm to 45 mm is my sweet spot . I’m pretty sure it always will be .

[Cambo]

I don’t find the 40 mm too big….while I’d be ok with a 36, I’d probably stay with my 40’s given the choice. Anything bigger than that would would seem too large.

[rmagoo57]

Originally Posted by johnk

144

.

Bingo!!!

[Robf52]

Originally Posted by Stan Cooper

For me, never. I'm eighty and have worn GMT-Masters (1675 and 16710) for decades and can't imagine wearing a smaller, thinner watch. For one thing, I'm far sighted after my cataract surgery and need either progressive lenses or reading glasses for near vision. With a smaller dial, I probably wouldn't be able to see the time without glasses.

Pushing 71, and totally agree.

[inadeje]

My watches range from 52 mm down to 39 mm. I’m in my 50s and frankly have never considered any watch too small or too large due to a persons age. Wearing the right watch for corresponding attire is however important in my view.

[tifosi]

For me, never. I’ll be wearing a Sub forever.

[RFA]

Originally Posted by S’portEye

Depends on what you call small. 39-41 has always been a sweet spot on my wrist. I generally have more issues with thicker watches now. 14 is definitely too thick for my tastes as I got older. Really like 12 or less now. I’m 50.

Agree with this. Thickness spoils a lot of 42-45 mm watches that would otherwise be appealing.

[ts3]

Didn't like thick chunky watches when I was 30 and don't like them many years later. 10mm max for me. One reason I have not owned a Rolex.

[Zeli_papa]

Nothing to do with the age , just go with your gut feeling and wear what feels right for you at this particular time, no right or wrong there imo

[ArtNouveau]

I have had and still do have watches ranging from 38-47mm or so. Age has nothing to do with it although my most worn these days are “Rolex40” to “Seiko43” range.

[garyk]

Originally Posted by ArtNouveau

I have had and still do have watches ranging from 38-47mm or so. Age has nothing to do with it although my most worn these days are “Rolex40” to “Seiko43” range.

Same, I’ve been wearing these size watches since the 70s.

[espanol]

Slightly different, but currently having an existential crisis (kidding).

I was recently in Dubai. Stayed at a 5-star resort, which is important for context. My family and I are not 5-star people, but got an incredible deal and couldn’t pass on it.

I’ve never seen so many Rolex watches in one place. Quite literally everyone in the resort was wearing one, women included. A few RMs as well. Plus a few apple watches.

Of the Rolex I saw, they were all 40mm+, and contemporary. I wore an Explorer, so far from loud.

To OP’s question about size, I’ve realized here that I just don’t fit in with the modern, shiny, hype Rolex. I’ll keep my modest Explorer, OP, and that’s about it. The ones I noticed that were wearing the Daytona’s, Sub’s are also donning every major designer brand logo they could. Shoes, hats, bags; it was almost like a competition to see how many luxury logos they could slap on their body at one time. Rolex included. I found it incredibly tacky.

So for me, has less to do with size and more to do with image. Unfortunately modern Rolex doesn’t carry the same image to me that now-vintage Rolex once did.

Maybe I’m just getting older.

[Ny325]

I always preferred smaller watches. 36mm-40mm is my go to.

[htc8p]

my dad would wear 40mm sized watches but after cataract surgery and age he prefers my bond seamaster 42mm. he can read it easily.

but the weight is a factor

[George58]

At 65yoa I think and like my 36 DD or my 34 PP Aqua. Don't like the look of a older gent wearing a DS

[HogwldFLTR]

Smaller watches are for boys and not grown men. I don't wear chunky Rolex but stick to 40mm watches.

[Obi Wan]

I do not know what the future holds to me, but I am 38 and I do not see myself into small watches. For me, 39-41 is the endless perfect size.

[S.Explorer]

I must be an outlier as I already knew in my late teens I preferred smaller, thinner watches, typically 36mm size for comfort.

[Medtech71]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

Smaller watches are for boys and not grown men. I don't wear chunky Rolex but stick to 40mm watches.

Well, you got that one completely wrong.