GQ making a push for smaller watches

[teamkitty]

Originally Posted by eonflux

And these will be the "new" shorts for next season

You ever see a gym full of cross fitters? (hint: short shorts are already back - and have been for quite a few years).

[joli160]

Originally Posted by glamorama

So 36mm DD will perfect again.

I can't remember it was not

[Quicksilver]

I agree with the article. 36-40 mm is perfect for me and I suspect for many others. But I appreciate that bigger guys want the choice of a larger watch. You should tailor the watch to you wrist size, height and length of arm. Nothing looks sillier than a big watch on a guy that can’t carry it off.

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by Chadridv

39-40mm is still my limit. They do have a nice Tudor and Rolex, but they also have this whole look...

Yes, I'm always bothered by how they force looks together, based on who their advertisers are. Sorry, but a man who appreciates and seeks out the delicate refinement of a $15k Piaget dress watch isn't buying $900 suits off the rack at Nordstrom...


I read through the whole thing again last night and something else did hit me: this works on most of the watches they've selected because the designs are decades old and they have a certain classic, even vintage, appeal. That's why I don't like the Hublot at all, but would happily wear the Rolex, Tudor, Omega or even Timex.

That Bulova, which I wouldn't wear since I wouldn't wear that much gold (even if I could afford that much real gold), also demonstrates why I've always thought that 36mm was the right size for the DD, and the 40mm version looked way too large for the type of watch it was.

[dmash]

Originally Posted by jb335

Brief write up talking about the move to smaller watches after the over sized look of recent years. And I agree!

Tudor gets a shout out too.

https://www.gq.com/gallery/best-smal...hes-under-38mm

This in itself is a joke. If one lets GQ dictate the type of watch he or she is wearing, that's just sheep mentality. You should be wearing the watch YOU like this entire time, no matter what any 'trend' or magazine says. Be that small, large, in between, whatever.

[Abdullasaif]

39-41 not more not less

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by Quicksilver

I agree with the article. 36-40 mm is perfect for me and I suspect for many others. But I appreciate that bigger guys want the choice of a larger watch. You should tailor the watch to you wrist size, height and length of arm. Nothing looks sillier than a big watch on a guy that can’t carry it off.

I would add that one should also account for the style of watch, and in what size it looks most proportional. Even a smaller guy can get away with a bigger (39-42mm) watch that is supposed to be bigger (Rolex Sub; Omega Speedmaster), rather than one which has been "inflated" from its original size (DJ 41; Cartier Santos 100).

At the same time, even a bigger wrist can pull off a classically proportioned smaller watch. A 36mm DJ/DD looks good on most wrists, but a 37mm YM will look a little silly on many men.

[Krash]

I don't know. I got 7.25" wrists, which aren't really that small compared to a lot of guys on here, but I think anything over 42 is sort of ridiculous looking on me. Actually, I think the DJ 36 looks a lot better on me than a DJ 41 to be honest.

[tyler1980]

if i took fashion advice literally from GQ, watch related or otherwise I would be wearing suits and dress shoes without socks and the hem on the pants would be about 2 inches too short just to show off more of my bare ankle. Just saying

small watches fit with their trend of wearing clothes that are also too small.

[lhawli]

Originally Posted by Dan Pierce

I don't understand why anyone would care. We all come in different sizes, shapes, and perferred watch styles. Magazines don’t dictate what I decide works for me.
dP

Pretty much sums it up! Strokes for different Folks...

[Roy_D]

As a member of the sub 7" wrist club, I wholeheartedly support this movement! ��

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by Ra_88

That’s Panerai going out of business then.

yes they really have to stop making these ridiculous looking 47mm cases ..

Sent from my SM-G935W8 using Tapatalk

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by brandrea

yes they really have to stop making these ridiculous looking 47mm cases ..

Sent from my SM-G935W8 using Tapatalk

But on a Panerai it works. Since that's the size it's supposed to be (well, 47mm is a bit big in general, but seems to suit your wrist size quite well). Panerai became popular because of the big watch trend, rather than modifying its designs to keep up with the trend.

[sechsgang]

The 39mm to 42mm space is never going to lose it's overall appeal IMHO. There are oversized watches for the sake of oversized (which look good as they were always worn and designed as such), and then smaller for those who enjoy that look, but given the average size of humans, that sweet spot of 38.5mm and 42mm isn't going anywhere.

[watchwatcher]

OK. Nobody else has pointed this out, so I feel it's my duty.

The green leisure suit is priced out at $2,850. Why would I be interested in fashion advice from a magazine that thinks buying and/or wearing that would be a good idea?

On the other hand, though, it does make the $8,600 price tag on the Hublot a little more palatable.

[lhawli]

Originally Posted by sechsgang

The 39mm to 42mm space is never going to lose it's overall appeal IMHO. There are oversized watches for the sake of oversized (which look good as they were always worn and designed as such), and then smaller for those who enjoy that look, but given the average size of humans, that sweet spot of 38.5mm and 42mm isn't going anywhere.

couldn't agree with you more. My smallest watch is 39mm (JLC) and my largest are 42mm (Speedy & PO).

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by dannyp

But on a Panerai it works. Since that's the size it's supposed to be (well, 47mm is a bit big in general, but seems to suit your wrist size quite well). Panerai became popular because of the big watch trend, rather than modifying its designs to keep up with the trend.

Preaching to the choir

7” wrist and I wear everything from 40 mm to 47 mm

[Chadridv]

Originally Posted by watchwatcher

OK. Nobody else has pointed this out, so I feel it's my duty.

The green leisure suit is priced out at $2,850. Why would I be interested in fashion advice from a magazine that thinks buying and/or wearing that would be a good idea?

On the other hand, though, it does make the $8,600 price tag on the Hublot a little more palatable.

Larry! You NEED that suit. Life is short, you know you want it.

[amh]

Looks great

Send that pic to GQ and tell them where to shove it!

Originally Posted by brandrea

yes they really have to stop making these ridiculous looking 47mm cases ..

Sent from my SM-G935W8 using Tapatalk

[JTL31]

Originally Posted by DoctorA

I have 7.6” wrists which makes my daytona look like a lady’s watch on my wrist! Hence it sitting in the safe!!

The Daytona is not meant to be a safe queen. Toss it my way... oh, good Dr.!!

[dmash]

Originally Posted by sechsgang

The 39mm to 42mm space is never going to lose it's overall appeal IMHO. There are oversized watches for the sake of oversized (which look good as they were always worn and designed as such), and then smaller for those who enjoy that look, but given the average size of humans, that sweet spot of 38.5mm and 42mm isn't going anywhere.

I would actually knock it down to 38-42 (maybe even 37). An open space dial such as Patek Calatrava, Vacheron Patriomony, Lange Saxonia, etc.....all look 1000x better in a smaller size. ESPECIALLY if you don't have seconds, date or a moonphase at 6 o'clock. JLC and their Ultra Thin 41 showcase this perfectly. They had a great watch with the Ultra Thin Moon at 39mm. They take away the moon function *and* grew it to 2mm. It just looks silly with too much grey space.

I wholeheartedly agree though, this spectrum 38-42mm, will ALWAYS have appeal. That's consistently been my perfect realm of sizes with a 7" wrist. 38mm for pure dress (Calatrava, etc), 40mm for an allrounder (Patek 5711, etc) and 42mm for pure sport (AP ROO, etc).

[JTL31]

Might be a gender bias, but I’m surprised nobody has brought up dial color & metal combos yet in relation to “appearance”of watch sz.
Ex: white dial Roman 36 DJ SS looks bigger on me than a 41mm DJ choc. baton Everose.
Wear what YOU like & “suits” your fancy (sans that green leisure suit)!

[Thuilln]

Originally Posted by joli160

I can't remember it was not

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by amh

Looks great

Send that pic to GQ and tell them where to shove it!

[jstan9]

Originally Posted by teamkitty

You ever see a gym full of cross fitters? (hint: short shorts are already back - and have been for quite a few years).

Exactly, fashions change. Wear what you love. Only wis peoples are intrigued by watches we see on the streets and in cafes.

Two anecdotes. I’m smitten with the Cellini Moonphase but can’t afford it. I had an old Seiko Moonphase with an unusually large moon window complication bought in 1986.

I pulled it out of a box and took it to the incomparable Gio on post street here in SF. He replaced the battery and a gasket that had dissolved over the years. I now have my budget Moonphase while I wait till my gringots account has more gold in it! That watch was my first serious purchase in my first real job. I think it was $175. A fortune to me at the time!

The point is, it’s probably 34mm. I was shocked because in all the years wearing it I never thought of it as small. I still don’t. Fits me great and is a great watch all around.

To your point about shorts. We just moved back to the Bay Area from Boulder, Colorado, a college and sports-nut town. I’d say, starting in 2010, the high school and cu (university of Colorado) suddenly looked like that basketball team photo earlier in this thread. The 70s we’re back! It was obvious cool to them.

I’ll confess I think the pie-pan watches look a bit silly to me but I think it’s cool to see young guys and gals into watches. If they love the pie pans, I’m glad they’re enjoying something beyond an iPhone and Apple Watch.

Wear what you love.

Fashions come and go. Rolexes, because the company is so conservative, remain timeless. They all look great!

[Khans14]

Seems silly to me. The size of the watch should mainly be dictated by the size of the person. This is like GQ running an article that small sized shirts are "back in" this year so everyone get rid of your medium, large and XL. Doesn't matter if your 6'4 240 pounds...... small is "back in." That said, 40 mm is the sweet spot for me with a watch. I have tried multiple 36 mm watches on and they look just plain silly on me.

[jstan9]

Originally Posted by JTL31

Might be a gender bias, but I’m surprised nobody has brought up dial color & metal combos yet in relation to “appearance”of watch sz.
Ex: white dial Roman 36 DJ SS looks bigger on me than a 41mm DJ choc. baton Everose.
Wear what YOU like & “suits” your fancy (sans that green leisure suit)!

Interesting point. That’s so true. I hadn’t thought of it. Thanks for sharing it!

[JTL31]

Originally Posted by jstan9

Interesting point. That’s so true. I hadn’t thought of it. Thanks for sharing it!

[smym18]

I'd have no problem wearing a 36mm Datejust and I'm 5'10" with a small-average size wrist. I wouldn't wear anything over 42mm and it would have to have a thin case.

edit - This just made me realize, however, that I would not wear the 37mm Yacht-Master. I'd prefer 36mm DJ over 41mm, yet 40mm Yacht-Master over 37mm.

[ccaballero]

GQ is a dumbass magazine for tools