The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Old 14 January 2017, 07:50 AM   #1
42mm Scud Missile
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: California
Watch: 216570 POLAR
Posts: 33
43mm Navitimer 01 vs 46mm

I'm going to buy one of the two and I'm struggling with this decision. I like the presence that the 46mm provides as well as the sapphire case back but I worry that the 46 size could look dated a few years down the road. Any thoughts?
42mm Scud Missile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 January 2017, 08:01 AM   #2
JacksonStone
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Oregon
Posts: 5,150
Personally I think 46mm is too big, but it's really a matter of personal taste. I wouldn't worry about whether it looks dated, so much as how you like it and how well it fits you. Some people can pull off bigger watches better than others. I've seen some situations where people's eyes are bigger than their wrists, if you know what I mean. Conversely, smaller watches sometimes look undersized on a guy with a really big wrist.

Just out of curiosity, what's your wrist size?
JacksonStone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 January 2017, 08:12 AM   #3
42mm Scud Missile
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: California
Watch: 216570 POLAR
Posts: 33
6 1/2
42mm Scud Missile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 January 2017, 08:19 AM   #4
El-Duderino
"TRF" Member
 
El-Duderino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 609
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42mm Scud Missile View Post
6 1/2


Then 43mm for sure. I have 7.25" wrists and the 46mm looks like a dinner plate on me. Bigger isn't always better and the 43mm will look so much more proportional on your wrist.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
El-Duderino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 January 2017, 08:37 AM   #5
JacksonStone
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Oregon
Posts: 5,150
What Duderonimo said. Go for the 43 Navi.
JacksonStone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 January 2017, 10:21 AM   #6
42mm Scud Missile
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: California
Watch: 216570 POLAR
Posts: 33
Thanks I appreciate the help!
42mm Scud Missile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 January 2017, 02:04 PM   #7
srvrf
2024 Pledge Member
 
srvrf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Real Name: Steve
Location: Indiana
Watch: PP/AP
Posts: 2,067
I have a 6.5" wrist and had a 43mm LE Navitimer. It fit perfectly and I'd recommend it over the 46mm watch. You have to also consider the market if you ever sell it. I absolutely loved the watch except for the 30m WR rating. So I did flip it and replaced it with a Sinn 903ST which has 100m WR and a bracelet


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
srvrf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 January 2017, 11:34 PM   #8
patrickjb
"TRF" Member
 
patrickjb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Real Name: Pat
Location: Boston, MA
Watch: 216570, 126600
Posts: 470
I have a 7.25 inch wrist, and a 46mm Navitimer. Looking back, I would've gone smaller. Too big, clunky, and obvious on my wrist compared to my 42mm Explorer II.
patrickjb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 January 2017, 12:36 AM   #9
sco
"TRF" Member
 
sco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Chicago
Watch: Subc AT 8500 CSO
Posts: 3,646
No question here with your wrist size. The 43 all the way.

My brother has huge wrists and can pull off the 48 super avenger 2 and the newer super ocean special at 46, but man those are huge watches.
sco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 January 2017, 02:37 AM   #10
sco
"TRF" Member
 
sco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Chicago
Watch: Subc AT 8500 CSO
Posts: 3,646
Quote:
Originally Posted by sco View Post
No question here with your wrist size. The 43 all the way.

My brother has huge wrists and can pull off the 48 super avenger 2 and the newer super ocean special at 46, but man those are huge watches.
Edit: the superocean special is 44 mm, and my point was that both of these watches look enormous on my 6.75" wrist.
sco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 January 2017, 08:52 PM   #11
arcadelt
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Monaro, NSW
Posts: 846
43.
arcadelt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 January 2017, 02:14 AM   #12
JP(Canada)
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Calgary, AB, CAN
Posts: 794
Have 7 3/4" wrist and preferred an bought my 43mm Navi after trying both. Feels like I'm wearing the watch, not the other way around.
__________________
JP
JP(Canada) is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 January 2017, 03:31 AM   #13
Mystro
2024 Pledge Member
 
Mystro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Real Name: The Mystro ;)
Location: Central Pa.
Posts: 14,622
Its not that 46mm is too big or ever look outdated but your wrist size is screaming for a 42-44mm size watch.
__________________
https://www.dropbox.com/s/hyitq0aikqgajc0/Time%20sig.jpg?raw=1[/img]
Mystro is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 28 January 2017, 11:39 PM   #14
GolfPunk
"TRF" Member
 
GolfPunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Real Name: Gary
Location: UK
Watch: WG Daytona
Posts: 4,395
On a 6.5" wrist you shouldn't wear anything above 40mm in my opinion, it will look ridiculous.
__________________
♕ Rolex DateJust 1601 Buckley
Birth Year 1972 ♕
Breitling Chronomat 47 mm GMT Limited
GolfPunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 January 2017, 04:57 AM   #15
Batman1
"TRF" Member
 
Batman1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Real Name: Sanj
Location: Toronto
Watch: GMT - Master 11
Posts: 121
Depends on your wrist. If you have a smaller wrist then 43 is the way to go.
Batman1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 January 2017, 06:39 AM   #16
JacksonStone
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Oregon
Posts: 5,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by GolfPunk View Post
On a 6.5" wrist you shouldn't wear anything above 40mm in my opinion, it will look ridiculous.
A lot depends on the watch, as well as the shape of the wrist. I have a 6.33 inch wrist, but it's fairly flat on the top. I can pull off a 42mm Aerospace, Planet Ocean or Speedmaster with no problem, because the lugs are all fairly compact, and the cases sit nicely on my wrist. Anything above 42mm is pushing it for me, though. When I start getting into Breitling's "oversized" territory (44mm and above), my wrist starts to look like a kid wearing his dad's suit.
JacksonStone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 January 2017, 06:42 AM   #17
GolfPunk
"TRF" Member
 
GolfPunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Real Name: Gary
Location: UK
Watch: WG Daytona
Posts: 4,395
See I have 8" wrists and carried a 47mm Chronomat GMT no problem but imperfect my Rolex Daytona and Chronomat Airborne 41
__________________
♕ Rolex DateJust 1601 Buckley
Birth Year 1972 ♕
Breitling Chronomat 47 mm GMT Limited
GolfPunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 January 2017, 01:27 PM   #18
WJGESQ
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,753
POs are 45.


46 would look great on this watch.
WJGESQ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31 January 2017, 03:14 AM   #19
JacksonStone
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Oregon
Posts: 5,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by WJGESQ View Post
POs are 45.
Were but it that simple. It's easy to lose track of just how many size offerings and variants there are of the Planet Ocean. Essentially, the first two generations of the three-hand PO had 37.5mm, 42mm and 45.5mm offerings, as well as a chronograph in 37.5mm and 45.5mm. The current (third) generation changes things up by offering three-hand models in 39.5mm and 43.5mm only, and the chronograph in 45.5mm. There's also a GMT variant in 43.5mm, as well as a special "Deep Black" GMT edition is 45.5mm.

For me, the original, 2500-based three-hand 42mm PO fit perfectly. After that, they started getting chunky with the 8500 movement, and I stopped caring so much. The latest generation loses me entirely.
JacksonStone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31 January 2017, 12:42 PM   #20
42mm Scud Missile
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: California
Watch: 216570 POLAR
Posts: 33
Thanks for all the input I really appreciate it! 20170130_123904 (3).jpg
42mm Scud Missile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 February 2017, 10:21 AM   #21
JacksonStone
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Oregon
Posts: 5,150
Congrats. Looks great - you definitely didn't need to go bigger.
JacksonStone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 February 2017, 01:49 PM   #22
El-Duderino
"TRF" Member
 
El-Duderino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 609
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42mm Scud Missile View Post
Thanks for all the input I really appreciate it! Attachment 823009


Congrats!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
El-Duderino is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Takuya Watches

Bobs Watches

Asset Appeal

My Watch LLC

OCWatches

DavidSW Watches

Coronet


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.