42mm Explorer II on small wrists 6.5" or less?

[strafer_kid]

I think a lot of guys who bought the 216570 have been caught out by its size. The difference in 42mm and 40mm sounds very little, but once on the wrist, it feels a lot more. I loved the design and look of the watch but could not get used to the bigger case. Really wish they had done it in 40mm!

[Psmith]

Personal preference. 42mm is not exactly a monster - in fact the Exp II is thinner overall than the Sub and sits flatter on the wrist. But try it for yourself rather than wading through pages of crowdsourced opinions(!)

[Seaswirl]

Originally Posted by jack81

Life is too short friend, if you really want Omega Dark Side of The Moon you should just go for it instead of keep on wondering. A little bit bigger wont hurt your wrist and you get to enjoy that beauty that will make you smile everytime you glance it. No offence intended, just my honest opinion.

No offense taken and appreciate your comment. At 44mm and very thick, the DTSOM was outside my comfort zone.

[gabeyts]

As many have echoed, wrist flatness matters more than measured girth. Try it on. Here is my Sub-C on my very small 6.0 inch wrist. I think 40mm is the biggest I will ever be able to go. If lugs hang over or watch is too thick, it will be noticeable.

IMG_2290.jpg

[jack81]

Originally Posted by Seaswirl

No offense taken and appreciate your comment. At 44mm and very thick, the DTSOM was outside my comfort zone.

[larsd4]

Originally Posted by Spikedlee

Wow I actually think it fits your wrist perfectly!

Watch seems to ride too close to your hand for me. I like to wear it above the wrist bone to avoid jamming the crown into the back of the hand when flexing it back. (revving a motorcycle movement). Might be just my anatomy.

[Speedsleev]

Bought one and sent it back to my guy who was nice enough to let me try it for a day, bit too big and the new 126500 fits perfect on my wrist.

[JSol1]

It’s definitely personal preference. I tried one on and it just felt like it overwhelmed my 6.75” skinny wrist. It was more a feeling of being top heavy than lug to lug.

I’m actually debating whether to go for a 36 vs 40 Explorer. I slightly prefer the 36 at the moment…

[painexpert]

Originally Posted by JSol1

It’s definitely personal preference. I tried one on and it just felt like it overwhelmed my 6.75” skinny wrist. It was more a feeling of being top heavy than lug to lug.

I’m actually debating whether to go for a 36 vs 40 Explorer. I slightly prefer the 36 at the moment…

40 Explorer would look good. 36 would work but may be slightly small, IMHO.

[ikincooper]

Originally Posted by JSol1

It’s definitely personal preference. I tried one on and it just felt like it overwhelmed my 6.75” skinny wrist. It was more a feeling of being top heavy than lug to lug.

I’m actually debating whether to go for a 36 vs 40 Explorer. I slightly prefer the 36 at the moment…

Personally I’d go 36. I find the 40 just looked too oversized. 36 below on my 6.25-6.5 wrist




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rom33]

Wrist about 7 inches. Feels and looks good. Much brighter than looking at a black dial watch.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[PepsiBezel]

Maybe OP gained a lot of weight over the last decade plus?

…if they did, then the 42mm Explorer II may work; if still less than 6.5 then go with a 16570.

[Eric88]

LOL...this one might win the ZOMBIE thread contest, being 10+ years old and bumped for some random reason by someone with one post, it appears. ROFLMAO.

Anyways, I did end up getting one of these a little over two years ago and I wore it very sporadically for two years. I never warmed up to it for a variety of reasons and it recently left the nest so someone else can enjoy it. I found the watch to always be just on the verge of too large and it was definitely getting the least wear of my small collection.

Here's my original incoming and review thread from 2+ years ago.

Maybe this remains a helpful thread for the future. Cheers!