216570 126600

[crazymcmichael]

Can some of you post wristshots of a 216570 VS 126600? I still want to buy a SD but afraid that it wears bigger than the explorer 42mm in terms of lug to lug length. Explorer 2 fits good, however my wrist is 6.5

[cwilliams21]

I have both but I do not have any wrist shots to post but can later. I can tell you that they are two totally different pieces size wise. Not comparable whatsoever.

[crazymcmichael]

Would appreciate a lot !!

[travisb]

6 3/4” wrist here.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[strafer_kid]

I had a 216570 a while back but flipped it due to its size. Whilst it was fairly comfortable to wear, it always felt slightly big, and I would not say I have a particularly small wrist. I now have the 126600 SD50, and whilst it is described as being 1mm wider, it does not feel like that, and I find it easier to wear although it does sit a bit higher on the wrist?

[crazymcmichael]

Originally Posted by travisb

6 3/4” wrist here.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thank you beautifull fit there. Do you feel 1 of those fits bigger?

[crazymcmichael]

Originally Posted by strafer_kid

I had a 216570 a while back but flipped it due to its size. Whilst it was fairly comfortable to wear, it always felt slightly big, and I would not say I have a particularly small wrist. I now have the 126600 SD50, and whilst it is described as being 1mm wider, it does not feel like that, and I find it easier to wear although it does sit a bit higher on the wrist?

Problem is that it is so hard to come by :((((

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by strafer_kid

I had a 216570 a while back but flipped it due to its size. Whilst it was fairly comfortable to wear, it always felt slightly big, and I would not say I have a particularly small wrist. I now have the 126600 SD50, and whilst it is described as being 1mm wider, it does not feel like that, and I find it easier to wear although it does sit a bit higher on the wrist?

The visual presence can work wonders on the brain. The Exp 2's dial is larger which makes the watch look huge compared to any diver. Even the Exp 1 looks large on the wrist compared to an 114060, the dial. Although the fit is physically smaller the eyes keep sending signals to the brain that it's larger because you are staring at the dial after all, not the case per se.

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by crazymcmichael

Can some of you post wristshots of a 216570 VS 126600? I still want to buy a SD but afraid that it wears bigger than the explorer 42mm in terms of lug to lug length. Explorer 2 fits good, however my wrist is 6.5

Michael

Not the EXP 2 vs SD43 but here's a comparison on my wrist of the SD43 and Sub C. You've got a Sub C so this may help.

[brandrea]

The measurement form lug to lug is about the same between the two references so size wise they are the same.

I think as others have pointed out, the dial is what makes the EXP2 seem to wear larger.

IMO you have to decide whether the height of the SD43 will work for you. I believe it’s about 3 mm thicker.

The other significant differences are weight and caseback profile. The caseback of the EXP2 is much flatter and has more surface area that makes contact with the wrist. The SD43 has a smaller more convex shaped caseback which makes less wrist contact.

For me the caseback of the SD 43 sinks into the hollow of my wrist, behind the ulnar bone, but I have a relatively flat shaped wrist. If you have a round shaped wrist, the SD43 will definitely sit much higher and wearability would be different for you.

I really wish you could try one on first

[crazymcmichael]

Originally Posted by Devildog

Michael

Not the EXP 2 vs SD43 but here's a comparison on my wrist of the SD43 and Sub C. You've got a Sub C so this may help.

On your wrist, and i know you have one similar sized wrist it looks very very good, hard to believe your wrist is ''small'' thank you for this photos

[crazymcmichael]

Originally Posted by brandrea

The measurement form lug to lug is about the same between the two references so size wise they are the same.

I think as others have pointed out, the dial is what makes the EXP2 seem to wear larger.

IMO you have to decide whether the height of the SD43 will work for you. I believe it’s about 3 mm thicker.

The other significant differences are weight and caseback profile. The caseback of the EXP2 is much flatter and has more surface area that makes contact with the wrist. The SD43 has a smaller more convex shaped caseback which makes less wrist contact.

For me the caseback of the SD 43 sinks into the hollow of my wrist, behind the ulnar bone, but I have a relatively flat shaped wrist. If you have a round shaped wrist, the SD43 will definitely sit much higher and wearability would be different for you.

I really wish you could try one on first

Thank you, i hope( i am out next week to some city) to catch one there in a grey dealer or so… And fit it on obviously

[Frits1980]

I have both and the exp2 (polar) wears bigger or at least looks bigger on the wrist. Bit like a RO 15400

[SS Oyster]

Originally Posted by Devildog

Michael

Not the EXP 2 vs SD43 but here's a comparison on my wrist of the SD43 and Sub C. You've got a Sub C so this may help.

Good pics, but the SD43 picture is closer, making it look even larger by comparison than it is. Clearly larger, but making pictures zoom to same arm size would be more beneficial. That said, you didn't have to submit them at all, so thanks for doing that for the OP at all.

[crazymcmichael]

Originally Posted by SS Oyster

Good pics, but the SD43 picture is closer, making it look even larger by comparison than it is. Clearly larger, but making pictures zoom to same arm size would be more beneficial. That said, you didn't have to submit them at all, so thanks for doing that for the OP at all.

I am gracefull for sure, i think, what i can see from how the sub wears that his wrist is about his size, and the SD looks really really good on his wrist……….. So i have pretty good hopes by him.. Also i think it looks great with that tattoos( i have a lot tattoos aswell :()