One has to draw a line somewhere as to where the boundary for too small or too large may be.

You can argue "what's one more millimeter? A mm is tiny". Sure. And what's 1 more dollar? If you can afford a $1000 watch, surely you can afford a $1001 watch. The fallacy you run into is that, by extension, if you can afford a $1001 watch, you can afford a $1002 watch, and so on ad infinitum such that one can conclude that if you can afford a $1000 watch, you can afford a $100,000 watch.

 

That is one weird-arse argument. But ok 🤓

 

if the Girard Perregaux Cosmos was 46mm instead of 47mm I'd be all over it

but it's not so suck it, Girard!

 

I don't like round numbers

Sent from my SM-F721B using Tapatalk

 

As strange as it sounds, yes. 1mm does make a difference to me. I can tell the difference between a 39mm and a 40mm. But between 40mm and 41mm, I can't. It has a lot to do with the type and size of the case.

 

It has a lot to do with the type and size of the case.

And even more importantly, the lug width, where 1mm does make a difference.

I need a 22m bracelet, the less taper the better. That eliminates feminine-sized cases.

 

Maybe he just doesn't like the watch, and is nitpicking. If someone loved the watch, I would think they will overlook the 1mm.

 

Not to be a boor, even though I am, and deplorably so, but I was watching some review videos, and saw some of the comments.

One can sometimes see similar comments here too, when someone mentions a new model.

So the watch in question is 40mm. That's a universally reasonable size that would look good on 95% of wrists.

BUT there is always that one jerk who fancies himself to be an "extremely refined" connoisseur. He comes along and says: "I'd be all over it if it were 39mm."
In other words, "I'm not gonna buy it."

Really?

First of all, the idea of "being all over it." This tiresome 80's idiom needs to be retired.

Second. the tininess of the difference that would prevent this fool from "being all over it" sounds to my (boorish) ears like someone claiming that they would order that steak if it came with 5 fewer grains of salt.
GAAAAAA !! 🤨

If you're NOT gonna get it, just don't get it. Don't jive me with that 1mm bowlscheitte.

PS: My wife discovered, and cannot believe, how sissy, how uptight, how altogether pinched, so many male watch enthusiasts really are.

PS: I draw the line at -/+3 mm But 1mm? Git outta hee. 🙄

You have issues and should post less.
Could be he just doesn't like the watch, and posted the size as an excuse. ought not matter to you one way or the other

 

If I didn’t set hard rules for myself, life would be chaos. I pick a lane and try to stay in it.

 

For me no, absolutely not. When I read people constantly saying things like "it's a 40mm... if only it was a 39mm!" I scratch my head and usually come to the conclusion that complainers are always going to complain. It's just what they do. The watch is the design, and if you don't like the design then its not for you. But to use one or two millimeters as the reason the brand is failing is just nitpicking to me. I guess I just see so much in watches that I like I tend to miss the microscopic details that so many find catastrophic. Just my take.

 

In general, other factors than the measured diameter are far more important regarding how a watch wears and looks on the wrist. The diameter itself means very little. This is also true for the measured height in the middle.

Having said that, there are individual cases where the exact same watch just 1mm larger or smaller could make a difference. E.g., I'm pretty sure that I'd wear my Werenbach Leonov more often if it was 1mm bigger. It's just on the edge of what I perceive as too small, so 1mm more could push it safely into my comfort zone.

 

In general, other factors than the measured diameter are far more important regarding how a watch wears and looks on the wrist.

This.

Here is a 46mm on my wrist (biggest “mm” watch I’ve ever owned:

Here is a 42mm (also my same wrist):

here is a 40mm

Case shape, lug shape, etc. makes more of a difference. The more important measurement is lug to lug rather than case diameter.

 

Depends on the model. I have a 41mm with 47mm lug-to-lug that wears very comfortably. The 42mm version has a 50mm lug-to-lug and wears too large for my taste. Not to mention the change in thickness/height.

Whether or not that's what said commenters mean when they complain about a 1mm difference, 🤷‍♂️. But assuming proportions remain similar, that 1mm change in diameter can mean change elsewhere as well.

 

I second this, sometimes 1mm more means bigger proportions and that could mean more 3mm L2L and 1mm higher. If it only changed diameter, i would be ok

 

Not to be a boor, even though I am, and deplorably so, but I was watching some review videos, and saw some of the comments.

One can sometimes see similar comments here too, when someone mentions a new model.

So the watch in question is 40mm. That's a universally reasonable size that would look good on 95% of wrists.

BUT there is always that one jerk who fancies himself to be an "extremely refined" connoisseur. He comes along and says: "I'd be all over it if it were 39mm."
In other words, "I'm not gonna buy it."

Really?

First of all, the idea of "being all over it." This tiresome 80's idiom needs to be retired.

Second. the tininess of the difference that would prevent this fool from "being all over it" sounds to my (boorish) ears like someone claiming that they would order that steak if it came with 5 fewer grains of salt.
GAAAAAA !! 🤨

If you're NOT gonna get it, just don't get it. Don't jive me with that 1mm bowlscheitte.

PS: My wife discovered, and cannot believe, how sissy, how uptight, how altogether pinched, so many male watch enthusiasts really are.

PS: I draw the line at -/+3 mm But 1mm? Git outta hee. 🙄

I understand the frustration and disbelief behind your reasoning. I think the typical commentary exemplified is exaggerated, but the place it comes from is no less a genuine concern. While I cannot speak for those who comment in such wording, I do have my dimensional 'limits'. When I test or push those limits I have found so far the generally the size remains a weaker point of the watch in question. This then further strengthens my sense that my limits do have real value. It doesn't make the watch look less attractive, but it may very well affect how pleasurable it is to wear such watch when part of a collection in which it needs to warn or assert its place. For example I have never ventures beyond 41mm and the one 41mm watch I own is pushing size and weight limits in my view. My 40mm watches, which one exception (featuring a very limited lug-to-lug that fits my wrist near perfectly) do also feel big. I don't own a 39mm watch, but would expect a positive effect on wearability, and consider my 38mm and 37mm watches to sit very well on my wrist, though the lug-to-lug should not become overly exaggerated. When considering that the difference between disliking, liking, loving, or committing to buying a watch generally comes down to a careful balance of specs and price within which several minute details are likely to be determinants, actually the impact of diameter (and lug-to-lug) is very big. These are the elements that determine how well it fits, sits, and presents on a wrist. So, yes, especially considering the frequency of 42mm watches, I regularly find myself wishing they would present it in a 1 or 2mm smaller form factor. Sometimes that could transfer it from something I appreciate to something I could prioritise purchasing. Admittedly, it may also be that it transfers from something I generally like to something I would love, but other details (and price or genre more often than not) might still prevent me from prioritising. Sometimes the sentiment is almost akin to relief, as it permits me to discard an option because I know I need at least some rational limits to my desires. I can understand how some may vent this using exaggerated expression.

 

It does for me. Have tried on a variety of 41mm watches (most recently the newest Sub) and I have quite often found that the L2L on 41mm cases pushes enough over the edges of my wrist to either feel uncomfortable or look ungainly/unbalanced sitting on top of my wrist (FWIW I have small, flat-topped wrists). It makes sense too - it's an aspect ratio thing. 1mm larger case will usually need a slightly larger L2L to maintain case proportions (given a particular style or shape of case). 40mm is the max limit where it feels like the proportions of the watch fit within width of my wrist to where the lugs come right up to the edge without hanging over. And my personal preference is to be a little on the short side than too long, so 1-2mm in case size does make the difference (in corresponding L2L) for me.

 

A few mm of diameter difference on dive watches generally has little to no impact. On all-dial watches like the Presage Cocktail Time, a 1mm diameter shift could affect the wearability. So it’s nuanced.

However for spec hunters, this 1mm is immense because their primary concern is a list of items on a checklist and if it strays past that guideline, it’s not worth exploring.

Yes, it’s a sad way to indulge in the hobby.

 

It's not a matter of the diameter, per se, but, to a large extent, of the surface area, which increases as the square of the diameter. That's why for similarly shaped models, people can in fact judge quite accurately the difference that small variations in diameter make to appearance. It's also why case shapes that depart from round look considerably bigger given the same measurement across the watch ("diameter"). Then of course there are similar considerations with respect to the dial.

 

It's not a matter of the diameter, per se, but, to a large extent, of the surface area, which increases as the square of the diameter.

I get your point, but just to keep the math correct, it increases as the square of the radius, not the diameter.

 

Using your example you need to realize that a great number of members here are inherently afraid of any watch over 39mm.

 

You can say it. A great number of members here are old people. Old wrinkly-ass-afraid-of-40mm-poopheads.

 

The watch has four dimensions the case width, the height and the lug to lug and the lug width Any of these variables can change the look or feel of the watch. If the watch is 40mm that can be irrelevant if the lug to lug is greater than 50mm and for some that just won't fit on the wrist correctly, whereas a watch could be 42mm and have a lug to lug of 50mmm and the fit will be different. Yes 1 mm could make a difference, but all the proportions should be considered, and of course the most important dimension is the owners wrist size.

 

The one other factor you missed on lugs are the shape - if it’s flat or downward curving. The shape of the case and caseback has an impact too.

When you bring bracelets into the frame, more things to consider:
1. End link male/female
2. Thickness of initial links
3. The length of each link
4. Bracelet link articulation
5. Weight of the bracelet to the watch head
6. Wrist hair pulling capacity
7. Micro adjustments
8. 1/2 links
9. No taper vs mild taper vs severe taper
10. Dimensions and weight of the clasp

 

Let's ditch millimeters and go to microns. Then it's a thousand!

 

Eh, the only way I think this is valid is the aggregate. Bigger watch, longer lug to lug, usually taller, etc. That being said, I have larger than 40mm watches that I wear because the perceived size is smaller than the measurements would have you believe. An example would be divers with wide Bezels which make the watch seem smaller to me on wrist. I have also purchased smaller case diameter watches which had long lugs or sat proud on my wrist that I eventually passed on.

 

Not to be a boor, even though I am, and deplorably so, but I was watching some review videos, and saw some of the comments.

One can sometimes see similar comments here too, when someone mentions a new model.

So the watch in question is 40mm. That's a universally reasonable size that would look good on 95% of wrists.

BUT there is always that one jerk who fancies himself to be an "extremely refined" connoisseur. He comes along and says: "I'd be all over it if it were 39mm."
In other words, "I'm not gonna buy it."

Really?

First of all, the idea of "being all over it." This tiresome 80's idiom needs to be retired.

Second. the tininess of the difference that would prevent this fool from "being all over it" sounds to my (boorish) ears like someone claiming that they would order that steak if it came with 5 fewer grains of salt.
GAAAAAA !! 🤨

If you're NOT gonna get it, just don't get it. Don't jive me with that 1mm bowlscheitte.

PS: My wife discovered, and cannot believe, how sissy, how uptight, how altogether pinched, so many male watch enthusiasts really are.

PS: I draw the line at -/+3 mm But 1mm? Git outta hee. 🙄

the answer is: don't watch those videos. Never before have so many people with so little to say said so much. thanks, internet. Wear what you like and don't worry about what some boob says on youtube, tiktok, reddit....and so on.

 

True that. But sometimes, and only sometimes, I need to, to see photos of the watch under different aspects, not to hear some bore go on and on.

And, as a "student of psychology," I learn a lot about this species by reading the comments.

 

I think if you took any watch and +/- 1mm on any single dimension (diameter, lug to lug, height), 90% of people wouldn’t be able to tell the difference unless they were looking closely at the two watches side by side. Once you start comparing different models/case shapes, or changing more than 1 dimension by +/- 1mm the differences will be more apparent.

 

Not to be a boor, even though I am, and deplorably so, but I was watching some review videos, and saw some of the comments.

One can sometimes see similar comments here too, when someone mentions a new model.

So the watch in question is 40mm. That's a universally reasonable size that would look good on 95% of wrists.

BUT there is always that one jerk who fancies himself to be an "extremely refined" connoisseur. He comes along and says: "I'd be all over it if it were 39mm."
In other words, "I'm not gonna buy it."

Really?

First of all, the idea of "being all over it." This tiresome 80's idiom needs to be retired.

Second. the tininess of the difference that would prevent this fool from "being all over it" sounds to my (boorish) ears like someone claiming that they would order that steak if it came with 5 fewer grains of salt.
GAAAAAA !! 🤨

If you're NOT gonna get it, just don't get it. Don't jive me with that 1mm bowlscheitte.

PS: My wife discovered, and cannot believe, how sissy, how uptight, how altogether pinched, so many male watch enthusiasts really are.

PS: I draw the line at -/+3 mm But 1mm? Git outta hee. 🙄

I've said this many times before but lug-to-lug distance make a substantially bigger difference in wear and comfort, than case diameter.

When someone makes a big deal out of 1mm I think they generally a.) don't have a lot of experience with different watches and follow some general rules they have read of developed themselves, or b.) use it as a short-hand way to (whether knowingly or unknowingly) discriminate between the tens of thousands or options available and make finding the "next thing" easier.

I also think, in general, people with more experience in the "watch game" understand that often times more changes come along with a reduction or increase in case size than just a simple change in diameter. Take for instance the rumored 75th anniversary Omega Seamaster. The new model will have a case size reduction from 42mm (current production model) to 41mm (upcoming production). This change in diameter, if the rumors are true, will also come along with a slightly different case thickness, different lug-to-lug length, and potentially other small tweaks to the design and proportions. So although on paper the 1mm change may seem small, the changes that come along with it could be significant when it comes to wearability and overall design. So upon reading the new Seamaster would have a smaller case size, I was excited because of the other changes that reduction in 1mm can imply

 

I've said this many times before but lug-to-lug distance make a substantially bigger difference in wear and comfort, than case diameter.

That, and the form.
Those that jut straight out, as in some German pilot watches, are the worst.

But I can already hear our German watch fans saying:

 

PS: I draw the line at -/+3 mm But 1mm? Git outta hee. 🙄

Look at it another way - if 1mm doesn’t matter, then 40mm is ok. If 40mm is ok, then 41mm is ok. If 41mm is ok, then 42mm is ok, etc. Alternatively, that 1mm could be the straw that broke the camel’s back.

37mm vs 39mm is a massive difference. 39mm to 41mm is also significantly noticeable. If 2mm is so obvious, then 1mm should be noticeable. And in my experience, it is. I most certainly do notice a difference in how an 39mm wears on my wrist vs a 40mm. I can’t have a watch on my wrist and say for sure “this is 39mm or 40mm” - however, give me 2 watches where one is 39 and one is 40, and i can most certainly tell which one is larger/smaller.

Nor should this be surprising: if you are used to a certain size, then something even 1mm larger or smaller just feels different.

 

Look at it another way - if 1mm doesn’t matter, then 40mm is ok. If 40mm is ok, then 41mm is ok. If 41mm is ok, then 42mm is ok, etc. Alternatively, that 1mm could be the straw that broke the camel’s back.

37mm vs 39mm is a massive difference. 39mm to 41mm is also significantly noticeable. If 2mm is so obvious, then 1mm should be noticeable.

Someone else gave this logic on page 1. It seems like sophistry to me. Seems somewhat convincing, but is not. Almost everything in life has that "1 mm" room for adjustment and negotiation.
But there is always that line(usually unspecified) where one says: "AW HEYULL Naw!"

I mean, there are slippery slopes, and then there are slippery slopes, to paraphrase one of our fearless leaders.
I don't think this is a slippery slope of that kind, such that one would eventually end up accepting a 50mm.


it sure is. 41 to 43 feels exponentially MORE noticeable.

I did mention that I will examine a size of 3mm difference, and not rule it out altogether. By this I meant, as so many have mentioned, things like the bezel (if any) thickness, dial (see MIDO's all-dial: HEEYUGE, despite its relatively acceptable diameter size.) Lug-to-lug, etc etc.

Yes, noticeable, smaller or larger but also subsumable and rendered either inconsequential or even better for it, by other elements in play.

 

Hahahaha. Lol. No. Of course not. Only the most anal retentive people would actually claim they can tell the difference in 1mm case size.

 

the dial area is also important. thin bezel and big dial area makes bigger difference than the paper measurement of X mm.

 

If 1mm is/isn’t important to someone, it’s absolutely none of my business. It’s their life, taste, money and criteria- not mine.

 

Way to make this all about you, my friend. Nobody asked if it was your “business” or not what other people think. The OP is merely asking for everyone’s individual opinion. Two different things. Think about it.







[emoji381] Ask YOUR doctor if ROLEX is right for YOU.