WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner
41 - 60 of 216 Posts
Interesting.

I think I'd have to use width, rather than diameter to calculate my optimal ratios.

The diameter of my wrist doesn't have as much bearing on what does, or doesn't, look 'right', as much as the visible width of wristmeat sitting just beneath a timepiece.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mee-Losh and mft4
I'm sure that some mathematician has worked this out before but I worked out the following ratio system for assessing the appropriate size for a watch on a wrist.

Its pretty simple

1/ Convert wrist size into mm

2/ Divide total wrist size in mm by the size of the watch

eg A 7 inch watch and a 38 mm watch = 178mm divided by 38mm= Ratio of 4.7

This brings me to the controversial part. What is an acceptable ratio? I think using this formula, that an acceptable ratio falls between 4.0 and 5.0. Anything below 4.0 is too big and anything above 5 is too small.

Here is an example using a 44mm watch which should be too big for some with smaller wrists

6.5 inch ( 165 mm) Ratio=3.75 Too big
7.0 inch (178mm) Ratio=4.0 Just ok- acceptable
8.0 inch (203 mm) Ratio=4.6 Great fit


This brings me to interesting observation that wearing a 39 mm watch on a 7 inch wrist has a a very similar Ratio as wearing a 44mm watch on an 8 inch wrist. That is, a ratio of about 4.6.

For reference, here are the conversions for wrist size
6 inch = 152.5 mm
6.5inch = 165mm
7inch = 178mm
7.5inch= 190.5mm
8.0inch = 203mm
8.5 inch = 216mm

I realize I am opening myself up to ridicule for being too analytical but I think it's a pretty useful way to work out a rough guide and obviously does not take into account lug shape etc. What do you think? Has someone worked this out before? Have I got too much time on my hands? Can this concept be improved on?

Cam
This is fantastic work. I tried it out with my 170mm wrist. 34mm watch is exactly 5. 42mm watch is quite exactly 4. And it is indeed within these parameters that I can pretty much safely wear a watch. If it gets smaller or bigger it depends on the watch. I have a little more leeway to the bigger side as my wrist is flat with a 56mm wrist top.

It would be also good to make the same chart with wrist top size, how large your wrist is, and the lug-to-lug size of the watch. Basically the lugs shouldn't overhang the wrist. If both are given, then it will most likely look at least OK.
 
This is great stuff - pushing the boundaries of WISdom.
I am attracted to camb's theory as modified by WnS, 4 and 5 seem to be the golden numbers.

I will be looking at wrist-shots in future to see if there is an arm-hair modifier.
 
didn't think about them- let me think about that one!
How bout square watches? I just picked up a BR 03-51 GMT and I have a very small wrist 6.8 wrist and the case is 42mm. Looks big at first, but I'm getting used to it and actually like the look. I think as long as the case does not over hang and that you like the look, go with it. My friends think it's too big, but I like the look.

Watch Black White Watch accessory Fashion accessory
Watch Analog watch Watch accessory Fashion accessory Jewellery
 
This formula actually worries me; the danger is that a bureaucrat in government somewhere will be reading this, and will be cooking up some way to profit from it. This has dire ramifications for skinny guys like me, who love massive watches on our scrawny wrists. I wake in fright at the thought that laws could be passed, making a 'correctly' sized & fitted watch compulsory. 'Watch Police' would patrol streets & public transport; I could be arrested & charged for enjoying my 51mm monster on my 6.5" wrist - a clear violation of all that is fit and proper in the guidelines. Further charges would be laid due to the overhanging lugs; yet further charges would arise due to excess bracelet length. The fact that I love my big watch to overpower my wrist would carry no weight as a defence in court. There is a formula for correct watch/wrist ratio, and it must be adhered to.
Or perhaps I should be taxed for wearing a watch that is palpably excessive, in the same way that is proposed for owners of SUV's. Big, heavy watches would be taxed so heavily that we would all be rushing to the nearest service station to pick up a plastic digital. My post is made tongue firmly in cheek, but all the same you just never know, especially in these perilous economic times.... Take care brothers!
 
Discussion starter · #48 ·
This formula actually worries me; the danger is that a bureaucrat in government somewhere will be reading this, and will be cooking up some way to profit from it. This has dire ramifications for skinny guys like me, who love massive watches on our scrawny wrists. I wake in fright at the thought that laws could be passed, making a 'correctly' sized & fitted watch compulsory. 'Watch Police' would patrol streets & public transport; I could be arrested & charged for enjoying my 51mm monster on my 6.5" wrist - a clear violation of all that is fit and proper in the guidelines. Further charges would be laid due to the overhanging lugs; yet further charges would arise due to excess bracelet length. The fact that I love my big watch to overpower my wrist would carry no weight as a defence in court. There is a formula for correct watch/wrist ratio, and it must be adhered to.
Or perhaps I should be taxed for wearing a watch that is palpably excessive, in the same way that is proposed for owners of SUV's. Big, heavy watches would be taxed so heavily that we would all be rushing to the nearest service station to pick up a plastic digital. My post is made tongue firmly in cheek, but all the same you just never know, especially in these perilous economic times.... Take care brothers!
Victoria is the "Nanny" State so watch out! ;-)
 
This is great. Though I would say a ratio of 4.5 to 5.2 is ideal. I have a 190mm wrist, so this gives me between 36mm and 42mm, which is my preferred sizing bracket for analog and steel watches. Having said that, my Vector looks good on me at FIFTY TWO MILLIMETRES, which is a ratio of 3.6. I think this is a special case, due to the nature of the piece
 
Having a background in mathematics, and also being kinda ... intent... on formalizing systems, I really like this approach.

I do believe that lug to lug would tell a better story than watch face diameter. That's from the perspective of a watch looking to big on a male wrist if it tends to overhang the wrist. Men can get away with big blocks of metal on their wrists in general.

It goes without saying that it's a guide, not an absolute. Dress watches should generally be smaller than pilot watches, for example.

There's no substitute for putting a watch on your wrist and looking at it, but something like this can help when one is internet shopping, with no opportunity to try before one buys.

Great work!

ABG

EDIT: your calculation gives me a watch range between 38mm and 47.5mm. I have a watch with a 44mm width which seems about as large as I should go, so that's a pretty good correlation.
 
Thought I'd dig this up for my first post. Cracking idea by the way. Its basically spot on for me. 6.4" wrists. My mums are wider and she lets me know it!

34mm is my bottom limit which I could get away with with a dress watch. 42mm is my top limit which is as big as I'd go, for a diver mind you. Not a pilot watch as it would look massive. 38-39mm is around my ideal size for something like the Sinn 556.

I usually prefer shorted lug-lug watches with a low height.

Cheers.
 
Discussion starter · #54 ·
Thought I'd dig this up for my first post. Cracking idea by the way. Its basically spot on for me. 6.4" wrists. My mums are wider and she lets me know it!

34mm is my bottom limit which I could get away with with a dress watch. 42mm is my top limit which is as big as I'd go, for a diver mind you. Not a pilot watch as it would look massive. 38-39mm is around my ideal size for something like the Sinn 556.

I usually prefer shorted lug-lug watches with a low height.

Cheers.
Some of my best work!!!! Welcome to the forum!
 
This formula may work well for people with "average" sized wrists but I feel like it gets a little out-of-whack for people on either side of the spectrum. For example, as a 6-inch-wrister, my ideal watch size would evidently be somewhere between 30 and 38mm. I've got a few 34mm vintage watches and they feel like a great size, but I would hesitate to wear anything smaller - especially anything that wears small. The vintage pieces I have are dress watches that wear bigger than their size, if anything. On the other hand, I feel like I can pretty easily wear a 40mm watch without looking silly, especially if it's something sporty like a diver.

For the other extreme, I'm pretty sure a 50mm watch will look disproportionately on any wrist, even an 8-incher, even though this formula puts a 50mm watch into the "normal" size range.

I don't know if it's just that the ratios get skewed at the extremes or what, but I think people on the smaller end can wear slightly larger watches, and people on the larger end, slightly smaller ones, than these ratios would indicate.
 
For the other extreme, I'm pretty sure a 50mm watch will look disproportionately on any wrist, even an 8-incher, even though this formula puts a 50mm watch into the "normal" size range.
I don't know about that. There are a few guys on this forum with 8" to 8.5" wrists, and I was quite surprised how small a 40mm to 42mm watch looked on them. I think these guys could easily wear 50mm. And don't forget that 50mm would be at the upper end of the 8" wrist size.

This is coming from someone who generally thinks large watches are silly. I have been recently convinced that there is a place for large watches - on large wrists.
 
What about the shape of the wrist?

My wrist measures 6.5, but my bone is very wide and flat, and not in a circular. So looking top down, my wrist width measures 55mm at the narrowest point, and the height is 40mm.
 
I'm going to disagree with this I have a 6 inch wrist which would mean I could only wear a 30.5-38mm watch, but I am currently wearing a 47mm (3.2 ratio) watch lug to lug (face is 41mm (3.7 ratio)) and it looks completely average, it is definitely not too big.

I measured the long diameter of my wrist and it is about 57mm and I actually think that is the size that matters, not the whole circumference.

You definitely just can't have a 'magic ratio', it depends on the person and the watch.
 
Thought I'd dig this up for my first post. Cracking idea by the way. Its basically spot on for me. 6.4" wrists. My mums are wider and she lets me know it!

34mm is my bottom limit which I could get away with with a dress watch. 42mm is my top limit which is as big as I'd go, for a diver mind you. Not a pilot watch as it would look massive. 38-39mm is around my ideal size for something like the Sinn 556.

I usually prefer shorted lug-lug watches with a low height.

Cheers.
I'm in the exact same boat, though I think even a 32mm watch is perfectly fine -- that was probably the average men's watch size 80 years ago.
 
41 - 60 of 216 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top