PeterCDE
10167
Agree with Mark, it?s a matter of getting used to it
Hi John,
i don?t think it?s a large or particularly thick watch; with 38mm, it?s even within what is a preferred size by ladies these days - and i well remember having seen several WW.TC on female wrists lately!
But i do understand your point; after wearing a 31mm piece (which is the smallest i wear occassionally) or a watch between 34mm (common size before 1970?s) and 36mm, every larger watch appears to be huge. On the other hand, after wearing a larger watch for a couple of days, every 31mm piece appears to be a dwarf on the wrist.
So i?d say it?s a matter of getting used to it and personally, sometimes i do appreciate to have some substantial "heft" on the wrist. If wearing an ultra-thin 1960?s piece, the weight is such that you easily forget to wear a watch at all.
Having said that, i?d say the 4900 is even among the smaller contemporary pieces.
But the real trick is to make a very wearable and larger watch, which does have the incredible benefit of being more easy to read due to a larger dial diameter.
And when i recall wearing the WW.TC, the Laureato Evo3 or the Sea Hawk II (all well over 40mm), then i?d say GP does a wonderful job in creating large, but very comfortable pieces!
So i?d give a little wrist time and try to "warm up" with it!
And if this doesn?t work, i?d sit back and await the trend towards larger case sizes to pass. I?d not be surprised if smaller watches will be en vogue again in a forseeable future.
It?s a nice 4900 and beautiful pictures!
Greetings,
Peter