Rolex

I have honed my collection to more independents and watches that I will collect forever. I will post some more of them soon…Jim

...I have a 7.25" wrist and love 38mm watches...especially of the dress variety...

My wrist is smaller than yours, 6.25 inches.
But I think you got my point. You say 39mm fit is perfect but you can go up to 44mm. For me, 36mm is perfect but I can go up to 42mm (even 44mm). In recent years however for anything of any significant value or cost I’m not going beyond 40mm as even if the lug to lug is shorter the dial may still look like a saucer on my wrist. The one exception is the Journe CTS which is 42mm but with no lugs. Unfortunately for me much of what’s interesting today is on the larger side.
I think as others have pointed out, my effort to simplify the discussion by using diameter and not lug to lug really doesn’t get precisely to the point as some 42mm watches will wear smaller then 40mm, and vice versa.

Like you, I have some “bigger” watches because I want the complications or style, of course lug placement, like in the 45mm IWC Pall Weber I wear makes a big difference…Jim

It’s easier to think about diameter.

My two exceptions are iwc pilot chrono in 42mm as it fits with the pilot feel to wear bigger. The other is my 43.5mm montblanc minerva collection villeret chronograph, here my heart won out with the enamel dial, huge movement and balance wheel, finishing, and snail dial.. I just wanted it. I do feel it fits OK on my wrist because it is not too thick (12mm IIRC?), but I would wear it more if it were smaller. I do think lug to lug distance makes as much or more important of a contribution here.

Also, re the Montblanc you highlighted the big dilemma. We know a watch is likely too big, or beyond the size that ideally suits our wrists, but other factors come in. The draw of the watches features were just too strong and so we compromise. I think we all do this a lot, if these watches were available in different sizes we’d likely size down.

I have been musing about adding a patek, and I'm drawn to the pilot travel time (for many reasons, not as dressy, sweep seconds, unique look), but the 37.5mm "womens" not the 42mm ! The 42 is too big with all the pushers, etc.

I did really want to get it, as it’s one of the few Pateks I actually like as a casual watch.
The smaller watch, when there is a choice like this, is likely better on most wrists.
My issue with the smaller pilot was at that time there was only the rose gold option and once I went to see them I realized that the rose gold is not the same on both. The smaller watch is a slightly different mix of metals and so it’s shows more yellow than the larger watch. I think I went three times to see, and had a Tiffany dialed smaller pilot available to me too. But in my eyes it was a yellow gold watch which didn’t look good for me.
I still think about the white gold now, which would be perfect.

You are correct, the smaller version is 4N gold which is not as red as 5N. I actually think the 4N pairs well with the brown dial. A Tiffany branded one would be cool 👍

36 is for me a perfect size, certainly for certain models!



But always favoured the 36-40 (approx) sizes, though certain models are exceptions where the size is part of their identify!

Optimal size is always smaller, but a range can work depending on things other than just diameter.

A lot depends on the watch and its lug-to-lug measurement. Some 36mm watches wear quite large and some 42mm’s wear just fine. But I generally prefer 38-40mm. Though I have a few vintage pieces around 35mm that are terrific. I don’t own anything beyond 42mm and continue to hold that line as a large watch, for me, tends to be distracting and cumbersome.

But lug to lug is not widely referenced or quoted I think so most people think diameter and then perhaps adjust for visuals like longer lugs, larger pushers etc.

...34mm to 38mm size (especially dress watches) at decent values because everyone thinks they have to wear 40mm or more.

I would say market dependent somewhat. As mentioned, small is definitely fashionable in certain places.
But for sure there remains a lot of great watches in the smaller size range which just get passed over due to size. Good for us happy with the smaller sizes then !

Better a touch small than too big. One is discrete, the other uncomfortable. I am amazed however how different sizes, depending on brand and model seem to fit. Lugs, crowns, and optically bezels a big driver.

This is where I’ve gotten to. And many watches these days my opinion of how they fit me has changed from OK to “a little too big”.

Than just diameter.

It's good that recently lug to lug has been another reported metric for sizing. But another very important stat is the dial vs bezel size. For example, I have a x-33 that's 45mm (!) listed, but it wears better than a jlc MUT at 40 mm because of the dial to bezel ratio - a lot of the x-33's measurements are from the bezel and bumper, but all of the MUT is big dinner plate dial. I have a 6.75" wrist, so normally 45mm would be completely out for me.

When you really get down to it, bezel color makes a huge difference as well. I tried on the rhodium YM37 a while back, I really wanted to like it but it looked too small for me. But I expect the bb54 will be just right, because the matched bezel color will make the dial look bigger rather than fade into the bracelet.

And many folks here are more aware of the lug to lug than the average watch person (of which there are equally many of us here).
You do make a great point re bezel and dial. Bezel thickness, colour or material as you say, also can be a big factor.

Some 38 models wearing small and some 36 models are just perfect on the wrist.

Thats why I always try the watch on the wrist before making a decision