Why Are Larger Watches So Unpopular All of a Sudden

I really started getting into the hobby of collecting watches in the early 2000s. The watches that were most popular and received the most coverage in magazines and forums of the time were the Omega Seamaster and Rolex Submariner. The Seamaster 300 was riding a high after being featured in recent James Bond movies and the Submariner is just a mainstay of popularity.

When it came time to buy my first nice watch, I ended up choosing the Seamaster 300 GMT which measured in at just under 42 mm. With the Submariner being 40 mm and my new Seamaster being a little larger, I just thought that this was the size a watch was supposed to be. When I got tired of the Seamaster 300 GMT, I ended up going back to Omega and getting a Seamaster Planet Ocean.

The Seamaster Planet Ocean took things up a few notches from the Seamaster 300 line. First was the now 600 meter water resistance, second was the case size. The Planet Ocean grew a few millimeters in size from 42 mm to 45.5 mm. I would wear the Planet Ocean for a good amount of time and really got used to the size of it. Looking back, I could only imagine how heavy the watch must have been having a stainless steel case and bracelet.



To put things into perspective, I’m around six foot three inches tall and weigh around 200 lbs. My wrist isn’t that large, measuring around 7.25 inches being more flat on top than round. I did around this time also buy a lot of less expensive watches measuring from 39.5 to 40 mm and in short order felt they were too small for my wrist. Most of these watches were either sold, or worn by my future wife, who clocks in at a world beating five feet two inches.

In the mid 2000s I started getting more into my career in the watch industry and was now exposed to a huge variety of watches in the metal. Through nobody’s influence I started to gravitate to watches like the Audemars Piguet Royal Oak Offshore, Panerai Luminor Submersible, IWC Big Pilot and Hublot Big Bang. All of these watches measured 44 mm plus and felt just right on my wrist.

I also had access to smaller watches naturally, which I would try to wear for a few days but they never felt right. For example, as much as I wanted to personally like Patek Philippe, none of their watches felt at home of my wrist. The Annual Calendar 5960P in my mind at the time was a grail watch, until I had the chance to try one on. As soon as I buckled the deployment clasp and flipped it over, the air went out of the room and the slim 40 mm case just seemed tiny.



Even when Richard Mille first came on the scene I wore a RM 005 in titanium for a week or so. The watch was super lightweight and measured in around 38 mm in diameter. This was the first taste I had of Richard Mille, besides the Richard Mille designed Offshore Montoya, and I was just very let down. Current Richard Milles are now closer to 50 mm if you look at the brand standard RM11... for some reason they aren't shamed for being large watches...



This also brings me to the Royal Oak. At the time, Royal Oaks were considered not popular at all, the Offshore was getting all of the love. The only Royal Oaks I spent much time with were the three metal variants of the City of Sails. These watches measured 39 mm and to me always felt small. They felt like a watch that was trying to be an Offshore, to me something was just missing from them.



In the late 2000s I lost most of my interest in watches but continued to work in the industry. I didn’t pay much attention to trends and new models, and in my mind large watches like the Offshore and Big Bang were still most desirable.

As I started to regain my interest in watches in the early 2000s, I was in for a rude awakening. For me, it was like I was stepping out of a time capsule with my tastes being over a decade old. The new trend was that smaller was better, not only that, but you would be chastised for wearing or liking bigger watches. It seems that any watch over 42 mm is now viewed the same as a 58 mm Invicta.

I don’t remember there being so much hatred for smaller watches in the mid 2000s, so I was really surprised by all the large watch hate…

So what is it that makes me prefer larger watches? I never thought about this until recently, I mean why would I? Large watches were just accepted from back in my time…

Naturally I was nurtured to like larger watches starting my journey of collecting watches in the early 2000s, so that has some influence. Do I want to get noticed and show off with a larger watch? Not necessarily, but I would love to start a conversation with somebody who notices what I’m wearing. I keep thinking this will happen, but it hardly does.

It wasn’t until I purchased a watch that Seiko did in collaboration with a Japanese clothing company that I liked that it suddenly hit me. The Seiko x Neighborhood Tuna Diver SBDY077 measured in at 43.2 mm and I also owned a first generation Seiko Samurai, so I thought I knew what I was getting in terms of size. Boy was I wrong…



Now true, the case of the watch measured over 43 mm, but the lugs were hidden. So unlike pretty much every watch I’ve ever worn where the lugs drastically increased the size of the watch, this Seiko had the lugs tucked under the case. This watch wore more like my wife’s 37 mm Glashutte Original with tradition lugs than any 43 mm watch I’d tried on. Over the next few weeks I tried to convince myself the watch was large enough, but something just felt off. During this time I discovered that it was the fact that the watch did not cover most of my wrist that really bothered me. The watch was constantly on either the left or right side of my wrist. Even when centered, the watch just looked off. Eureka! I didn’t like smaller watches based on their lack of symmetry on my wrist. It only took me 20 plus years to figure it out.

I need to also point out that I don’t like watches that hang over each side of my wrist either. Have I really found any that do that? Not really. Even super large watches like the Royal Oak Offshore T3 at 48 mm, had non-flared lugs and a traditional strap that went straight down over your wrist. If this watch had traditional Offshore flared lugs, the watch would leave so much negative space between my wrist and the watch, which I would not care for.



My wife has a much smaller wrist than mine, so when I’m looking at watches for her, I’m constantly looking at things I like. She’s tried on a 46 mm IWC Pilots Chronograph and numerous Panerai Luminors at 44 mm and they just look silly on her. She has now gravitated to wearing a Rolex Yachtmaster 16622 at 40 mm and a Hublot Big Bang All Black at 41 mm. Both watches look good on her and fit her wrist, while in my opinion seem small on me. Now she does also have some very dainty pieces like an all gold vintage IWC that might be 20 mm, but it wears more like a bracelet than a watch.



My two forever watches are an Audemars Piguet Royal Oak Offshore Montoya in titanium at 44 mm with flared lugs and an IWC Big Pilot Top Gun perpetual calendar at 48 mm. I’ve never thought either of these watches were excessive for my wrist, and for the most part fit my build. The 48 mm of the Big Pilot perpetual also allows all the functions of the perpetual calendar to be displayed in a non-clustered way.



After pairing my collection down to two watches, I felt it was time to add a third watch. The watch I ended up picking was the IWC GST Aquatimer 2000 in titanium which measured in at 42 mm. I guess I had become so used to the size of the Offshore and the Big Pilot, that the Aquatimer just felt small to me. Don’t get me wrong, I LOVE the watch, but when a super interesting watch popped up at a great price, it had me rethinking the Aquatimer.



The watch in question was a Hublot King Power Oceanographic 4000 in full carbon fiber. This watch measured in at 48 mm and a beastly 23 mm of thickness. Now after being groomed by all the watch influencers about Big = Bad, even I started questioning this watch, especially the 23 mm thickness. When the watch showed up, I quickly strapped it on and all the worrying about size went out the window. Unlike Offshores, the Oceanographic had lugs that flared down, not out, so the watch actually sits well on the wrist. Being crafted in full carbon fiber with a titanium inner core, the watch is also rather lightweight. I will agree that the 23 mm thickness is too much to put under a cuff, but I wear t-shirts 90% of the time, and for the cold days in Austin I wear a hoodie, which you can sneak this under. Needless to say the GST Aquatimer 2000 is now for sale.



I guess after all this ranting, I want to get the point across that you should wear what you like. I don’t understand the current general thinking that big is bad. Every person is built differently, I wouldn't sit here and say somebody that is five foot five with a 6 inch wrist should wear a Big Pilot and mock them if they didn’t. I also don’t feel like people should look at people with large wrists or bigger builds and scoff at them for wearing a 44 mm plus watch.

I’ve had a very long time friend and by far one of the leaders of the industry flat out tell me a 48 mm Offshore will not fit me. This same friend used to wear 48 mm Offshore T3s with me, and he’s an inch or two shorter than me with a smaller wrist. He’s been very involved in the industry while I took my little break, so maybe he was influenced by trends. I also had another friend ask me if I was trying to compensate for something with the large watches. Now his wrist is much smaller than mine and he mostly wears 41 mm Rolex sports models. When comparing how my 44 mm plus watches look on my wrist versus how a 41 mm Submariner looks on his wrist, they’re pretty much identical looking… but big equals bad right?



I think the funniest thing is when I saw two people on YouTube talking about their small watches and trying to get validation from each other that a 32 mm vintage Rolex looks good on their wrists. Once again, wear what you like, but these same people bash anything over 40 mm. It’s a shame that a small collection of vocal influencers can start a group hatred towards targeted things such as Hublot and large watches.

Here at Hourstriker we just love all things watches and of course have our personal preferences, but would never bash anyone for wearing anything they enjoy. We’ve been collecting for a fairly long period time and have been in physical contact with thousands of watches, which I believe has allowed us to really know what we like. These opinions were formed outside of the hype and group thinking. I guess we aren’t part of the cool crowd now, liking both larger watches as well as Hublot, but hey we’re good with that!