rek001 Posted July 29, 2007 Report Share Posted July 29, 2007 Aloha y'all- hope you're having as nice a weekend as mine. Yesterday I visited an antique dealer that specializes in re-furbished vintage wrist and pocket watches, called Father Time Antiques in Chicago. They had some very nice timepieces, a few bubbleback Roliies that were quite expensive, but after trying a few on, I was absolutely struck by how small they are compared to what I'm used to wearing. I tried on a mens rectangular Elgin and it looked like a child's watch on my wrist. I used to go in there, and, although I've never bought, I had considered buying a few of their timepieces. But now I don't think I could wear a watch that small. Any of you tried on a vintage timepiece and been struck by its size? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FxrAndy Posted July 29, 2007 Report Share Posted July 29, 2007 I have a 69 seamaster, and although i love the way it looks i too find it way to small @ 34mm, same as all my westend watches 34/36mm just too small! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchmeister Posted July 29, 2007 Report Share Posted July 29, 2007 I find the same thing. Early on after I met Ziggy I got all excited about vintages. Although he doesn't display much here he does beautiful vintage work. So I started looking for interesting vintages but found that the only larger vintages are Unitas based. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazarini Posted July 29, 2007 Report Share Posted July 29, 2007 Well i see what u are saying guys ... i have started with 44 mm pams , 45 mm upo and an 217 destro ... when i recived my 1st sub a modern one at that it just looked like a toy to me at 40mm but after some time i found it to be normal size and actualy look much more normal on my 18 cm / 7.2 inch wrist ... My last purchases were a 42 mm pam witch suits my wrist perfect ... and an vintage 1680 sub witch is even smaler than 40mm , maybe someone else knows the size and as it tends to look small on my hand when had it on first day ... after some time i dont feel its small anymore ... it kinda grew on my wrist if u know what i mean regards laz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
predfan2001 Posted July 29, 2007 Report Share Posted July 29, 2007 I bought a N.O.S. WWII military watch off of eBay a few years back. The watch was absolutely stunning in the pics but the seller didn't mention size. I assumed it was around the size of an Airking. WRONG! It looked like a little kids watch. I don't even think it was 30mm. Yes it was very nice, but I relisted it and resold it immediately. My personal taste for size is anywhere between a Submariner and a UPO. I'd love an Omega Railmaster but I'm affaid it would be too big. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rek001 Posted July 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted July 30, 2007 I wonder when and why watches started to get bigger, anyone know? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eunomians Posted July 30, 2007 Report Share Posted July 30, 2007 My guess is that since many vintage military tool watches were (in general) larger than 'regular' watches, folks started to take notice. What I mean is, I think that folks started to realize that a bigger dial, bigger hands and a larger case provided easier "user interaction". Hey, if the pilots use big watches that look neato, why shouldn't the layman have access to such a watch, too? I also think that people tend to be larger in size nowdays, too. 'Tis a shame whilst hunting for vintage watches that so many of them are really just kid sized toy watches. There are so many of them that are gorgeously designed timepieces - they're just too small to be worn in this day and age. By the mid 1950s, watches started to sprout in size (39mm-40mm) with the advent of the Bretiling AOPA Navitimer, the Rolex GMT 6542 + Sub 5512 and the Blancpain 50 Fathoms. Again though, please note that these watches were designated tool watches, but were available to the layman for the very first time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olivia Posted July 30, 2007 Report Share Posted July 30, 2007 It's just a style issue...like button down collars on shirts, pleated pants, etc.The 1940s-1950s watches were small styles. I have a number of Hamilton vintage watches and they are around 30MM. Look like unisex watches, but the quality is superb. Who knows...small watches might come back, then what would we do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rek001 Posted July 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted July 30, 2007 Very interesting, thanks Euno and Olivia! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Febus Posted July 31, 2007 Report Share Posted July 31, 2007 You know what they say Big watch, small d............ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goofy Posted July 31, 2007 Report Share Posted July 31, 2007 I am a collector of vintage watches, circa 1940-1960 and you are correct about the size. I currently have about three dozen including a knotty lug Hamilton, a Bulova picture watch a Gruen Curvex among many others. Fortunately I have small wrists so I have no problem wearing them. I agree that men are overall bigger now days and styles change, but I also wonder if the larger sizes are also a result of them being easier to work on. Maybe The Zigmeister can elaborate on this topic sometime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eunomians Posted July 31, 2007 Report Share Posted July 31, 2007 ...but I also wonder if the larger sizes are also a result of them being easier to work on. Maybe The Zigmeister can elaborate on this topic sometime. That is an interesting thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.