Is it only me or does CW keep making smaller and smaller watches to my disappointment. I really love their value and quality, but man...<=42mm watches just look too small. Its probably my personal preference and size of my wrist, but less and less options these days and it feels bad.

Yeah; I guess CW is producing what's popular and sells.

Did you get a C60 #Tide that you were after, or maybe one of 42mm C60 Trident Pro 600s from the Summer Sale?

Guy


Sent from my Galaxy S23 Ultra using Tapatalk

It merely reflects general trends in the industry over the last couple of years. When I was new to the forum, most CW watches seemed to be 40 mm plus, and a lot of people were pushing for smaller watches. I’ve been to CW Towers a couple of times recently and tried on 36 mm watches. I do find them a bit small for “sports” watches, whereas the 39 mm Sealander and the 40 mm Twelve, both of which I own, seem perfect.

What goes around comes around.

jlocout wrote: ↑Sun Oct 01, 2023 11:46 pm Is it only me or does CW keep making smaller and smaller watches to my disappointment. I really love their value and quality, but man...<=42mm watches just look too small. Its probably my personal preference and size of my wrist, but less and less options these days and it feels bad.

Horses for courses. I was born in 1948 and was given an adult men's Rotary hand-winding watch on my 10th b'day. I wore that until 1975 when I bought a hugely expensive (£30 - week's wage back then) LED watch from Dixons. The Rotary, in common with most men's watches in the 50's and 60's had a case diameter of 33mm. Even in the 1990's men's watches were normally between 36 and 38mm and its not really until the 2000's that people started wearing dinner plates on their wrists. As I'm half way through my eighth decade my small (but perfectly formed!) collection of watches are all in the 36-39mm range which, as I have a rather thin wrist and prominent wrist bone, I find most comfortable. As you say in your last sentence its down to size of the wrist and personal preference and 'Vive la Difference' (those wearing a Yema will have no need to translate that).

I might suggest a quick read of this opinion article.

Everyone has their own views and opinions about watch sizes - I certainly do - and I doubt anyone is going to be moved by anothers viewpoint - if it differs to theirs.

There is almost a herd mentality to this. With others telling you what the 'sweet spot' is, their 'sweet spot' that is, as if you have to follow, or be missing out, somehow.

So we went big, then we went smaller, and now we are gender free, which we are now told is something new. It's just more marketing waffle, to try and generate more sales. If they saw a trend of buying bigger watches rise to prominence, they would come up with something to milk that for all it's worth.

Anyone else swap watches with their partners? I have 'lost' a Bremont, Longines and RZE to my other half, and on her own back, she went and bought a G shock and one of those huge Timex field watches. She has also, shockingly, bought a small all white Anna Klein. Hardly following trends, she wouldn't know a watch trend if she saw one. She buy's or 'borrow's' what she likes. Simple. And always has.

And it's not often that Thailand is ahead of the game on anything really. But when it comes to watches, Thai ladies do like their oversized G shocks dangling from their slim wrists, or a G shock equivalent brand you have never heard of, and no doubt, fakes. If you're on Bangkoks transit system, it's one of the first thing you'll, notice. It's hard not to. And it's been that way ever since I relocated here.

Kip wrote: ↑Mon Oct 02, 2023 9:16 am I might suggest a quick read of this opinion article.

This article is fine evidence that everyone has an opinion. I do struggle with the idea that one watch size is perfect for everyone as the author claims. I'd say this article is worth exactly what I paid for it.

As an observer of the watch media for a number of years I found that the move to smaller watches began five or six years ago with just a trickle of articles bemoaning the lack of tiddlers. The trickle became a flood about 3 - 4 years ago and there is the, not unexpected, presumption from the online watch media that because they have said all watches should be < 40mm then any watch which is larger than that is a bad watch. I prefer watches in the 40 - 44mm range and as a "Grumpy Dinosaur" I'm fine with that. I bought two CWs in the January NN sale and both were older models with diameters of 42mm. There's only a certain amount of money available for watch purchases and if a brand doesn't make a model (size, design, features, etc) I like then strong brand loyalty doesn't matter, the money will, and indeed has gone elsewhere.

I don't listen to trends or what's considered en vogue. It's what works for me, with legible dials being a priority. Even a date window needs to be well sized and framed. My eyes aren't what they were. Squinting takes the pleasure out of a watch; functionality first.

Des

strapline wrote: ↑Mon Oct 02, 2023 6:02 pm I don't listen to trends or what's considered en vogue. It's what works for me, with legible dials being a priority. Even a date window needs to be well sized and framed. My eyes aren't what they were. Squinting takes the pleasure out of a watch; functionality first.

Des

This!

Watches in my accumulation range from 33-45mm, and though I got my first watch - Texas Instruments LED - in 1977, I have none of my earliest watches; my oldest continuously owned watches date from 1986 in my late teens. I feel there are plenty of watches across the size spectrum available though sizes do seem trending smaller of late. There are also larger ones of recent vintage readily available, both NOS and second hand.

I’d also remind us that in addition to the drop-sized Sealander, CW also let loose the 41mm C63 LEs not long ago. I doubt they would produce a newly proportioned larger case for just the run of 300 watches. And the popular C60 Pro 300 is doing well at 42mm.

thomcat00 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 03, 2023 2:02 am Watches in my accumulation range from 33-45mm, and though I got my first watch - Texas Instruments LED - in 1977, I have none of my earliest watches; my oldest continuously owned watches date from 1986 in my late teens. I feel there are plenty of watches across the size spectrum available though sizes do seem trending smaller of late. There are also larger ones of recent vintage readily available, both NOS and second hand.

This is where I am as well. I go from 35mm to 45mm. We are definitely spoiled for choice these days but I can also understand the frustration of being locked out of a design you like because it isn't being offered in the size you would prefer.

The late 90s and early 2000s did have a resurgence in genuinely large watches driven by Panerai etc. In the end I think the market spoke and those models ended up not selling very well. Otherwise they would still be the majority of offerings.

As @thomcat00 said there are other places to go. Panerai is still kicking. Breitling makes some watches with a lot of presence (code for 43+ mm) and no one would admit with a straight face that the normal Black Bay wears svelte .

Don’t forget the majority of people buy one watch and wear it for everything. One way to get these people to replace a watch that isn’t broken is to convince them that they want or need a new watch.

One way to do this is to make the old watch look old fashioned and by increasing and decreasing the sizes they are convincing people to trade up for the newer model. If watches didn’t look different from generation to generation then many people would stick with what they have.

There are of course the exceptions to this rule and you all know who I’m talking about, but they don’t need to persuade people buy their watches, they are doing that anyway.

Could all this shift in sizing be more to do with what the manufacturers want people to think and buy, rather than people thinking for themselves? I am of course not referring to anyone on here as we all know we can think for ourselves and decide with our own minds,

There is a general trend worldwide for smaller watches. 20 years ago there was a trend for bigger watches and the 46mm square Bell & Ross was seen on many a slim ladies wrist, but that trend has reversed. It might have something to do with the popularity of 'heritage' pieces, re issues of historic pieces which were smaller than todays watches. If people are happy to wear a re issue under 40mm and perhaps as small as 36mm then they will happily wear a new watch of that size. It is pretty simple, they make what the people want and they find that out with market research. The fact that they sell very quickly is testament to the fact that the buyers want them. It can be annoying if you like or suit bigger wrists, but there are plenty of watches up to 43mm still available.