Almost there..

Discuss Christopher Ward watches
Post Reply
kalniel
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2020 3:23 pm

Almost there..

Post by kalniel »

I've been following CW for some time, possibly years by now, and with each release the designs get closer and closer to the watch I'm looking for.. but as far as I can tell, we're not there just yet. Does the forum have any words of wisdom or alternatives?

I'm looking for a modern, automatic, time piece with GMT. I've got skinny wrists, so unfortunately need 38/39mm case diameter, or <45mm lug to lug. This sadly rules out many CW watches and pretty much leaves me with the C60 mk3 GMT (1). Except the bezel numerals are way too large/ bold. What I really want is the same thing but with a more modern type for the bezel. Something.. like the C65 Anthropocene (2) - look at that gorgeous bezel. But.. it's 41mm and too large lug-to-lug :( Any chance this better bezel design/font will make it to the C60 GMT? Or is there a similar watch out there somewhere else?

1: Image

2: Image

MarkingTime
Guru
Guru
Posts: 355
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2017 7:19 pm
CW-watches: 6

Re: Almost there..

Post by MarkingTime »

I have relatively skinny wrists too, but the C65 is a good fit for me. Perhaps you should try one out under the 60/60 guarantee?

User avatar
nburgess
Senior Expert
Senior Expert
Posts: 253
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 1:42 pm
CW-watches: 3
Location: Surrey, UK

Re: Almost there..

Post by nburgess »

Kalniel - The C65 definitely wears smaller than it's 41mm size would lead you to believe.
I have a C65 GMT and I have fairly skinny wrists, but it doesn't (in my mind) look out of place at all. In fact, if anything I would like it 1-2mm bigger.
I wouldn't worry, and as MarkingTime has mentioned above, get one and try one under the 60/60. You won't be disappointed.
Neil

meinberg
Junior
Junior
Posts: 52
Joined: Fri Apr 26, 2019 4:06 am
CW-watches: 2
Location: Melbourne

Re: Almost there..

Post by meinberg »

Another vote for the C65 wearing smaller than 41mm, I think if you tried it under the 60/60 you wouldn't return it :)
Oris, CW, Tag and a few others.

Soporsche
Senior Guru
Senior Guru
Posts: 751
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2016 10:22 am
CW-watches: 11
Location: London

Re: Almost there..

Post by Soporsche »

After trying the 65 GMT it wears smaller, in fact too small for me personally and i wear mainly 40-44. I would say almost like a 39mm!
Stephen

9+ CWs and a modest collection of other brands

GTC854
Senior
Senior
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2018 6:52 pm

Re: Almost there..

Post by GTC854 »

Got to agree with all the comments above. I received a 40mm C60 and a C65 knowing I was only going to buy one and send one back. The C65 wears smaller than the 40mm C60. You have nothing to lose using the 60/60 facility and a lot to perhaps gain!
Good luch
Gordon

User avatar
StrappedUp
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 1878
Joined: Fri May 05, 2017 2:14 pm
CW-watches: 1
Location: South Wales

Re: Almost there..

Post by StrappedUp »

A few old photos I found of the C65 GMT.

For reference, my wrists are approx. 160mm and 170mm at the widest part.
Length of my wrist (top-bottom) is ~52mm and 57mm widest part.

Image

Image

Image

I would have preferred it to be a couple of mm smaller, but it's definitely wearable.
In fact, I have the Khaki arriving today.

Hope this helps.
Ryan

Soporsche
Senior Guru
Senior Guru
Posts: 751
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2016 10:22 am
CW-watches: 11
Location: London

Re: Almost there..

Post by Soporsche »

Difficult to suggest without knowing your tastes but if not the CWs:
Glycine Airman GMT No1 or 18
Zenith Port Royal 38mm (lovely) imho
Seiko (Grand Seiko) GMT 39mm
Revue Thommen Cricket
Steinhart Ocean GMT (smaller model)
Bell and Ross Space and another I cant remember.
Stephen

9+ CWs and a modest collection of other brands

Soporsche
Senior Guru
Senior Guru
Posts: 751
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2016 10:22 am
CW-watches: 11
Location: London

Re: Almost there..

Post by Soporsche »

StrappedUp wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 10:45 am
A few old photos I found of the C65 GMT.

For reference, my wrists are approx. 160mm and 170mm at the widest part.
Length of my wrist (top-bottom) is ~52mm and 57mm widest part.

I would have preferred it to be a couple of mm smaller, but it's definitely wearable.
In fact, I have the Khaki arriving today.

Hope this helps.
Looks great!
Stephen

9+ CWs and a modest collection of other brands

kalniel
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2020 3:23 pm

Re: Almost there..

Post by kalniel »

Thank you all, especially StrappedUp for the pictures and Soporsche for the alternatives. My wrists are a few mm skinnier still than Ryan's, so I think despite the C65 wearing small, it might be too much. Good point about the returns though - how have people found the process? Any quibbles?

Soporsche
Senior Guru
Senior Guru
Posts: 751
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2016 10:22 am
CW-watches: 11
Location: London

Re: Almost there..

Post by Soporsche »

Its quite straight forward, request a return slip via an option on your account, slip dispatched/received. Send it off and await refund. The refund sometimes appears at the end or the following month but not outrageously delayed in my experience. Relatively painless as long as you are not in a super rush to put the money into something else.
Stephen

9+ CWs and a modest collection of other brands

Lavaine
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 3280
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 5:45 pm
CW-watches: 5
Location: Alberta, Canada (The Great White North, eh!)

Re: Almost there..

Post by Lavaine »

+1 for the Glycine Airman 18. I have one and it fits my 160mm wrists comfortably.
Image
2017 CW Forum "Darwin Award" winner.

Post Reply