Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

48mm Apple Watch

blairh

blairh

macrumors 603
Original poster
Dec 11, 2007
6,015
4,553
I fully believe we are getting a 3rd size next year as the rumors of such a thing warm up.

I feel it's logical that this size will be bigger than the current 45mm model.

LeaksApplePro says it will be 48mm. I know this is a very large size but I do believe it will ultimately be accurate.

Curious what you all think about this potential size. I know it's very big but I think it would be awesome.
 
Well, I‘m sure there would be a market or in other words, people who‘d wear such a ridiculously big watch…. I definitely wouldn’t
 
I love large face watches so it’s an instant buy for me even with small wrists. My only question is if the existing 42/44/45 watch bands will work with that size or if we would have to purchase new bands.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jz0309
beach bum said:
I love large face watches so it’s an instant buy for me even with small wrists. My only question is if the existing 42/44/45 watch bands will work with that size or if we would have to purchase new bands.
Click to expand...
If there would be a 48, my guess would be you’re gonna need new bands for it
 
  • Sad
Reactions: beach bum
I‘m willing to bet the rumoured rugged one will also be the bigger one. Which makes total sense as for a model made for „extreme sports“ a bigger display (and a bigger battery) will be more useful/important and the „rugged“ exterior will make the Watch bulkier anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: blairh
the future said:
I‘m willing to bet the rumoured rugged one will also be the bigger one. Which makes total sense as for a model made for „extreme sports“ a bigger display (and a bigger battery) will be more useful/important and the „rugged“ exterior will make the Watch bulkier anyway.
Click to expand...
But that would make the rugged model too big for people, who, like me, have small wrists. I don't think Apple would make a rugged model just for bigger people -- small people can do extreme sports, too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SisterBlue22
Night Spring said:
But that would make the rugged model too big for people, who, like me, have small wrists. I don't think Apple would make a rugged model just for bigger people -- small people can do extreme sports, too.
Click to expand...

Thing is that a lot of people like bulky, even oversized Watches. Not me, not you, but many others. And even if you don‘t really like the look, during sporting activities I guess the look on the wrist will not be as important to most people than in other, more everyday situations. Easy solution, then (according to future Apple): get the bulky, rugged Apple Watch for (long-lasting) athletic activities and a nice „regular“ Apple Watch for all other times. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
the future said:
Thing is that a lot of people like bulky, even oversized Watches. Not me, not you, but many others. And even if you don‘t really like the look, during sporting activities I guess the look on the wrist will not be as important to most people than in other, more everyday situations. Easy solution, then (according to future Apple): get the bulky, rugged Apple Watch for (long-lasting) athletic activities and a nice „regular“ Apple Watch for all other times. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Click to expand...
I'm not talking about looks. The bigger size watch literally doesn't fit my wrist. I'd love to wear the bigger size for the bigger screen, but it's longer than the flat part of my wrist. So if the rugged model comes only in the bigger size, I wouldn't be able to wear it. So I hope if Apple does make a rugged model, they'll make one that's small enough for me to wear.
 
48mm would be a pass for me. Haven’t tried on a 45mm watch yet. But I’m guessing it is the upper limit of what would look good on my wrist based on how my 44mm fits. Also a larger watch would have to offer something really compelling to get me to ditch my collection of 44mm bands and start over.
 
My prediction… gonna be what a lot of people were asking for in a rugged Apple Watch.

Aluminum body with sapphire glass. Possibly a Nike version. You heard it here first. It will be priced somewhere between SS and Al. I don’t see apple making something out of galvanized rubber like a hockey puck lol.

Thoughts?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd love to have a 48mm but I don't see that happening. I think Apple has found its sweet spot with the 45mm size and will keep it there for at least another few years. The rugged version seems to make more sense with something like a rubberized outer body and a hardened screen (which I'd also love to have).
 
Personally, I’d buy it. But there’s no way I think a 48 mm would be attractive to the general consumer. (And at a higher price point).

If you measure a 48 mm Apple watch on paper with a pencil (which obviously includes the housing with the display), it’s ridiculously large.

But besides that, I don’t really trust rumors about the Apple Watch, plus this early being almost a year out, there’s so many falsities on the watch, it’s borderline ridiculous. We will know more concretely I’d say about six weeks before the actual Keynote. That tends to be by tradition when the largest leaks debut.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Night Spring
Relentless Power said:
But besides that, I don’t really trust rumors about the Apple Watch, plus this early being almost a year out, there’s so many falsities on the watch, it’s borderline ridiculous. We will know more concretely I’d say about six weeks before the actual Keynote. That tends to be by tradition when the largest leaks debut.
Click to expand...
Keep in mind too that rumors were predicting a total redesign with flat sides for the S7 right up until the moment the keynote started. Even rumors close to the event should be taken with a healthy dose of skepticism.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Night Spring
Monkswhiskers said:
A square design in this size would not feel too much bigger I reckon.
Click to expand...
It really would. I encourage you to take a 44 mm Apple Watch, accurately trace it on paper. Ok, then proportionally draw 48 mm directly next to the 44mm tracing, you’ll see how significant it really is. Not to mention, the weight difference will also be substantial with the additional of the glass and housing.
 
I think, Apple is closely watching the market of traditional watches. There was a period a couple of years ago, with yearly growing watches. Then it suddenly stopped, because they became monstrous. Now watches shrink again and lose heavyness. (general development) - so: no for 46 mm - I am pretty sure.
 
Johnson, like many other celebs often wear Panerai Watches. 44mm were their standard but saw a huge increase in 47/48mm. There are even a few 50mm+. 47mm is the sweet spot for me, but I’d probably wait for year 2 of a larger watch since I just got an S7SS
 
Oh man! I‘d so go for a larger 48mm watch. But the problem for me at that point is the weight, not the size.

To me, the sapphire screen is a must-have so I’d probably consider getting the Titanium for the first time ever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back