Anyone who assumed the 42mm was huge (or "your dad's watch") regretting the 38mm?

Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by benguild, Apr 26, 2015.

  1. benguild macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2003
    #1
    Honestly after wearing the 42mm all weekend I can't imagine a smaller watch somehow being better unless you have really small wrists.

    It looks bigger in photographs but seems like the perfect size otherwise.
     
  2. Wallabe macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2015
    #2
    Nope. The 38mm is the perfect size. 175mm circumference, 60mm width.

    But really, the 4mm doesn't make much of a difference. It's not like iPhone 5 vs iPhone 6 Plus.
     
  3. judethat macrumors 6502

    judethat

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2007
    #3
    No the 38 is perfect size. (And weight). So much so I've now cancelled order for the 42 SG.
     
  4. NM08SRT8 macrumors 6502a

    NM08SRT8

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2010
    Location:
    New Mexico
    #4
    Whatever you have to tell yourself to justify your decision.

    :cool::p
     
  5. Wallabe macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2015
    #5
  6. NM08SRT8 macrumors 6502a

    NM08SRT8

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2010
    Location:
    New Mexico
    #6
    Understood. If you're the dainty sorts (which looks like you somewhat are), 38mm contrasts you well.
     
  7. Wallabe macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2015
    #7
    I like the right fit rather than oversized. Same with my clothing.

    It really depends on your style. Maybe if I'm a biker type of person, I'd like a larger watch.
     
  8. virginblue4 macrumors 68000

    virginblue4

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2012
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #8
    Very happy with my choice of the 38mm! But I have small wrists, around 150mm.
     
  9. NM08SRT8 macrumors 6502a

    NM08SRT8

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2010
    Location:
    New Mexico
    #9
    Of course.
     
  10. cshouston macrumors member

    cshouston

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2015
    Location:
    Miami, FL
    #10
    I really wasn't sure after looking at people's try-on photos, but I'm glad I got the 42mm. I'm not a big guy at ALL, but today I learned that I must have big wrists (hey ladies :rolleyes: ) because the 42mm looks like the 38mm did on that previous poster's wrist. I can't imagine how dainty the 38mm would look on me.
     
  11. Che Castro macrumors 603

    Joined:
    May 21, 2009
    #11
    When I first got my 42 I thought they sent the wrong one this thing is small
    First time seeing it in person Friday
     
  12. iToph macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2014
    #12
    wirst is 175mm here, and 38mm seems to be the perfect size for me. The thing is: you have to look on the watch itself while comparing the size.. Most people only look on the screen sizes and this may irritate the feel of the size.
     
  13. NM08SRT8 macrumors 6502a

    NM08SRT8

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2010
    Location:
    New Mexico
    #13
    I enjoy the 42mm case myself. Being 6'1 190lbs, it looks more fitted to me than the smaller variants. But then again, I couldn't imagine my Omega Planet Ocean and Rolex Milgauss being small faced either, lol. That would look silly.
     
  14. Wallabe, Apr 26, 2015
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2015

    Wallabe macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2015
    #14
    It really depends on your wrist size, so you want to get the one that gives a better proportion. Wearing a large t-shirt doesn't make you more masculine because you refuse to wear a small T-shirt, even though you fit in a small.

    If you have bigger wrist, get the bigger size, same with smaller wrist.

    ----------

    I can already tell if Apple had offer the 42mm and 46mm (instead of 38 and 42), people will complain the 42 is too small, which some already have. People want a screen the size of their iPhone, but in the form of a watch.

    ----------

    What's your wrist circumference and width?
     
  15. eiprol macrumors regular

    eiprol

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2009
    Location:
    Spain
    #15
    I ordered the 42mm (still waiting for it), but after seeing videos and pictures of people with similar wrists unboxing it, saying that "it fits fine", but looking like a tacky-bulky-geeky watch, i've decided to order a 38mm. If that's fitting fine for them, I prefer the "too tiny" option.

    Y prefer to keep it elegant and low profile than bulky and geeky covering all my wrist.

    In my opinion, anyone with a wrist smaller than 180mm should go for a 38mm, and mine is 170.
     
  16. shenfrey macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    May 23, 2010
    #16
    Anyone who assumed the 42mm was huge (or "your dad's watch") regretting the 3...

    I think a lot of em regret it but are too proud to admit it. Don't be surprised to see a massive influx in sales of the 42mm next launch.
     
  17. rhyme macrumors regular

    rhyme

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2013
    #17
    I bought the 38 after trying it on in the shop. I've now had it for just over two days and can't imagine wanting a 42. People on this forum keep saying that they "look bigger in photos", but as far as I can tell, that isn't true. I've also been pleasantly surprised how easy it is to tap to pick the right app without zooming in. I want expecting that, since I have trouble with the iPhone keyboard.
     
  18. sbharj macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2014
    #18
    I think the "ultimate sizing guide" (see other forum topic) is a good guide. I have 165mm wrists but the they are the full width of a credit card so 42mm looks good on my. I've tried on my gf's 38mm and that feels kinda small relative to the 42.

    Although if I had been wearing the 38mm for 2 days and then put on the 42 it would probably feel big. Its almost like whatever size you get is the right size for you regardless of your wrists lol
     
  19. Shanghaichica macrumors 603

    Shanghaichica

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2013
    Location:
    UK
    #19
    No the 38 mm is perfect for my wrist and quite comparable in size to my old watch.

    [​IMG]



    [​IMG]
     
  20. tkermit macrumors 68030

    tkermit

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    #20
    Agreed. In hindsight I should have never listened to any of that. The 38mm one in real life to me looks exactly as I expected it to based on the paper cutout and any photos I'd seen.
     
  21. jbromer macrumors 6502a

    jbromer

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2008
    Location:
    MD, USA
    #21
    Perfectly happy with 38. 150mm wrists, thinner than cc.
     
  22. cshouston macrumors member

    cshouston

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2015
    Location:
    Miami, FL
    #22
    I just don't think 38mm would look good on me, or appear too dainty. Like I said before, I'm not a big guy, 5'8" and a small to medium frame, but I must just have broad wrists. Here's a pic for comparison:

    [​IMG]

    I just think a 38mm wouldn't cut it for me. I am loving it in 42mm, but maybe I'll try on a 38 next time I'm near an Apple Store just for S'n'Giggles.
     
  23. leenak macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2011
    #23
    Actually it seems whatever you have to tell yourself to justify your decision. I'm not sure why others are so worried about what size people order.

    ----------

    Actually, I'm hoping for next launch, they'll have a 36mm.
     
  24. Theydonboi macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2011
    #24
    No problems whatsoever with the size. I have a similar (non-smart) watch of exactly the same size as the 38mm, which is how I knew I'd made the right decision before it even arrived. I wanted a watch, not a screen wide enough to cover my entire wrist.
     
  25. iToph macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2014
    #25
    175mm wrist, 38mm watch. Bigger isn't always better :)

    IMG_0593.jpg

    i love my new toy :apple:
     

Share This Page