The dimensions of the Apple Watch (vs Moto 360)

Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by douglasf13, Sep 10, 2014.

  1. douglasf13 macrumors 65816

    Jul 2, 2010
    Hi. It seems that there has been a lot of confusion as to the size of the Apple Watch, because Apple only gave us the dimension of the case from top to bottom, rather than the more common diameter of the case from left to right that we're used to seeing with circular watches. I found a link where someone does a pretty good job estimating the dimensions of the watch, which I wanted to share:

    Here are Paul's estimates for the large model:

    The body including sensor: 36.2 mm wide x 42 mm tall x 12.6 mm deep
    (The watch body without the pulse sensor on back is only 10.6 mm deep)

    Another gentleman in the comments section estimated them similarly:

    38mm version: 33mm wide × 38mm tall × 12.4mm deep
    42mm version: 36.4mm wide ×42mm tall × 13mm deep

    In comparison, the Moto 360 is a 46mm circle, and is 11.5mm in height.

    I think this is why the Apple Watch needs to be seen in person, and all the hands-on reviewers aren't complaining about the watch being large or tall. The Apple Watch height is only around 1.5mm higher than the Moto 360, but a couple of millimeters of that is the sensor section that sticks out in the back, and the straps of the Apple Watch attach in the middle of the case, rather than at the bottom like the Moto, so it doesn't feel as if it sits as high. As far as height and width, both Apple Watches are noticeably smaller than the Moto (assuming these size estimates are in the right ballpark.)
  2. dacreativeguy macrumors 68020

    Jan 27, 2007
    Well, for one thing, looking at pics of the Moto shows that the band is mounted at the bottom of the housing, almost like the watch was placed on top of the band. So you see the complete thickness at all angles.

    In contrast, the Apple Watch's band connects higher up on the housing. In the pics of the metal link band, only half the height of the housing is visible above where the band connects. Probably helps to disguise some of the thickness.

    It in interesting that apple would go with the mechanical crown on the side, since its fixed size will fight the effort to make future versions thinner and thinner. Maybe they already have ideas to replace or minimize it going forward.
  3. douglasf13 thread starter macrumors 65816

    Jul 2, 2010
    Yeah, that was my point. Even though the Apple Watch is a little thicker, it probably wears thinner than the Moto, because of the strap placement.

    I'd imagine that could make the crown a little smaller in future versions, and it'll still be usable. Either way, 12mm-13mm thick is inline with an average size dive watch, these days, so they may not be too concerned about the size. That Ikepod Megapode that Jony Ive likes to wear is something like 16mm thick.
  4. dacreativeguy macrumors 68020

    Jan 27, 2007
    Wonder why they didn't go with a touchpad on the side like Google Glass. Maybe they couldn't get the control precise enough (Glass touchpad isn't very precise at all)
  5. SHNXX macrumors 68000

    Oct 2, 2013
    Omega Planet Ocean (left) and Rolex Sea Dweller (right)
    both around 14.5mm

    Rolex GMT Master 2

    PAM 111
    15mm thick

    Vacheron Constantin Overseas Date: ? mm
    Audemars Piguet Royal Oak Offshore Diver 15703ST: 13.90mm

    Breitling Navitimer B01
    17mm thick

    16mm thick

    Patek Philippe Sky Moon Tourbillon

    Forgive me for this ****** picture but these are my watches: Patek Calatrava 5127 and Rolex GMT Master
    Top: ~12.5mm
    Bottom: ~8mm
    But that's a dress watch.

    Maybe you like think watches but that's a personal preference.
    Apple Watch is not thick.

Share This Page