Women buying 42mm size?

Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by Trigeeks, May 4, 2015.

  1. Trigeeks macrumors member

    Trigeeks

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    #1
    I have ordered both sizes, hoping the 42mm will look the best. I have tiny wrist, 138mm, but love chunky watches. I wanted to know if any gal with small wrist bought the 42mm. Thanks
     
  2. Chupa Chupa macrumors G5

    Chupa Chupa

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    #2
    I'm not gal but depends on the look you want. Goes for guy or girl, but easier for a girl to get away with wearing an oversized watch. Guys just look dorky in ill-fitting anything. If you want to look inconspicuous like any other watch than 38. If you want the geek-chic "hey I'm wearing an AW" look then 42.
     
  3. AbsoluteMustard macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2015
    Location:
    Boston, USA
    #3
    I don't think 42mm is that large. Any size wrist should be able to wear it. Plus the extra battery life is always a plus.
     
  4. hannahjayne macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 26, 2010
    #4
    I tried it on yesterday. Looked fine and not too big but also looked like something from an 80s sci-fi film!!
     
  5. Beagle22 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2015
    #5
    I have been on the fence between the 38 mm and 42mm. I ended up ordering the 42mm and am receiving it tomorrow. I don't live near an apple store so I haven't been able to try one on. However my daughter went to a store. She said I'm going to love the 42. I'll post tomorrow and let you know.
     
  6. Chupa Chupa macrumors G5

    Chupa Chupa

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    #6
    Not true. I have small wrists and the 42 makes me look like a caricature. Way too big and makes my wrist look even more diminished. It's why it's not a good look for a guy but a girl can get away with it.

    Take a look at some of the try-on pics posted by people wearing a 42 w/ small wrists and you'll see what I mean. It looks ridiculous.
     
  7. AbsoluteMustard macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2015
    Location:
    Boston, USA
    #7
    Pics are a lot different than real life. That is why people post that they are shocked how small they are when they see them.

    Everyone has their own preference in style, and I think that anyone can wear the 42mm. My other watches range from 39mm to 49mm, so I am a fan of a variety of sizes.


    Larger watches are currently in style, so it won't make you look less of a man.

    Stallone with his 60mm Paneri says so
    [​IMG]
     
  8. Chupa Chupa macrumors G5

    Chupa Chupa

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    #8
    I agree pics can be deceiving but I've tried on the watch; seen others trying on the watches in real life. 42 looks stupid on guys with small wrists (140-160mm). I know some guys have zero fashion sense or don't care if they are wearing baggy pants, or maybe wear baggy pants as an anti-social statement, but they look silly none-the-less, just not in their mind.

    Not really sure what you are trying to say about Stallone's watch. He doesn't have tiny wrists or arms and I'm pretty sure most here on MR are not of Stallone's je ne sais quoi either.
     
  9. dyt1983, May 4, 2015
    Last edited: Jun 4, 2015

    dyt1983 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 6, 2014
    Location:
    USA USA USA
    #9
    edit: remove personal identifiable info not relevant to the thread.
     
  10. Trigeeks thread starter macrumors member

    Trigeeks

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
  11. LoveToMacRumors macrumors 68000

    LoveToMacRumors

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2015
    Location:
    Canada
  12. Mapple86 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2015
    #12
    I have 150mm wrists and I want to show you that photos are very missleading.
    First and second photo are both 42mm on the same 150mm wrist wirh the only difference: the distance of the camera whiletaking the photos.
    [​IMG]
     
  13. AbsoluteMustard macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2015
    Location:
    Boston, USA
    #13
    Not your fashion sense does not equate to bad fashion sense
     
  14. Trigeeks thread starter macrumors member

    Trigeeks

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    #14
    XBan, did you go try them on? I tried them on and preferred the 42mm on my 138mm wrist.
     
  15. Chupa Chupa macrumors G5

    Chupa Chupa

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    #15
    It's not MY fashion sense; I'm a guy. I have none. But there is a difference between fashion sense and wearing clothes and accessories that don't fit right. I'm merely advocating that those who don't want to look like a clown buy the size that fits.
     
  16. D.T. macrumors 603

    D.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Location:
    Vilano Beach, FL
    #16
    Same for my wife: extremely fashionable, liked the display size and felt there was nothing wrong with it being a little oversized* like some of her other watches.










    *That's what she said ...

    ----------

    That's an outstanding example of the illusion of size difference through just the photo angle/lighting/etc. :cool:
     
  17. silverblack macrumors 68030

    silverblack

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    #17
  18. Beagle22 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2015
    #18
    I received my watch 2 days ago. When I first tried the 42mm watch on I wasn't sure if I was going to like it. Now that I've worn it for a bit....I love it. It's not too big where it's annoying or uncomfortable. I actually forget that it's on. Would the 38 look better on my wrist...probably. I like the bigger watch face especially when I'm running and am trying to read stats or control the music app. My wrist is about 150 mm. I have the BSB and it's pretty comfortable.

    ----------

    I believe she is wearing the 38mm. She had mentioned in one of her weekly journals about wearing a modern buckle. Those are only made for the 38mm.
     

Share This Page