The largest independent, non-commercial, consumer-oriented resource on the Internet for owners, collectors and enthusiasts of fine wristwatches. Online since 1998.
Informational Websites ChronoMaddox -- the legacy of Chuck Maddox OnTheDash -- vintage Heuer website Zowie -- Omega information
Discussion Forums ChronoMaddox Forum Heuer Forum Omega Forum
Counterfeit Watchers ChronoTools Forum ChronoTrader Forum
Vintage Heuer Discussion Forum
The place for discussing 1930-1985 Heuer wristwatches, chronographs and dash-mounted timepieces. Online since May 2003.
OnTheDash Home What's New! Price Guide Chronographs Dash Mounted Collection
Re: The New York Times Style Magazine: Men's Fall Fashion

Jeff

I'm not surprised - some of the very big watches look plain rediculous and it was always likley to be a fad. I'm not sure this will effect vintage Monaco's but there was always likley to be a return to more normal/smaller size watches like the Carrera at some point, because of their classic proportions. Classis is classic.

I think the idea of a watch to wrist ratio is a joke, it's all about personal taste surely, i'm doubt many people will be getting their tape measures and calculators out!

: Yesterday, The New York Times published its Fall 2009 issue of
: its Style magazine, dedicated to Men's Fashion. There is an
: interesting article about the sizes of men's watches and how
: there is currently a trend toward downsizing. Here is the link
: to an online, interactive version of the article --
: http://www.nytimes.com/indexes/2009/09/13/style/t/index.html#pageName=13watchesw
: [If the interactive version doesn't work for you, here is a
: link to a scan of the article .]

: The author uses the Heuer Carrera as a barometer / benchmark of the
: changing size of watches, and he makes several references to
: Carreras; unfortunately, there is no illustration of any
: Carrera, vintage or modern, large or small.

: One controversial aspect of the article -- at least it is being
: debated on another popular forum -- is the author's suggestion
: that the watches a person wears should be in proportion to his
: (or her) wrist. Others believe that the watch need not be
: matched to the wrist, but to the person's overall body size;
: still others suggest that anybody can wear any watch, regardless
: of their size (or the size of their wrists). Here is the crucial
: passage from the article:
One thing is certain, though.
: Whether on the hunt for a modest beauty or its supersize cousin,
: a man should always take into account his wrist size. A smaller
: wrist like my own (170 millimeters around and 56 millimeters
: across) looks a bit foolish with a 42-millimeter mid-1980s Heuer
: Pilot but great with a 35-millimeter 1964 Heuer Carrera.
: Fittingly, that proportion, 56 to 35, is almost exactly the
: long-famed ‘‘golden mean’’ — the ratio rooted in the
: Fibonacci series that, as legend has it, typifies ideal balance
: and perfect harmony. I will admit that this is the first
: time that I have heard the "golden mean" applied to
: the size of a watch. So what do we think: early Carreras and
: 2444's for the little guys; Monacos and Montreals for the big
: guys; or is it "any watch for anyone"?

: Jeff

Current Position
Chronocentric and zOwie site design and contents (c) Copyright 1998-2005, Derek Ziglar; Copyright 2005-2008, Jeffrey M. Stein. All rights reserved. Use of this web site constitutes acceptance of the terms of use. CONTACT | TERMS OF USE | TRANSLATE