The Top 5 Most Unwearable Watches I’ve Ever Owned (Based on Size)
Over the past 11 years I have aggressively “collected” watches. In that time I have lusted after and rapidly disposed of that lust to the tune of 128 watches. That’s a lot. A lot for me, and I think a lot for any collector in that timeframe. Some I’ve sold because I’ve upgraded, some because I lost interest, and some because they were just dumb choices to begin with. But some I sold because they were simply unwearable. Not my fault. And so today I share with you: The Top 5 Most Unwearable Watches I’ve Ever Owned (Based on Size).
“Unwearable” is subjective. There are watches that are unwearable (to me) for many other reasons too. Case size just happens to be a constant. Dials, hands, complications, crowns, and other watch features can be easier to forgive or can grow on you. That vintage blue dial catches the afternoon light, flashing purple and with it you uncover a facet of the watch previously unknown. But the lazy predictable case just sits there, a constant chunk, whether you’re staring at it, driving, typing, or whatevering.
So in no particular order, here we go…e
1. The Aquastar Benthos 500 reference 1002. What an incredible watch! The Benthos 500 was introduced in 1965 and production was said to run for about another 10 years on. Most know my deep affinity for Aquastar. But this hulking, I mean HUGE stainless beast was ridiculous to try and wear on a daily basis. The watch case plunks down on your wrist at a whopping 43mm wide by 16mm high. There isn’t a shirt cuff in the depths of any Men’s Wearhouse that this beast slips under. I miss the heck out of it but sold it after only about 6 months. It’s easily one of the most unwearable watches of my collection all-time. you want to turn a hobby into something more. Or maybe you have a creative project to share with the world. Whatever it is, the way you tell your story online can make all the difference.
2. The OG Tudor Pelagos reference 25500T. This is a tough one because I love this watch so much I’ve actually bought it twice. I couldn’t even let it leave my orbit and ended up pushing the second one off on my brother, thankfully, so I still get to admire it every once in a while. But this watch, especially on the bracelet, is wildly uncomfortable and far from a daily driver for me. The combination of a 42mm width, 14mm height, and 22mm bracelet tapering to 18mm, it was second to function as a safety chain on your trailer hitch far better than to peek out behind your Penguin cuff ridiculous! So sad to admit out loud.e rest. If you read the words back and don’t hear your own voice in your head, that’s a good sign you still have more work to do.
3. This next whopper is the toughest to chew - the IWC reference 3706. I adored this watch. For almost a year I convinced myself that everything was ok. But, it wasn’t. At a height of 14.6mm, it was wholly unreasonable. It was like 1000 flapjacks stacked on your wrist. You were literally 1/100th as tall as Gary Coleman, but I miss your perfect dial and amazing bracelet, 3706!
4. The Heuer Regatta reference 134.601 in black PVD. Same song from me - I did love this watch so much! Heuer’s take on the Regatta timer is special. In all of its forms from the 1965 co-op with Aquastar to the 2018 reissue of the Skipper with Hodinkee, this brand does Regattas and does them best. The Regatta complication is the most coveted of all to me; the colors, the countdown, that swift smooth buzz of the chrono starting when you jam the hammer - all of it. But the jumbo oblong 44mm by 15.5mm high PVD case and bracelet is just a polarizing thing on your wrist. It looks like an H3 in bicycle tires. Close your eyes and imagine the opposite of an “under the radar” watch - that’s this Heuer. Maybe I just couldn’t pull it off, maybe no one could.
5. Coming in at number 5, this one pains me more than I can tell you. I look forward to all the snarls and virtually chucked rotten tomatoes coming my way on this one but it needs to be said… the Tudor “Big Block”. Any of the references including 94300, 79160, or 79170. Yes, that’s right - “Rolex’s first self-winding chronograph in an Oyster case.” Friends, watch lovers, countrymen, and women, I utterly adored this watch! I owned 5 variants with the final being an outrageous 1989 reference 79170 with 12-hour bezel, full box and papers, and from the original owner's son. It. Was. Incredible!
But no matter what strap I put it on, no matter how I tried to wear it, I just could never get comfortable with the 14.5mm height and 44mm lug to lug. I’m sorry to my many Big Block bros that I made along the way. I’ve likely offended you with my terrible words, but alas, they’re all painfully true.
I wouldn’t trade the experience of owning these watches for anything. That’s one of the coolest things about collecting - finding what’s unwearable to you.
Thank you to @marcoestreich for his superior editing!
