# Oris Diver 65 42mm vs 40mm comparison



## btwatches

So I just got these two watches in my shop and wanted to give somewhat of a comparison. Both watches are available with metal bracelet, textile and leather straps. 

I have a medium sized wrist so the 40 and 42 fit well. Oris just recently introduced the new vintage bracelets to their 65 divers line. While I can see the merit of what they are trying to do, I feel that the band itself feels a bit light on weight. I like a nice hearty feel to my bracelets; however, I can see the appeal of a lighter bracelet. Size wise, they sit and feel almost identical, in the photos you can see a relative thickness difference between the two but while wearing them both, I did not notice any difference. 


If I had to pick a model and style I would go with the new dial on leather 42mm, but would understand why people would gravitate towards metal.


----------



## airborne_bluezman

Beautiful! What are the lug-to-lug measurements of each?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Kjo43

Nice photos. Appreciate you posting them. 

Do you perceive any difference in the size of the dial and crystal between the two? I've been curious if the 40 vs 42 is just the case/bezel itself or if the dial size is really different. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## btwatches

Lug to lug measurements if measuring from the tips the 40mm one is approx 1mm smaller than the 42mm. 20mm vs 21mm.

The crystal on the 42mm does look chunkier. As for the dials they look about the same


----------



## SaoDavi

Tried on the 42mm last weekend. I was a little disappointed in the bracelet. It feels light and a little thin/flimsy. Not nearly the quality of the Aquis bracelet.


----------



## btwatches

Yea, I felt that too. Had the Oris Rep in today he told me they purposefully made it that light feeling to feel vintage like. An homage to old school rolex bracelets


----------



## Crate410

Very nice!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## airborne_bluezman

This is the measurement between lugs, meaning the bracelet width, right? How about top lug to bottom lug? I assume it'll be something like 47 or 48mm?

Thanks,
Jeff



btwatches said:


> Lug to lug measurements if measuring from the tips the 40mm one is approx 1mm smaller than the 42mm. 20mm vs 21mm.
> 
> The crystal on the 42mm does look chunkier. As for the dials they look about the same


----------



## slo84

Nice comparison of both!


----------



## BrentYYC

airborne_bluezman said:


> This is the measurement between lugs, meaning the bracelet width, right? How about top lug to bottom lug? I assume it'll be something like 47 or 48mm?
> 
> Thanks,
> Jeff


Yes. btwatches incorrectly used the term "Lug to Lug" to refer to the inter-lug measurement (i.e. bracelet width), which is 20mm for the 40mm Sixty-Five and 21mm for the 42mm Sixty-Five.

"Lug to Lug" (as you seem to be aware) refers to the tip to tip distance between the top and bottom lugs. I know the L2L size for the 42mm Sixty-Five is 47mm, but I don't know what it is for the larger version because I don't have one to measure. It would seem logical to extrapolate that it would be 49mm, but that's a guess.


----------



## btwatches

my bad...top to bottom is the same on the 40mm Sixty-Five


----------



## rashshane

Thank you so so much for the comparison pics! Was looking at the 42mm model recently cause I like the size better than the 40mm. Also the protruding sapphire crystal looks really beautiful. But is it just me or does it look like the hour markers are placed a bit too far towards the edges of the dial? Makes the dial look a tad bit wierd imo. And i was really looking forward to this model.


----------



## BrentYYC

rashshane said:


> is it just me or does it look like the hour markers are placed a bit too far towards the edges of the dial? Makes the dial look a tad bit wierd imo. And i was really looking forward to this model.


I think it might be the distortion around the edges caused by the curvature of the domed crystal. Viewing from an angle can make the markers look squeezed against the outer edge of the dial.


----------



## cuthbert

This is the first time I post here as I am not familiar with this brand.

On Saturday anyway I popped in an AD and I inspected the two watches, exactly the same configuration.

I have been impressed by the quality of both and by the design of the 40mm variant, the 42 mm while nice looks a little too "generic" to me.

The bracelet was nice, but the rubber band was really pleasant to touch and wear...I should definitely start to save up, this watch is much nicer than a BB IMO, the only drawbacks are that is 100 mt rated, the laser engravings and a certain play on the bezel of the samples I handled.


----------



## dilatedjunkie927

cuthbert said:


> the only drawbacks are that is 100 mt rated, the laser engravings and a certain play on the bezel of the samples I handled.


I agree about the bezel action being meh. I handled one this weekend and was a bit underwhelmed. This is purely subjective, but I also thought the faux vintage lume was a shade too yellow. I still want one on a bracelet, but am not in as much of a hurry to pick one up as I was before I saw it in person.


----------



## cuthbert

Actually I think the vintage lume made the watch (like the Longines Legend Diver), I wouldn't consider it if it had white numbers.

IMO the dial is one of the best around (along with LLD), in particular the date is perfectly incorporated in the design.

Here:

https://www.watchuseek.com/f10/wus-russian-forum-project-2016-rebooted-3459737-6.html

We are discussing about a similar watch (reissue of a design from the 70s) and as somebody was complaining about the vintage lume I used the Oris to make a point. for it.


----------



## Whiskeydevil

I love the originality of the dial on the 40mm. I prefer the 42mm since I have a larger wrist, but can't shake the feeling it's just like most other vintage divers flooding the market.


----------



## V-Twin

Thanks for the report btwatches, I prefer the dial indices of the 42 but in the 40 case.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk


----------



## commanche

Whiskeydevil said:


> I love the originality of the dial on the 40mm. I prefer the 42mm since I have a larger wrist, but can't shake the feeling it's just like most other vintage divers flooding the market.


Exactly my sentiment, I want it to look more different and special, not like any other cliche, hence my pick is 40mm


----------



## Whiskeydevil

commanche said:


> Whiskeydevil said:
> 
> 
> 
> I love the originality of the dial on the 40mm. I prefer the 42mm since I have a larger wrist, but can't shake the feeling it's just like most other vintage divers flooding the market.
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly my sentiment, I want it to look more different and special, not like any other cliche, hence my pick is 40mm
Click to expand...

Now what are you going to do for strap/bracelet?


----------



## Abeer

Loving that dial on the 40. There's just a lot of open space on the 42 -- at least in photos.


----------



## 310runner

Lug to lug for the Oris 65 42mm is 49.9mm, and 47mm L2L for the smaller 40mm version



airborne_bluezman said:


> Beautiful! What are the lug-to-lug measurements of each?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## AAAAAThats6As

why can't the 40mm have the dial of the 42? just can't stand that distorted techy typography. am I alone on that?


----------



## DocScotter

AAAAAThats6As said:


> why can't the 40mm have the dial of the 42? just can't stand that distorted techy typography. am I alone on that?


I initially felt that way too. The 40mm just looks so much better than the 42mm on my 7 inch wrist. Although the blue 42mm dial is beautiful, after awhile it started to look to me like every other dive watch dial out there. On the other hand, nothing else out there looks like the original Diver Sixty-Five dial. It definitely grew on me and seduces you over time. I ended up getting one of the Topper Limited editions since I really liked the redesigned dateless dial and movement. If I were to do it over again I would go for the new 40mm "Black and Blue" (not the Dauphine Blue and Grey) dial. It still has the funky numerals but the dark blue ring looks black until the sunlight hits it.


----------



## yankeexpress

Big fan of the 40


----------



## Michael Day

Beauty is always just interpretation of the individual. For me the 42 is everything I want. Love the lack of senseless rubbish written all over the dial. Love the traditional look. I flipped a Black Bay because the case design was too blocky. The design here is supurb. IMO. I have a few watches so for me the dressing down that the fabric has is great. The use of a deployant with it is novel and works well. For me the only difficulty was blue or green.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## DutchMongolian

What type of strap is this? It looks awesome! Also, does the 40mm version have fat lugs? I'm having a hard time removing mine.



yankeexpress said:


> Big fan of the 40


----------



## spartan6

Picked up the 42 with river bracelet today. Awesome watch wears well on my 6.75 in wrist. Was concerned with the thinner bracelet after years of planet ocean, GMT and Black Bays on the wrist. I think the 65 will be a long term keeper for a tool watch.


----------



## DocScotter

spartan6 said:


> Picked up the 42 with river bracelet today. Awesome watch wears well on my 6.75 in wrist. Was concerned with the thinner bracelet after years of planet ocean, GMT and Black Bays on the wrist. I think the 65 will be a long term keeper for a tool watch.


Congrats! I've never been a bracelet guy and have always preferred leather straps and natos...until I got the Diver Sixty-Five! The highly tapered and riveted oyster style bracelet is the most comfortable bracelet I've ever worn. It's as comfortable as any leather strap and I think it may have something to do with the tapering. Don't knock it until you try it!


----------



## scottconn170

Loving my 42mm just got it today and threw on a 20mm Leather Nato.









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## yankeexpress

DutchMongolian said:


> What type of strap is this? It looks awesome! Also, does the 40mm version have fat lugs? I'm having a hard time removing mine.


The Alfa strap is sold by a couple of sellers (don't know who actually makes them)

https://chotovelli.com/products/alfa-tan-leather-watch-band-strap

Note: On the Oris 65 pictured is a 22mm wide strap gently squeezed into 20mm lugs. I like wide and thick leather straps (TWSS)


----------



## DutchMongolian

Thank you Yankee! I'll check to see if I can find a 20mm somewhere, I have a feeling changing it out might be a PITA...



yankeexpress said:


> The Alfa strap is sold by a couple of sellers (don't know who actually makes them)
> 
> Note: On the Oris 65 pictured is a 22mm wide strap gently squeezed into 20mm lugs. I like wide and thick leather straps (TWSS)


----------



## icesee

Here is my 42 mm green dial on 20mm cincy strap works natos

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## AAAAAThats6As

great nato! haven't seen that color/pattern before. works really well.



icesee said:


> Here is my 42 mm green dial on 20mm cincy strap works natos
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## icesee

AAAAAThats6As said:


> great nato! haven't seen that color/pattern before. works really well.


Thanks!!!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------

