sssurfer

Yes, this thread is a stunner!

Keep the spice flow going!!!

Wow!

Even a 203...

Any one think of a better way of doing this as an online dcument as when i open the file is comes up embedded in IE and is a pain to format????

Maybe it would be easier to save it on your HD (right-click, then 'save object as...'), edit it, and re-attach it?

At least you will not have it embedded in IE.

They are not poor, rmc, they are awesome! And this project of yours is very exciting. Please keep us updated about your progresses.

4 SF 240?!?

Anyway...

first of all let me say that I have no interest in defending what I said, all that I can gain from it is just to give away a movement.

That said, I surely agree that a low-res picture with a slight (very slight, IMO) perspective can be misleading.

Not up to a 2mm difference, though!

Maybe that OP felt 8mm as being too close to the center pinion, so they added a couple transfer gears to bring the subdial a little outwards?

What we actually need is not a movement repping the pin-pin distance of the Angelus 240, it rather is a movement repping the pin-pin distance of the Egiziano's dial ( they are not necessarily the same, as I just pointed out).

And a movement able to do so without any need for transfer gears would be an added bonus, I think.

Anyway, if you are not on the same advice as mine, no problem at all. Offer retired. Friends as before.

A pic of my SHT-Mod Dep buckle. Sorry, you won't find it anywhere: one of a kind.

So, basically with Panerai watches, one would have to be fairly close to tell if it's gen or not, unlike perhaps Rolexes?

Thanks for your appreciation, Vicky.

Yes, I would say yes. Apart from the crown and CG spacing, naturally.

Some other tells I can think of, to add to your wonderful list, is the tint of the AR. It's too purple on 127s, if a rep. Also, it may be too blue on the 44mms.

Yes, but I would add it to the "side-by-side comparison" only. Furthermore, even on the gens the AR tint is something quite variable.

Another tell, in terms of authenticity, are fantasy PAMs. Obviously, if you see a non-working tourbillon, etc., it's not a gen.

I would add: if you see a tourbillon from the front side, it's not a gen.

Unless the watch is rectangle-shaped, almost orange dial, and you also see a private aircraft, 100+ hot chicks, and a private army to defend it...

FxrAndy's guide with my add-ons (how could I attach it to your post, Andy?):

Rep_spotting_Guide.xls

Hi Stephane, still lurking PAMs after getting rid of almost all your PAMs?

Quite a good rep -- just, it is a PAM 236, not a 250 (the only difference is the bracelet).

The dial is almost perfect.

Just 4 flaws: 2 unrecoverable and 2 recoverable.

Unrecoverable 1: the date pusher is not exactly @10H, it is rather midway between 10H and 9H.

Unrecoverable 2: the numbers on the caseback are incorrect, they used the caseback from the PAM 188 and 196. The 236 and 250 started from I-series, there are no G-series.

Recoverable 1: the datewheel. The date font is, as usual, ridicolously thin. And the datewheel looks a little recessed (sunken) below the dial.

Recoverable 2 (or even negligible): as usual, the crown is a tiny bit thinner than the gen.

Unfortunately absolutely no link between OP and Italian Air Force, on any times (unless you consider it a link OP making lume for military instruments and pointing devices to almost all the Italian Army before and along WWII).

But specifically about OP watches, no link with Italian Air Force, even on air-carried incursor frogmen.

And, as you know, the frogmen who were wearing Radiomirs were all but air-carried...

On PAM Luminors, the thing that you can spot 5m away is the crown thickness.

But let's suppose it's a good rep and I you have it in your hands.

In this case (and in order):

1 - Floppy CG lever (again on Luminors, obviously).

2 - On 6497 movements: swan neck regulator, recessed pinion.

3 - On date models: date font and mag.

4 - Lume.

5 - Numbers on the caseback (series, millesimation, etc).

(I feel the "A" undetectable other than on a side-to-side comparison with a gen).

And I am quite sure I am missing something here...

PM sent Cats.

@SSSurfer: Not sure I understand "to your appointment"? There are no mods, if that's what you're asking.

Apologies for my -- as usual -- poor English. I was just asking if you are happy with your first PAMs.

Great watches, congrats!

Are they to your appointment?

To anyone interested on the PAM # of those models:

276

270

277

274

Wow! Can't wait to see the rest!

Really thanks for sharing this exceptional event with us!

Its at the bottom Marco.....you should have a drop down box...change back to VIP mode....

REALLY thanks, tech!!!

Whew, it worked!

Thanks Adm / Mods....

Here is Davidsen's response to the question:

The correct distance of sub dial from centre pin is around 8.2mm.

Current 6497 sub dial distance (10.2mm) from centre pin which is a bit too far.

Well, maybe we can have a couple good news.

First:

Honestly, I don't know where and how Davidsen took that 8.2mm measure from:

It can be easily seen that the center pin - subdial pin distance is about 10.5mm, i.e. decently close with the 10.2mm of the 6497.

(It's not by chance that, as a matter of fact, the 6497 is exactly the movement used in the rep of another Angelus PAM, the 203).

Second (and even better):

I happen to have an 8-day movement by Normis, Swiss, that is about 43mm diameter and with a center pin - subdial pin distance of about 10.5mm.

On those measures, that movement looks a perfect fit to our needs.

I might give it to Davidsen, if he is able to rep it and you think this can let this project run...

http://www.chronometrie.com/watchsounds/watchsoundspage.htm

That's not perfect.

I was very serious about getting this watch repped a few months ago. I had the factories all lined up and the investment money too. The problem is not the case, rotating bezel, size or any other cosmetic thing. The biggest problem and the one that shut down the project for me was the movement. The spacing for the 6497 is incorrect and would make it look awful to how it is supposed to look. The original movement is the only movement that will "work" in this configuration.

I believe DSN was going to rep this model as well, but that was his pitfall too. The movements available will not give the correct spacing for the subdial.

My only option was to freeze the second hand, but no one really liked that idea.

Uhm... How much the distance between the central pinion and the second hand pinion is, exactly, tootall?

The receding of the PAM tide (if any) is due to the fact that the new models are very difficult to rep -- at least at the level of accuracy wanted by the PAM nuts (and almost all PAM lovers are PAM nuts).

That is the exact opposite of models up to 2005, that had simple movements and quite simple dials (at least the Base and Marina models that also were the most bought).

I think this is the reason for the rep makers heading elsewhere now.

Naturally, this is rather a shit in focus for reps.

My goodness!

Really.

Well, at least those folks know what a watch is... The next generation is going to have mobile phones directly implanted into their brains...

Definitely a wonderful watch, congrats!

Just, it's not the Titanium that does not fit the brown strap, it is the blue dial (the 036 and 057 teach a lesson here).

That watch is made for a blue or gray or black strap, with light blue stitching.

How the caseback is?

In this case, what is important is the watch itself, not how it looks on one

Yes Hambone, thats really interesting. Thanks for sharing this amazing tale.