sssurfer

Curiously enough, the second subdial was chosen by OP as it was adding to fast readability of the watch. With a second subdial you always know where the second hand approximately is, i.e. where to look for it. On the contrary, a central second hand might be momentarily superimposed to the minute hand or the marks, and you might loose precious seconds before locating it and reading it. One can feel the PAM look ugly, childish, or even ridicolous, but all details have a reason to be that way. Until the Richemont-Vendome era, at least.

Thanks for the heads up and the pics, Victoria! I wonder why on the 'risti reference page site they state the 206 as F-series only... Curiuosly, the 206 is not even mentioned on my official Special Editions Panerai catalogue.

Yes, this rep is just fantasy. And I have a bad feeling that we are never going to see a working linear PR gauge. Still, good to see a sandwich dial with date. Even if the date font is the worst ever. Boys, this watch is a rollercoaster!

Wearing it and taking no care about what others think. Love is love.

I admit I completely missed that post. Still, if this is that same watch, I think that the brushed case just makes for an inaccuracy about a 111, it is not enough to make for a 001 in consideration of all other features. Got mislead by the cracked crystal. I honestly believed this movement was like in your first pic. Ok, point taken. Really. I agree. It looks we agree this is all but a 111H. I'll try to summarize, as this got a bit confused. This watch is: 001 like: movement. 111X like: display back, OP number. 111E like: serial number, polished CG. 111F like: millesimation number, polished CG. 111H like: sandwich dial (is it?).

The 127 is 47mm. On a smaller wrist I would recommend a 111H (44mm) or a 050 (40mm auto w/ date too).

?????????? Where do you see the sandwich dial? E or F. The letter says "E", while the "/4000" millesimation says "F" (on E-series it is "/3500"). ?? The 001 has an OP II movement. The movement in the pics is correct to the 111 E and F series. Also, The OP 6567 number on the caseback is correct to the 111, while a 001 would be OP 6500, 6502, 6518, or 6520. Hard to tell about the case from the pic. But the CG surely looks polished, that is correct to the 111 E and F series. Maybe it would be correct for PAM001 rep, but surely not for PAM001 gen as it mounted OP II movement. The 111 houses the OP XI (which replaced OP II) The movement on 111E and 111F looks exactly like this one. I hate to look so picky, but searching for a correct 111 under those assumptions is going to result extremely hard, and I wish to avoid anyone that hassle.

Never dropped a whole watch, but an almost unsourceable sandwich crystal. Still kicking my ass for that. Have my solidarity.

Can't figure it out why should anyone want to change mini-fiddy's gold hands to black hands... but that lume is gourgeous!

Which is your wrist size?

I bet you do. We all do. Stay assured it's the best place around for replica lovers. Yes, the PAMs with their hundreds models, and many models different according to their different releases across different years, they are really a thing for nuts. And if you are going to get infected by the PAM virus, then you may bet that in a while you will get nuts too. Yes, DSN and TWP models, or already-fixed-ones from former owners, make for your best chance to get a good out-of-the-box rep. If you specify what DSN or TWP model(s) you are heading to, I might give you my personal opinion. Unfortunately, the incorrect "A" appears to be universal (it is a very tiny flaw, though).

Differences in price between those three models are probably due to the fact that the second model is Titanium (price up), and the third model is the least accurate of all (price down). The third is the least accurate because its movement should look like that of the other two, and because the case is Titanium where it should be brushed Tantalum, and SS where it should be polished Tantalum. I.e., no Tantalum at all. The movement in the first two models is quite accurate. Its main flaw is in the shape of the swan neck regulator: it is "needle" shaped while it should be "dagger" shaped. This is an ubiquitary flaw of "Swiss ETA" movements, as ETA did never make dagger swan necks. You will find dagger swan necks only on Asian movements. The inaccurate "A"s are because of their horizontal dash, that is placed lower than it should be. So that the triangular room at the top of the "A" looks larger (higher) than it should.

Thanks, Freddy! Same problem as anywhere, though. That thread was about making a dial matte, not parts that are supposed to stay in touch with skin or clothes many hours a day. And considering the cost of having it PVD coated, I think I am going to give up. Thanks anyone for your help anyway.

chieftang & lysys - thanks for your insights about gen PAM AR coat! Anyway, I am still going to go for 2-side AR coating only. As I said, I prefer perfect readability rather than perfect accuracy. That someone might spot my watch as a rep is no big issue to me. I also think that if someone is in knowledge that PAMs are 1-side AR coated, then he will also be able to spot a rep independently from any AR...

I just wish to share my experience as a devoted PAM fan. In a recent past I got two crystals single-side AR coated, and my conclusion was: Since now I'll go for double-side AR coating only. Yes, even if it is inaccurate on PAMs. The difference in effect between single-side and double-side AR coat is overwhelming. With single-side AR, forget to see the incredible apparent missing the crystal that we can see on double-side AR pics. Just, you get single reflections instead of double reflections. To me, that completely frustrates any good of (and need for) AR. The only real benefit from single-side AR is that it cuts out reflections from the dial -- i.e., from date and cyclops. BTW, it's months now that I am hunting for any official reference about the genuine AR coat on PAM being on the inside only, and I never found any single one. I own all official Panerai catalogues since 2002, and they always spell 'Anti-reflective coating' only. All pictures of gens on the net look as they are double-sided AR coated. I am beginning to believe that this assumed thing of PAM single-side AR is just an urban legend. Anyone got any evidence?

It is not supposed to be. But any local watchsmith can remove it.

Great to read that the goal has been reached. Still I just donated a bit though, to express my appreciation and maybe it can help on a next run.

No problems, ahchard. Rather, thanks again for making it clear that this rep is 47mm. This makes it even more inaccurate, as all the '1950' Luminor models released in 2007 are 40 or 44mm models -- with only exception for the PAM 276 i.e. the Luminor 1950 6 days tourbillon power reserve steel (a bummer). About your brain supplements, take it easy, don't waste your money. They are essentially useless, just a deal for the pharmaceutical Houses. Rather, go spending your money on a new good rep.

Which is the best PAM rep out there, it is a subjective thing. The most accurate ones are usually the simplest ones, with no date and even no seconds. Still, you might like something more complete and get a different model with some minor flaws that you can get corrected by having the watch modified by professionals here. It also depends on what size you want -- 40, 44 or 47mm. My best suggestion is: take your time to read here and do some research. You will end up with a much better understanding about the several issues involved and you will take the best out of your money.

Thanks ahchard for this review! A link to the first thread about it: http://www.rwg.cc/members/index.php?showtopic=47595

Personally, I am only paying for the future of rep makers and sellers.

Great!

The 112 and the 090 don't look fantasy, I would say. Welcome to the club! And bye bye to your wallet.

Your AR is simply awesome, k! Can't wait to get my crystal back. No problem to me that it was glass rather than sapphire. I actually feel that AR coating on glass is even better than on sapphire, as it also adds to glass' scratch resistance. Any differences in color nuance on glass rather than on sapphire are of no concern to me. I am just waiting to get my glass crystal back in order to verify my assumptions. Just emailed you about these thoughts. THANKS ONCE AGAIN! :sss: urfer