sssurfer

What do we do when we LOVE the Fiddy, (127) but our wrists are too small!?

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

Saw this from his earlier post... or I thought I saw it. I could be wrong.

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.

This I do not agree. Movement for 111E and F series should look like this, while his movement looks like this...

Got mislead by the cracked crystal. I honestly believed this movement was like in your first pic. Ok, point taken.

No problem. It's a good sharing of info we exercise here. My intention of my initial reply was to express my confusion with this '111h' he has. Looks like a hybrid of pre-E and E/F series to me.

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?).

I am leaning towards a 111 or 127. I have a smaller wrist so I was thinking of 44mm ones. I would love you opinion!

The 127 is 47mm.

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

Here's how I see this '111h':

??????????

- Sandwich dial tells me it's an H-series Luminor Marina (PAM111h).

Where do you see the sandwich dial?

- Case back marking tells me it's an E-series (PAM111e)

E or F. The letter says "E", while the "/4000" millesimation says "F" (on E-series it is "/3500").

- Movement tells me it's a pre-E series Luminor Marina (PAM001).

??

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.

- Brushed case tells me it's a titanium case or an automatic.

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.

For one, the movement in this '111h' looks like older looking OP III, which would be correct for PAM001 rep.

Maybe it would be correct for PAM001 rep, but surely not for PAM001 gen as it mounted OP II movement.

The 111 houses the newer OP IX (which replaced OP III)

The 111 houses the OP XI (which replaced OP II)

has a different looking bridges from this one.

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!

Thank you so much guys for all the information you sent. Based on what I have read in this forum, these are the most accurate PAMs today:

1. 111 E

2. 111 H

3. 127 "fiddy"

Correct me if Im wrong. But I am leaning on purchasing any of those models. I hope you can help me decide as well.

Which is your wrist size?

Dag I love this place.

I bet you do. We all do. Stay assured it's the best place around for replica lovers.

... but there are soooo many PAM models that (at least to a PAM noob) look the same.

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.

Would a Davidson or TWP have one with these issues corrected, or are they across the board?

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.

Dear Forum Member Vacuum:

In the future, please be more careful in your choice of words concerning your membership status and financial contributions to this forum. We no longer tolerate the use of words like 'VIP', since they suggest an artificial and potentially insulting differentiation between the diverse specimens of homo sapiens sapiens who frequent RWG.

We'd also thank you not even to allude to 'upgrading' your membership, since this can also be emotionally painful to those who have not done so.

We are currently working on a classification-scheme in which all those who frequent RWG - members, non-members, scammers, lurkers, GAF, Customs, Homeland Security and FBI agents, serial watch-molesters as well as those who've arrived here by accident after a particularly sloppy Google search - will be referred to by the all-inclusive term of 'Comrade Replica Watch Collector Person.'

Since we also believe in the free exchange of information on the Internet, please be aware that any contribution you make for the hosting of this forum will be returned to you with an additional bonus of twelve (12) percent interest per annum, calculated on the length of time you deposit your (censored) - we no longer permit the mere mention of (censored) - here with us. Under this new system, the more (censored) you contribute, the more (censored) you'll get back!

In the not-to-distant future, we're even working on a plan to pay you for visiting our forum; whether this will be on a page-per-view and/or length-of-time-logged-in basis remains to be determined: our faithful Administrator and moderators have all taken second, and in some instances, third jobs to be able to make this forum the most profitable and least insulting Internet experience possible for its Comrade Members.

Yours truly,

RWG: a not-for-profit charitable institution serving replica watch collector persons worldwide.

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?

Is the crystal removable without the use of a crystal press?

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 worries sssurfer!

I'd just like to add that the datewheel font on this one is terrible...

I remember the original post now... man I have terrible memory! I remember you posted about this when I received the watch yersterday, but I thought your original post was only with photos of the movt. Now I see it was the exact same watch! LOL... I even posted a reply in that thread... Need to start taking some brain supplements...

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

"Inflated prices for gens"...

I don't think a company would survive if we paid the prices we wanted to pay for their watch. Essentially we are paying for their future.

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

Lello is on a short journey to the Big Apple.

Kruzer, I know he was hoping to meet you there.

Not quite. What you're looking at is a 3D representation of a 4D hypercube. To make matters even more confusing, the pictures are 2D representations of a 3D representation of a 4D cube (hypercube).

Pug, dun be a Pug! It's obvious that what we see in the avatar is a 2D representation of a 3D representation of a 4D cube

In that post of mine that you quoted I was not talking about the avatar, just about the very tesseract.

And you surely agree that a tesseract is a 4D cube -- or a hypercube, if you prefer ('4D hypercube' is a bit of a redundance, isn't it?).

Actually, at the age of 13 I drew a 2D projection of a tesseract and submitted it to my tech design teacher.

She did not understand, she thought I was trying to make joke of her -- and no, not because of so bad drawing skills of mine.

She threw my drawing away and she assigned me a sound 2 (out of 10).

That was my time to realize that adults and authorities may be incredibly dumb...

If a genuine dial fits your movement, then replacing the dial is a very easy task that any watchsmith can do.

Provided he is willing to work on reps, naturally.