palpatine Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 Ok, some news on the progress of the crown project: The newest version is in the making and I just got the info that I should receive the first pieces hopefully end of next week to make a review. In the meantime, I made some comparison shots of different crown versions: 1. rep 2. first PAMela batch which is 2,1mm 3. crown in 2,0mm 4. early version with 2,2mm Sorry for the bad pics, I took them fast and hastily, I did not even install the crowns, just put them on without stem. therefore, they are also not close enough to the case, please try to ignore that also. 1. rep crown, no news, still as bad as always. I post this just for comparison 2. first PAMela batch which is 2,1mm it looks way better than the rep crown, no doubt. It is a bit too much beveled, that reduces the optical thickness a bit. dani, i hope you don´t mind if i use your pic here, i did not have anymore handy 3. crown in 2,0mm: on these the bevel has been reduced compared to the 2,1mm. looks very nice for me. The interesting thing is, that this crown looks thicker than the 2,1mm although it is thinner (2,0mm). you see what effect this bevel has… Also a shot of a genuine. 4. 2,2mm fat boy: this was the first try 3 months back. I like it although its thicker than the gen. IMHO this crown would be very nice for a vintage or Pre-V PAM. These had thicker crowns than the modern PAMs. Here is a shot of a PAM001b 1998, looks quite the same… currently we are deciding between 2,0mm and 2,1mm. the genuine has 2,0mm (measured one). I will get a prototype in both dimensions next week. I will make a photoshoot then and post here. what do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedy1 Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 This is what I think...... To whom do I send the pp to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
premiumdesigners Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 im in for 3 or 4 when available for 127 and 111 6497 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAMman Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 The current Panerai, 44mm handwound models, have crowns of 1.9mm thickness with a minimal bevel. I would prefer no bevel at all (like the rep 036) to an excessive bevel. This way the crown could be bevelled to suit, provided it was solid SS. BTW, I have 2 reps with 1.9mm thickness but these are simply bevelled too much. A 111 rep from EL has a 1.9mm crown with the internal spring, just like the gen. Why can the manufacturer of the rep 036 ti crown not be commissioned to make a batch of SS crowns to the same spec? This would be the best result so far and we already know that the dimensions and visual appearance are 'spot-on'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trunk21 Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 I like the 2.0 mm. Looks most like genuine... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panerailord Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 the crown is super fantastic when it will be for sell asap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
palpatine Posted May 18, 2006 Author Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 I like the 2.0 mm. Looks most like genuine... these are my thoughts too. i have a genuine 118 crown and its 2,0mm. IMHO 1,9mm looks too thin even when its slightly or not beveled. i looked at 100 of pics and the 2mm seems to be the best. an alternative would be 2,1mm because imho i prefer a tad bit to thick than too thin looking... we will see how it looks on pics when i shoot some comparison pics between 2mm and 2,1mm as for a 001 PreV: 2,2mm all the way... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWG Technical Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 Looks like it's coming along really well... My only comment, no matter how thick we want the crowns to be, there is one really important factor that has to be considered if this is going to work... A too thick crown will not allow the crown to pull out enough to be able to move the keyless works from winding to time setting...so no matter what, if you can't change the time then it's not going to work. Can't wait to see them in person. RG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trunk21 Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 By the way, Palpatine, thank you for your tireless efforts to get these made! You are very dedicated to this cause!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertk Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 Looks like it's coming along really well... My only comment, no matter how thick we want the crowns to be, there is one really important factor that has to be considered if this is going to work... A too thick crown will not allow the crown to pull out enough to be able to move the keyless works from winding to time setting...so no matter what, if you can't change the time then it's not going to work. Can't wait to see them in person. RG thanks The Zigmeister. The watchmaker I use tried a real crown (from a real gmt he was working on) on my 099. we couldn't pull it out far enough to set the time. His solution would have been to slightly shorten the crown tube, which he say's he would be reluctant to do because if he went to far the opposite would be that you couldn't wind it. I don't know what the measurement's were but we guessitmated that it was .2mm thicker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indyclmbr Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 Looks great. I like the 2.0 mm version, but thicker (2.1) is better than thinner that's for sure. I'd love to snag one as well, if possible, when they become available. Good work. The resourcefulness of people on this forum never ceases to amaze me. Climb on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yodaddynukka Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 question: so for people with the 063, would we need the super thick version since it is a B series? thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watchpt Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 hey I want one for my pam 196 with 7753 and my pam 63 with 2893! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woody Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 So Tommy, when they finish making the first batch for testing, it will all be 2.0mm? Would that be the case? Or would there be some ultra thick 2.2s being made as well? Thanks again for all of your efforts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
palpatine Posted May 19, 2006 Author Report Share Posted May 19, 2006 So Tommy, when they finish making the first batch for testing, it will all be 2.0mm? Would that be the case? Or would there be some ultra thick 2.2s being made as well? Thanks again for all of your efforts. this is currently being discussed, either 2.0mm or 2.1mm. we want to make sure that no one still says "it looks too thin". so its better to have them slightly thicker than too thin. it would be ablolutely great to have a run in 2.2mm too afterwards. but that depends on how many interested members there are. but if its on me, i will do everything to have these made too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finepics Posted May 19, 2006 Report Share Posted May 19, 2006 Tommy I still think it best to go for the 2.0mm size. Remember that one member here has a couple of genuine crown which he has painstakingly measured and they are 1.91mm thick so we are already going over that with 2mm. At 2mm they will look perfect. A 2.2 run for the Pre-A types as a seperate deal is an excellent idea and I am sure you would sell plenty of them (count me in on a couple of those) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
palpatine Posted May 19, 2006 Author Report Share Posted May 19, 2006 (edited) Tommy I still think it best to go for the 2.0mm size. Remember that one member here has a couple of genuine crown which he has painstakingly measured and they are 1.91mm thick so we are already going over that with 2mm. At 2mm they will look perfect. A 2.2 run for the Pre-A types as a seperate deal is an excellent idea and I am sure you would sell plenty of them (count me in on a couple of those) yes i lean towards the 2.0mm too. but its interesting that he has crowns that are 1.92mm. mine is 2mm...hmmmm. seems that Panerai also has some differences in their model lines like rlx Edited May 19, 2006 by palpatine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sssurfer Posted May 19, 2006 Report Share Posted May 19, 2006 ...hmmmm. seems that Panerai also has some differences in their model lines like rlx Yes, as for the cyclops we (Archibald, Finepics, kruzer00 and me) already verified that OP mounted different sizes on different models -- and possibly even on different releases of one same model. No wonder it could be the same for the crown. Btw: I vote for the 2mm. Btw2: thanks, Tommy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchmeister Posted May 19, 2006 Report Share Posted May 19, 2006 Tommy- This is an earlier picture from you're post on the defunct RWG I: I liked these the best, what size were those? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
palpatine Posted May 19, 2006 Author Report Share Posted May 19, 2006 Tommy- This is an earlier picture from you're post on the defunct RWG I: I liked these the best, what size were those? these are the 2.2mm ones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchmeister Posted May 19, 2006 Report Share Posted May 19, 2006 For those who like the automatics, here are all the gens for comparison: PAM 63 GMT: 27A Silver Arrow Power Reserve: 196 and 188 Daylights: Now I am totally confused. I would have guessed 2.0 with virtually no bevel would have looked the closest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HauteHippie Posted May 19, 2006 Report Share Posted May 19, 2006 Looks like it's coming along really well... My only comment, no matter how thick we want the crowns to be, there is one really important factor that has to be considered if this is going to work... A too thick crown will not allow the crown to pull out enough to be able to move the keyless works from winding to time setting...so no matter what, if you can't change the time then it's not going to work. Can't wait to see them in person. RG Agreed. We definitely have to be careful not to overdo it. 2.0mm is the way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubiquitous Posted May 19, 2006 Report Share Posted May 19, 2006 Hey, Tommy. Would any modifications be needed for the 2.2mm crowns to work? As Ziggy mentioned prior, the thicker crown might not allow the stem to be fully pulled out/extended to the time setting position; I just pulled the crown on my Davidsen 009 to the time setting position, and with the thinner crown the outer edge is already almost touching the inside of the crown guard. I'd absolutely like to fit the thicker 2.2mm one to my watch, but am concerned about this potential issue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubiquitous Posted May 19, 2006 Report Share Posted May 19, 2006 Hmmmm. Very interesting. I just measured the crown on my davidsen 009, and it would appear that it is very near to being 2.0mm thick. Perhaps it doesn't have the appearance of being very thick because of the bevel? Can anyone else with a davidsen confirm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkchang79 Posted May 20, 2006 Report Share Posted May 20, 2006 Wow those crowns look great. I think I 2.0 looks perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now