Pam 090 In Leather, Working Power Reserve

[jacksavigliano]

Hi,

I am a new member of this forum. I read a lot before buying my first pam from Joshua . I think is a very good watch for a good price, but I'am not an expert!

Here there are my photos, have a look and I wait your positive or negative comments.

Jack.

Edited January 5, 2008 by jacksavigliano

[Watchmeister]

It is a 21j Asian variant and a good value. The major criticism is that this particular movement requires a date adjuster on the side of the case and the gen uses a 7750 with PR module and the date is adjusted via the crown. Ergo, there should not be a button on the 9 o'clock side of the case.

[dadog13]

It is a 21j Asian variant and a good value. The major criticism is that this particular movement requires a date adjuster on the side of the case and the gen uses a 7750 with PR module and the date is adjusted via the crown. Ergo, there should not be a button on the 9 o'clock side of the case.

if I got it right from a sssurfer post this should be a 35j asian movement, different from the asian 21j...he posted this info in a thread about the PAM222...and I think that these two reps 222 and 090 have the same mvt...sssurfer also said that this (35j asian mvt) is as good as the ETA2892...

sssurfer will join this post for sure...he makes a lot of research on this asian mvt's, so he will be able to say more...

as for the 090...it's a nice rep...I had it for a while before I sold it to a friend of mine...the watch is still running strong...2+ years!

[Watchmeister]

Dadog-

You are absolutely right. I simply lump all Asian automatics into the 21j category. That movement is a better movement than the standard 21j. But it obviously is not as good as the 2892 as you need another button to get the same functionality. Another place for water and dirt to creep in. :laugh:

[dadog13]

Dadog-

You are absolutely right. I simply lump all Asian automatics into the 21j category. That movement is a better movement than the standard 21j. But it obviously is not as good as the 2892 as you need another button to get the same functionality. Another place for water and dirt to creep in. :laugh:

It's not a 21J, it's a Seagull ST-2530 / TY-2530. 35J. The best Asian movement around, at par with the ETA 2892.

Have a look at the case side near 8Hr. Anything there? Try and push it.

this a quote from a post where ssurfer commented on this mvt...

[Watchmeister]

Exactly what Marco said. It is a great movement from an engineering perspective but they still could not achieve the same functionality as the 2892. His comment in the excerpt refers to the fact that the button is not an He valve but rather the date adjuster. And by the way I have two watches with that movement and they both needed adjustment to make the PR work properly. So the movement may well be an excellent movement but somehow the manufacturers are doing a poor job of assembling them. This was not true on either of my 2892's. Then again they are more expensive and perhaps the rep makers care as they don't want returns. :laugh:

[dadog13]

Exactly what Marco said. It is a great movement from an engineering perspective but they still could not achieve the same functionality as the 2892. His comment in the excerpt refers to the fact that the button is not an He valve but rather the date adjuster. And by the way I have two watches with that movement and they both needed adjustment to make the PR work properly. So the movement may well be an excellent movement but somehow the manufacturers are doing a poor job of assembling them. This was not true on either of my 2892's. Then again they are more expensive and perhaps the rep makers care as they don't want returns. :laugh:

yep, i know that the 2nd line comment is for the button on the case at 8 o'clock...

but in the line before he says that he is of the opinion that the movement is "at par with the ETA2892"...

I had 3 of these...one in the 090 and two in the 222...had some problems with one of the 222's but the dealer replaced the watch to me so i don't know what was the problem...

as for the 2892...it is one of the best movements that can be found in our reps and gens as well...and many reputable brands are using it in their own watches...really great mvt!

[Watchmeister]

Not only is the 289_ series a great movement but it is one where there are a number of great modules made by ETA (PR an GMT), Jacque Droz, etc.

[dadog13]

Not only is the 289_ series a great movement but it is one where there are a number of great modules made by ETA (PR an GMT), Jacque Droz, etc.

yep...the 2892 that is in the 027/028 is with the added Soprod 9040 module for the PR...and then again there are modules added on the 2892 for the chrono as well...

[sssurfer]

Chiming in, at last.

Dadog and kruzer, you both correctly interpreted what I said about the ST-2530 and the 2892.

Kruzer and I do not have a same evaluation about this issue.

Kruzer's evaluation is based on his good experience with the 2892, and his less-than-good experience with the Seagull's. And, on a second line, also on The Zigmeister's gorgeous report about the 2892, I would guess.

My evaluation is based on my personal good experience with both the ST-2530 I have, and my almost-perfect-but-not-perfect experience with the 2892. Nothing important, but I discovered that I move my left arm so little that in order to keep the 2892 running I have to shake the watch by hand every other day or so. This does not happen on any other movement that I have, either Seagull or Asian 21J or 2824.

And, on a second line, also my watchsmith is not a great fan of the 2892 (e.g., he likes the 2824 much more).

Please no misunderstanding here: by no means I want to suggest that the 2892 is a bad movement. Just, to me, it is not the best one of any movements. And just that the ST-2530 is underestimated -- or, better, poorly known.

I also think that the different experiences by kruzer and I may be due to the possibility that even the Seagulls may exist in different incarnations. I remember of a topic somewhere, where someone affirmed that many ST-2530 are not actually original ST-2530, but chinese lesser-quality copies of that chinese movement (!!!). That guy was basing his statement on several evidences that I cannot clearly remember now, but they made sense.

But, especially, I do not feel it is a matter of 2892-vs-ST2530 here. I raised it, and now I am sorry I did it. What is important, and what I think that we all can agree on it, is that the ST-2530, when not flawed, is far better than any other Asian movement we are used with, and it can sustain comparison with the best ETA movements.

Btw, kruzer was right on interpreting that my evaluation of the ST-2530 did not take in account that it has one functionality less than the 2892. I was speaking about his power reserve (that, as I said, I found better than that of the 2892), his smoothness (equal to the 2892), his precision (same), and -- as far as I tested it -- its solidity.

My watchsmith, who disassembled it completely, got very well impressed at its good finish, oiling, etc. He did not get impressed at the 35J (like a noob about movements like me), but rather at the overall construction and details.

[archibald]

For what it's worth, my watchsmith was pretty impressed by the fit and finish of the Seagull, but unimpressed by the design. Very difficult to service and reassemble because of the some quirky design features, says he.

[92tru]

And by the way I have two watches with that movement and they both needed adjustment to make the PR work properly. So the movement may well be an excellent movement but somehow the manufacturers are doing a poor job of assembling them :laugh:

hey there, im new around here but been trolling for a while now.

i have a question about the adjustment you mention. i have a pam222 on the way and in the pictures i see that the power reserve (PR) hand has been reading off below the 0 marker. does this mean that the range or alignment is actually off? so according to the scale it will never reach the 40 marker?

how difficult is it to make this adjustment (other than taking the watch apart and adjusting the actual hand?)

thanks!

[sanro]

My evaluation is based on my personal good experience with both the ST-2530 I have, and my almost-perfect-but-not-perfect experience with the 2892. Nothing important, but I discovered that I move my left arm so little that in order to keep the 2892 running I have to shake the watch by hand every other day or so.

Hey, Marco, don't complain!! The fact that both you and I have problems with the power reserve of the 2892 because we do not shake our hands enough...speaks very highly of our wives!!