Quote:
Originally Posted by profess1
Looks great! This watch hadn't been on my radar until I saw mcorliss's pic a few day ago. I'm now stalking it. I think this will be the watch that brings me back to Panerai. I owned a 111 for several years but personally never adjusted to 44 mm on my barely 7-inch wrist. I think 42 mm will hit the sweet spot for me. How do you find the thickness in relation to the other dimensions? Is it top heavy?
|
I agree with Mcorliss (obviously;)) I think the dimensions are great. It is top-heavy relative to the rolexes I am used to, but much less so than the 44mm pams I tried at least on my bird wrist. It is also less top-heavy than the 40mm PAMS (48/49) bc it is the same thickness but 2mm wider and seem to lay better on my wrist. The 1950s case rounds it out, making it less of a slab than the std 44mm luminor automatics. I really think its a beautiful watch.
You have probably seen this, but this link does a nice job showing how much thinner the 392 is than the 312:
http://panerai.watchprosite.com/show...898/ti-808078/