View Single Post
Old 8 May 2013, 03:35 AM   #13
Travelller
"TRF" Member
 
Travelller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: VIE
Watch: my sig. ;)
Posts: 3,106
Congratulations on your pending cause for celebration

You've also managed to select two of the nicer 2012 models available, which means you can't go wrong either way

Besides the obvious characteristics you mentioned, you also need to consider if your first PAM should have a sandwich dial or not (the cali being a "printed" dial). The 372 (and 422, 423...) have also the unique characteristic of engraved lettering (almost all PAMs have printed lettering).

Having said that, these two new PAMs are generally-speaking a nod to Panerai's short but rich history. As has often been the case, OP has made slight modifications so that they're not 1-1 with the vintage models. This bothers the DNAers like myself somewhat, such as the date on a cali dial, etc. A PAM that does not portray a vintage (or PRE-V) Panerai makes it no less of a PAM.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Cru Jones View Post
Personally, I wouldn't get sucked into the DNA nonsense. These are new watches...
I think the term "nonsense" is a bit crude coming from you; having said that, we can say that we have different opinions on said topic.

You want a "new" PAM, then look to a Submersible, a complications model, PAMs with 12 numbers, central seconds-hand, white dials, indexed-seconds dials, cyclops, so on. There are more than enough PAM models in current production that have little to do with DNA.

If you go with a 000 or 111 or 176 or 219 or 380 or 372 or 424 or a 449 and everything in those product lines then you (and OP) are attracted to Panerai (vintage and PRE-V) DNA...
__________________
Traveller - Genève * Melbourne * Miami * Wien
Breitling AVI 765r Navitimer 806r
Omega 3572.50 SM300MC Speedy Tuesday Caliber 321
Panerai 111 217 233
Rolex 16600 126600
Seiko SBGA125 SBDX001 SLA017 SLA025 SLA033
Tudor 5B GMT
Zénith A386ME
Other Mühle Glashütte S.A.R. Flieger Chronoswiss Tora
Travelller is offline   Reply With Quote