![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Singapore
Posts: 142
|
1680 for 243
Hi all,ever since I worn my friends Pam, I really like the size it fits on my wrist.
When I wear back my 1680, I just find it a little small. Question now is,I got an opportunity to trade for a Pam 243 last continued model 1 to 1 with my 1680. Shall I proceed? My 1680 still new old stock and still lumes. just watch only. What you think? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 19,749
|
That's tough...
I would KILL for a mint 1680. Well, not kill. Maybe maim? ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Watch: 5513MaxiI+PreComex
Posts: 18,421
|
I think NO...Keep your 1680.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NC, USA
Posts: 681
|
I would not do it. While I love PAMs, the 1680 is an absolutely classic.
__________________
Instagram: dukerules |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Real Name: Adrian
Location: UK
Posts: 953
|
I agree with the other guys keep the 1680 as it's a classic. I love the PAM styling but the 1680 just has the edge in this case.
__________________
Rolex 16610LV (2007) PAM 312K (2009) PAM 292K (2009) |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Real Name: Clive
Location: Exoplanet
Watch: spring-driven
Posts: 38,855
|
+5 on the 1680
![]() Cheers ![]()
__________________
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
2025 TitaniumYM Pledge Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Real Name: Eric
Location: Long Beach CA USA
Watch: Rolex Explorer II
Posts: 4,103
|
Getting rid of a classic is a difficult decision, I'd lean toward "no."
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Real Name: Solomon
Location: Islas de Filipina
Watch: 16=55/65/80s
Posts: 110
|
Stay with the 1680
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Real Name: Bryan
Location: Oregon
Posts: 7,399
|
The 1680 is quite a sought after piece. IMHO, it's worth a bit more as well....
__________________
Rolex / Panerai / Omega |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Real Name: Mik
Location: USA
Posts: 13,724
|
For me, no deal. I think 1680 > 243. Just be patient and save for that 243!
![]()
__________________
member#3242 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Real Name: Phil
Location: CA
Posts: 5,374
|
PAM 243s are more readily available...keep that 1680!
__________________
too much into watches... |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Singapore
Posts: 46
|
On the long run....1680's price would appreciate more...
![]() Keep it... ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 22,682
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Real Name: Clive
Location: Exoplanet
Watch: spring-driven
Posts: 38,855
|
^ Beautiful pic Mike
![]() Cheers ![]()
__________________
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 359
|
keep that 1680!!!
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.
ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX