ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

George Ab · 3 March 2010, 03:45 PM

I’m looking at a PAM177 (actually a PAM177I) and I previously owned a titanium watch manufactured by a different manufacture. The watch would scratch if you looked at it too hard. It has been my experience that not all stainless is created equal with respect to resilience to scratches for example I have had wonderful experience with my Rolex’s. I wonder if this true with the Panerai titanium. Anyone have any experience?

Regards,
George

mfer · 4 March 2010, 12:37 AM

They do scratch easier, but for some odd reason I don't mind scratches as much on my Panerai as I do my GMT IIc. Weird, but the scratches kind of add to it. Something about a worn Panerai just looks cooler.

632627 · 4 March 2010, 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mfer

They do scratch easier, but for some odd reason I don't mind scratches as much on my Panerai as I do my GMT IIc. Weird, but the scratches kind of add to it. Something about a worn Panerai just looks cooler.

agree here 100%. my titanium 176 already has a few and it doesnt bother me a bit. it also helps that the scratches blend in a bit more on a brushed finish, as opposed to a polished steel where they are more noticeable. also, i think the brushed finish suggests a more rugged look.

stockae92 · 4 March 2010, 05:31 AM

i guess this is the same case for all untreat Ti, it will scratch and ding more easily

steengeo · 4 March 2010, 05:38 AM

I once had the PAM177 and wore it for approx 1 year before selling it. The watch was in the same condition when I sold it Vs how it was bought. I didn't find it less scratch resistant than for instance the PAM 312 I have now.

Timber Loftis · 4 March 2010, 06:28 AM

I think Ti just tends to show scratches a lot more that Stainless.

argee1977 · 4 March 2010, 08:22 AM

It's only a scratch magnet if you are in a situation where you can scratch it, which in most cases would scratch up any watch.

Titanium does scratch a little easier than steel, but the good thing about the 177 is that it has a fully brushed finish and you can get it back to new condition with a little square of light scotchbrite and 5 minutes of time. I had a 177, wore it everyday for about 3 months, it had a few scratches, i then gave it a rub down and it was as if it was just out the box

p.s, the 177 for me is the best historic, it's lightweight, easy to maintain as stated above, has a nice dial and looks great.

GBJIV · 4 March 2010, 02:36 PM

I have to agree completely. 177 was my first PAM. I did have it serviced once since it was more than 5 yrs... But, it has maintained it's sweetness the whole time. I highly recommend the 177! 176 too although - I don't have a 176...

632627 · 4 March 2010, 05:55 PM

the lighter weight of the 176(and 177) make it the perfect model for somebody with a smaller

ral · 4 March 2010, 06:15 PM

I tried on a friends PAM00176 just yesterday. I was amazed how light it was. It is about a year old. I did not notice any scratches, but he does keep his watches well.

Lol-x · 4 March 2010, 09:38 PM

My only Panerai is the 177. I've had it for a couple of years.
Admittedly I have not worn it for that period, but I have found it in my personal experience to be quite scratch resilient, more so than the polished stainless steel finish on Rolex watches.

I have no hesitation in recommending Panerai Titanium watches as great wearers

632627 · 5 March 2010, 02:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 632627

the lighter weight of the 176(and 177) make it the perfect model for somebody with a smaller

should read.... "with a smaller wrist"

George Ab · 6 March 2010, 01:25 PM

Thank you all for providing meaningful feedback to my question. Deal has been struck on the 177i. Hello 177i, good-bye Sea-dweller.

3 March 2010, 03:45 PM	#1
George Ab "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Real Name: George Location: Seattle Watch: One of Them Posts: 6,924	Is the PAM 177 a scratch magnet? I’m looking at a PAM177 (actually a PAM177I) and I previously owned a titanium watch manufactured by a different manufacture. The watch would scratch if you looked at it too hard. It has been my experience that not all stainless is created equal with respect to resilience to scratches for example I have had wonderful experience with my Rolex’s. I wonder if this true with the Panerai titanium. Anyone have any experience? Regards, George Last edited by George Ab; 3 March 2010 at 04:08 PM.. Reason: Clarification

4 March 2010, 12:37 AM	#2
mfer "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Real Name: Mik Location: USA Posts: 13,724	They do scratch easier, but for some odd reason I don't mind scratches as much on my Panerai as I do my GMT IIc. Weird, but the scratches kind of add to it. Something about a worn Panerai just looks cooler. __________________ member#3242

4 March 2010, 08:22 AM	#7
argee1977 "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Real Name: Ryan Location: England Watch: AP ROC Posts: 1,462	It's only a scratch magnet if you are in a situation where you can scratch it, which in most cases would scratch up any watch. Titanium does scratch a little easier than steel, but the good thing about the 177 is that it has a fully brushed finish and you can get it back to new condition with a little square of light scotchbrite and 5 minutes of time. I had a 177, wore it everyday for about 3 months, it had a few scratches, i then gave it a rub down and it was as if it was just out the box p.s, the 177 for me is the best historic, it's lightweight, easy to maintain as stated above, has a nice dial and looks great. __________________ PANERAI, MORE THAN A WATCH, LESS THAN A KITKAT

4 March 2010, 02:36 PM	#8
GBJIV "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Real Name: Jackson Location: So. California Posts: 2,893	I have to agree completely. 177 was my first PAM. I did have it serviced once since it was more than 5 yrs... But, it has maintained it's sweetness the whole time. I highly recommend the 177! 176 too although - I don't have a 176... __________________ Jackson

4 March 2010, 09:38 PM	#11
Lol-x Facilitator Join Date: Nov 2005 Real Name: Steve Location: Omnipresent Posts: 33,687	My only Panerai is the 177. I've had it for a couple of years. Admittedly I have not worn it for that period, but I have found it in my personal experience to be quite scratch resilient, more so than the polished stainless steel finish on Rolex watches. I have no hesitation in recommending Panerai Titanium watches as great wearers __________________ *Most folks are about as happy as they make up their minds to be.* ~Abraham Lincoln Nothing compares to the simple pleasure of a bike ride. ~John F. Kennedy ROLEXploitation - yeah I'm a victim

4 March 2010, 05:31 AM	#4
stockae92 "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Socal Posts: 4,977	i guess this is the same case for all untreat Ti, it will scratch and ding more easily

4 March 2010, 05:38 AM	#5
steengeo "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Steen Georg Location: Denmark Watch: DSSD/Gold GMT IIc Posts: 92	I once had the PAM177 and wore it for approx 1 year before selling it. The watch was in the same condition when I sold it Vs how it was bought. I didn't find it less scratch resistant than for instance the PAM 312 I have now.

4 March 2010, 06:28 AM	#6
Timber Loftis "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Real Name: Jon Location: Chicago Watch: IIc,DJII,P244,A1-Z Posts: 2,857	I think Ti just tends to show scratches a lot more that Stainless.

4 March 2010, 05:55 PM	#9
632627 Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: los angeles Posts: 37	the lighter weight of the 176(and 177) make it the perfect model for somebody with a smaller

4 March 2010, 06:15 PM	#10
ral Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Philippines Posts: 650	I tried on a friends PAM00176 just yesterday. I was amazed how light it was. It is about a year old. I did not notice any scratches, but he does keep his watches well.

6 March 2010, 01:25 PM	#13
George Ab "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Real Name: George Location: Seattle Watch: One of Them Posts: 6,924	Thank you all for providing meaningful feedback to my question. Deal has been struck on the 177i. Hello 177i, good-bye Sea-dweller. Last edited by George Ab; 6 March 2010 at 01:26 PM.. Reason: Typo

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)