Tried on some panerais for the 1st time...

[rolex170]

Hoping to find some time today to try on some models at my AD. I appreciate the DNA and history of the Base models, but looking to get more utility from the more modern models. At this point, my budget limit is at the 312. I actually like the 312 in all respects right now...

Pros
sec + date function
Automatic
No cyclops (Looks cleaner to me)
Clear case back (it looks cool)

Cons (for me):
Thickness (.104 fit was great, but will need to try the 312)
Tang buckle (I like the deplyant on the 104 strap)


I would appreciate any comments on thickness compared to the 104!

[Psmith]

Originally Posted by rolex170

Hoping to find some time today to try on some models at my AD. I appreciate the DNA and history of the Base models, but looking to get more utility from the more modern models. At this point, my budget limit is at the 312. I actually like the 312 in all respects right now...

Pros
sec + date function
Automatic
No cyclops (Looks cleaner to me)
Clear case back (it looks cool)

Cons (for me):
Thickness (.104 fit was great, but will need to try the 312)
Tang buckle (I like the deplyant on the 104 strap)

I would appreciate any comments on thickness compared to the 104!

I've had both types of Luminor case and they fit fine. I have quite a flat wrist (not large), so the 312/320/etc are stable and comfortable. If you place a premium on in-house movements then you will err further towards the 312. Trying them on should hopefully makes things clear

[kilyung]

If you need date and seconds, a 312 is great if you can live with the weight/thickness of the watch. Otherwise the 233 is a great option.

[rolex170]

Well...i went to some ADs today to try on more watches... specifically, the 312 and 104 again. Neither had a 312 to try on, but the sales guy had a 321, which should be similar in case shape and thickness (so he says). As other have said, it didn't sing to me. Well the look was spot on, but the feel on my wrist just wasn't right for me. Obviously, it's because of my boney wrists, plus thickness and extra weight made the watch feel wobbly. I tried on the 104 again, and it felt better than the 312, but I'm not feeling the painted numbers now. I think the sandwich dial from the 312 spoiled me. I also tried on a 111 and that fit was even nicer, with a sandwich dial and clear back, but not sure if I can get used to the manual wind. I'll take a look at the sale section to see if the pricing looks good on the 111s as well....

[Travelller]

Originally Posted by rolex170

... 321 ... the feel on my wrist just wasn't right for me ... tried on a 111 and that fit was even nicer, with a sandwich dial and clear back, but not sure if I can get used to the manual wind...

The 111 is a great choice - IFF you can live w/o the date. If the 321 didn't "feel right", it is probably that most of the autos won't - or at least, none of the in-house; if you were ok with the 104 and it's 7750... . It could also be a case of 1950 (233, 312, 320,...) vs. Bettarini cases... (005, 104, 111, ...).

If you've spent some time reading about PAMs and PAM lovers, you'll have guessed by now that most prefer manual-winding movements on their PAMs, even when they usually go with autos in other watch brands. So please keep that in mind; I think once you get a manual-winding PAM you won't regret it for one single moment

Having said [all of] that, my vote's for the 111 (or the 177, the Titanium equivalent). You can check the date on your phone as it will hopefully only be necessary once a day, tops

Traveller - Genève / Melbourne / Miami / Wien
Wearing: 233(N) Wanting: 217, 275, 345, 368, 422 Wishing: 127, 203, 267, 276, 396

[GBJIV]

Originally Posted by mfer

My suggestion is to take your time and look around before you buy. Not sure on your budget, but a used 233 would be sweet as a daily!

This is really good advice... Take your time... and also consider the 233....

[Psmith]

Originally Posted by rolex170

Well...i went to some ADs today to try on more watches... specifically, the 312 and 104 again. Neither had a 312 to try on, but the sales guy had a 321, which should be similar in case shape and thickness (so he says). As other have said, it didn't sing to me. Well the look was spot on, but the feel on my wrist just wasn't right for me. Obviously, it's because of my boney wrists, plus thickness and extra weight made the watch feel wobbly. I tried on the 104 again, and it felt better than the 312, but I'm not feeling the painted numbers now. I think the sandwich dial from the 312 spoiled me. I also tried on a 111 and that fit was even nicer, with a sandwich dial and clear back, but not sure if I can get used to the manual wind. I'll take a look at the sale section to see if the pricing looks good on the 111s as well....

Manual winding is cool... but then I see PAMs as a break from the norm, for me. As a daily wearer you may not welcome the extra 'management' involved.
As I mentioned before, the 111 and other models that use the manual ETA movement do not hack. Some may find this irritating when setting the time, although it does not bother me

The other things to consider are: in-house vs. ETA movements, quick-change strap system vs. screw-bars, date or no date (not many manual wind models have the date)