panerai 1392 vs 392 | Anybody choose the PAM01392 over the PAM00392? panerai 1392 vs 392 The PAM 392 is on the left. The new PAM 1392 is on the right. It's supposed to . 31 RUE CAMBON perfume by Chanel - Wikiparfum. Eau de Parfum. See Olfactory Evolution. all the ingredients. Oakmoss | Patchouli | Bergamot | Ciste Labdanum | Black .
0 · [Panerai] PAM 1392. A decade
1 · Thoughts on PAM01392 vs. PAM00392
2 · The New PAM 1392
3 · Panerai PAM01392 : Luminor 1950 42 3 Days Automatic
4 · Panerai Luminor Marina 1950 3 Days Automatic PAM1392
5 · PAM 1392
6 · Insider: Officine Panerai Luminor Marina 1950 3 Days PAM 1312.
7 · Anybody choose the PAM01392 over the PAM00392?
8 · A bit of help if possible.
$8,270.00
Looking at picking up a 42mm Panerai. 44mm is just too big for me so save . #2 The PAM 392 is on the left. The new PAM 1392 is on the right. It's supposed to .
![[Panerai] PAM 1392. A decade](/upluds/images/[Panerai] PAM 1392. A decade.jpg)
Rolex Forums - Rolex Watch Forum > Other (non-Rolex) Watch Topics > .
The Panerai Luminor PAM 1392 is rated to 10bar (roughly 100 meters), which is more than .After a short conversation with its owner, u/Papooskimo, I found out Panerai actually makes .
The Panerai PAM 1392 is a smaller -and thinner- version of Panerai's traditional Luminor 1950. .
While the reduction on the case thickness is only around 2.5 mm, the difference . 392 is thicker and has the more traditional, cleaner dial without the dreaded . Looking at picking up a 42mm Panerai. 44mm is just too big for me so save your breath. Anybody out there choose the PAM01392 over the 392 and glad they did? I like that the 1392 case is slimmer and has the newer movement but I go back and forth on the blue seconds hand and yellowish hands/indices.
#2 The PAM 392 is on the left. The new PAM 1392 is on the right. It's supposed to replace the 392. Rolex Forums - Rolex Watch Forum > Other (non-Rolex) Watch Topics > Panerai Discussion Forum: A bit of help if possible..
392 is thicker than 1392 BUT for me the 392 fet much better and looked smaller, which for my 6.5” wrist is a good thing. The 1392 being flatter felt much bigger than 392. Tried 682 on in Italy and man what an amazing fit for me. I was nearly convinced to settle for the PAM 1392 -- but am glad I stuck to my guns and grabbed a mint condition PAM 392 before people figure out how great this watch really is. If you are looking for a classic Luminor and are "on the edge" of being able to pull off the 44mm -- I cannot recommend the PAM 392 enough.
The Panerai Luminor PAM 1392 is rated to 10bar (roughly 100 meters), which is more than adequate for spending time in the pool, surfing, snorkeling, and even most mild recreational diving for that matter. After a short conversation with its owner, u/Papooskimo, I found out Panerai actually makes the exact same watch in 42mm called the 1392! Like its bigger brother, the 1392 came in a 1950 cushion shape case with brushed side and polish bezel, complete with the trademarked crown guard as well as sandwich dial.The Panerai PAM 1392 is a smaller -and thinner- version of Panerai's traditional Luminor 1950. The case measures 42mm across, at a height of 13.2mm. It is powered by the caliber P.9010. While the reduction on the case thickness is only around 2.5 mm, the difference is quite visible when you put both watches side-by-side —on the picture below, you will find the new Panerai PAM 1312 on the foreground and on the second picture, on the left hand side.
Looking at picking up a 42mm Panerai. 44mm is just too big for me so save your breath. Anybody out there choose the PAM01392 over the 392 and glad they did? I like that the 1392 case is slimmer and has the newer movement but I go back and forth on the blue seconds hand and yellowish hands/indices. #2 The PAM 392 is on the left. The new PAM 1392 is on the right. It's supposed to replace the 392.
Rolex Forums - Rolex Watch Forum > Other (non-Rolex) Watch Topics > Panerai Discussion Forum: A bit of help if possible.. 392 is thicker than 1392 BUT for me the 392 fet much better and looked smaller, which for my 6.5” wrist is a good thing. The 1392 being flatter felt much bigger than 392. Tried 682 on in Italy and man what an amazing fit for me. I was nearly convinced to settle for the PAM 1392 -- but am glad I stuck to my guns and grabbed a mint condition PAM 392 before people figure out how great this watch really is. If you are looking for a classic Luminor and are "on the edge" of being able to pull off the 44mm -- I cannot recommend the PAM 392 enough.
The Panerai Luminor PAM 1392 is rated to 10bar (roughly 100 meters), which is more than adequate for spending time in the pool, surfing, snorkeling, and even most mild recreational diving for that matter. After a short conversation with its owner, u/Papooskimo, I found out Panerai actually makes the exact same watch in 42mm called the 1392! Like its bigger brother, the 1392 came in a 1950 cushion shape case with brushed side and polish bezel, complete with the trademarked crown guard as well as sandwich dial.
The Panerai PAM 1392 is a smaller -and thinner- version of Panerai's traditional Luminor 1950. The case measures 42mm across, at a height of 13.2mm. It is powered by the caliber P.9010.
[Panerai] PAM 1392. A decade
Thoughts on PAM01392 vs. PAM00392
The New PAM 1392
A tribute to the historic House address and famous sanctuary of Christian Dior, the eponymous Dior 30 Montaigne Collection offers timeless bags and leather accessories that showcase the House's expertise and masterful craftsmanship.
panerai 1392 vs 392|Anybody choose the PAM01392 over the PAM00392?
