Reply With QuoteOut of the two, IWC.
Panerai for me, out of those two.
In general though I think I prefer IWCs over Panerais.
Out of the two, IWC.
Left, love the IWC.
Tough call ! IWC juct edges it IMO.
IWC for for me without a doubt.
Right (or anatomical left)... :lol:
right for me.
IWC for me every time. Panerai do nothing for me.
IWC every single time.
But I am a tad biased... :D
Love them both - two great watches. At a push, I'd go for the PAM.
Pam, pure class :wink:
Panerai, it's a less cluttered and classic looking dial!Originally Posted by farmkid
I expected the Panerai would be first choice for me everytime...but seeing them side by side I actually think the IWC dial looks better................
The watch that isn't a joke, the IWC.
What's the punchline with the Panerai?
The IWC because of the case, movement and it being an IWC...
:shock:
..well each his own.
Fiddy all the way, although I am a big fan of the IWC, the PAM is exceptional and nearer to the original in size and looks than the IWC. Have a look
The size is a pretty original 47mm if I remember well:
The original B-Uhr was 55mm:
IWC all the way , realy crisp looking dial.
IWC. The Panerai is just too weird on the wrist*, and that crown protector makes winding a pain. I think it's the better looking watch in pictures, but in real life I believe there would be no contest.
* experience with homage only (to see if I really wanted one)
Newbie says PAM....they are just so unique.
The Pam for me, I'm afraid.
It is all about the movement for me.
I do also like IWC's - for their quality, and the WW2 pilots' series over the years.
If only there was a watch that looked like the mk10 - but had the 6497 inside.
Mmmmmm - can I hear one of the Glycine Incursore ticking from the watch box ?
Yes, I know, drifting off topic.
Apologies.
The Pam, then.
Right, but it doesn´t matter for me, i probably will never own one of them, too poor for that
I think the point, illustrated perfectly by the differing opinions including some like me who wouldn't buy either, is that it's down to personal choice and what does it for you. It's your money, buy what is instinctively the the most appealing to you for whatever reasons are important to you.
For what it's worth, I'm looking at this as my next purchase:
Some will love it, some will hate it.
Skier
You might be right - I read 52mm, but that might have been a slightly different model. (Not that being instantly able to tell between each of Panerai's 1,000 models is something you want to admit to, or should be proud of...):shock:
..well each his own.
Fiddy all the way, although I am a big fan of the IWC, the PAM is exceptional and nearer to the original in size and looks than the IWC. Have a look
The size is a pretty original 47mm if I remember well:
So 47mm is neither here nor there. Like the IWC, smaller than the original, yet still far too big for most wrists. Oh well!
...but what do I know; I don't even like watches!
Pam for me.
Nothing wrong with the IWC though,still a lovely watch.
Left.
The 8-day IWC had (has?) isochronism problems, which are a bit like a plane having difficulties flying.
And the Panerai is, like all but the originals, a testament to modern marketing.
So, neither.
I have to agree about Panerai regarding their marketing.....if I hear one more time about the Italian Navy or Egyptian I swear I will scream .
So that's it then, the Big Pilot it is .......now all I need is about 8 grand.
Pam if I could only have one, but would love to have them both!!
Right for me.
Neither have any aesthetic appeal to me.
A friend of mine owns the current IWC big pilot and we frequently compared his IWC and the 233 I owned at the time, have to say the big pilot repeatedly underwhelmed me. The 1950 case plus domed crystal blew the IWC out of the water.
The problem I have with the 127 is the rather simple movement, but other than that it is 8)
IWC any day it has all that the Pam is missing,
and Pams just dosen't tick me so it was a easy pick for me
Posting Permissions
