Quote:
Originally Posted by The OG Beef
Not arguing either way, but I’m curious about your specific reasoning.
all_in_the_pamily
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by rambo99
its a new in house movement based on the OP XXXIV. may be people starting to complain about the non in house OP XXXIV movement on newer models like 683, 959, 973 and 960, that's why panerai go back to the in house route. and it is thinner than the 682 movement.
|
I want the independent hour hand. I travel a decent amount and really appreciate that feature. I also found that the 42mm Sub is the best fitting current Panerai for my wrist. The fact that many (if not most) of the other automatic Luminors (including the 682) have this feature at basically the same, if not cheaper, price point with the P.9010 caliber, kind of screws with my personal value proposition.
Even if the new movement is thinner, they are using almost the same case, if not the same (Hodinkee says this new one is 14.37mm and their 682 review quoted 14.5mm), so there doesn't seem to be any tangible benefit to using the thinner caliber.
It's one of those things that if the other Luminors didn't have that feature, I probably wouldn't care, but armed with that knowledge, it's a decent chunk of cash to spend and feel like you're missing out on something when you're not being given a good reason for the change.