ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
10 August 2018, 04:04 AM | #31 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: USA
Watch: AP||Panerai||Rolex
Posts: 759
|
47mm, looks good on you. You can totally wear it!
|
11 August 2018, 03:27 AM | #32 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: usa
Posts: 31
|
I think the 42mm is too small the 47mm is way better.
|
11 August 2018, 03:38 AM | #33 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: USA
Watch: All
Posts: 4,936
|
47 looks great.
|
11 August 2018, 05:47 AM | #34 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Los Angeles
Watch: Sub
Posts: 862
|
42mm looks a lot better
|
11 August 2018, 10:17 AM | #35 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Usa
Posts: 72
|
Choose the one you are comfortable with, that is all that matters.
|
13 August 2018, 05:10 AM | #36 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Sal
Location: Las Vegas
Watch: Patek/Rolex/GS
Posts: 1,096
|
100% go with the 1389.
With a 7.25" inch wrist, you can definitely wear a 47mm PAM and not look ridiculous. I wear a 44mm 1312, which is pushing it for my 6.5" rounded wrist, so for me the 682 is a good get, although I didn't love the feel of it when I tried it on, which surprised me. If I had > 7" wrists, it would open up a ton more options at 47mm. If you like the 1389, pull the trigger |
13 August 2018, 08:46 AM | #37 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Usa
Posts: 99
|
Both watches look good on you but i think the 682 looks really nice if not better. i would go with the 682, it doesn't look small.
|
13 August 2018, 09:23 AM | #38 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Florida
Watch: SSDayt, 5711, 5170
Posts: 195
|
47 looks better on you than the 42
|
13 August 2018, 02:59 PM | #39 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Usa
Posts: 72
|
I is either the 47mm or nothing
|
14 August 2018, 08:54 AM | #40 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Virginia
Posts: 353
|
47
|
21 August 2018, 09:21 AM | #41 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,906
|
yeah, i am starting to lean towards the 47mm pam1389
its really starting to grow on me. went to try it on again.
__________________
|
21 August 2018, 09:45 AM | #42 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Houston
Posts: 294
|
Quote:
Badass on your wrist
__________________
I don’t tell my wife the price of my watches, so she doesn’t allocate similar funds for a purse. But I hope when I die she doesn’t sell my watches for what she thinks I paid. |
|
21 August 2018, 03:33 PM | #43 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: SNA
Posts: 3,612
|
|
21 August 2018, 04:12 PM | #44 |
TechXpert
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Earth
Posts: 23,444
|
47mm looks good! Go for it
I love the 42mm myself, but just can't get over the price |
21 August 2018, 05:17 PM | #45 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: aroundtheworld
Watch: SS Daytona - BLACK
Posts: 2,237
|
you should go for the 1389. i love the little blue hand and the slimmer case compared to the 389 i have, plus its one of the only few models to feature a ceramic bezel.
__________________
116520 Black - 116500 White - 116713LN - 116613LB - Panerai 389 - Chopard Mille Miglia GMT Chronograph - Chopard LUC Sport 2000 - Moser Pioneer Centre Seconds |
21 August 2018, 11:36 PM | #46 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: New York
Posts: 273
|
The PAM 1389 looks great on your wrist...pull the trigger
|
22 August 2018, 01:06 AM | #47 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: USA
Watch: BLNR/116500LN/APRO
Posts: 161
|
Was the 682 you tried on solid or exhibition caseback? I’m trying to locate an exhibition caseback.
__________________
Current Collection, in order of wrist time Rolex326934/IWC500705/Rolex116710BLNR/Rolex116500LN/AP15400ST Wife: Rolex178274/BreitlingB13050 (My Father's) |
22 August 2018, 04:20 AM | #48 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,906
|
Quote:
Might not be ez to locate a new one with clear caseback.. but good luck
__________________
|
|
22 August 2018, 06:32 AM | #49 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: SNA
Posts: 3,612
|
The 682 I bought a couple of weeks ago has an exhibition back (T series). I contacted all the boutiques and ADs in the US, and there were 5 ADs with T series exhibition backs at that time. The boutiques haven’t had one in a while.
|
22 August 2018, 06:56 PM | #50 |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: USA
Posts: 99
|
The 47mm is damn good, go for it
|
23 August 2018, 02:08 AM | #51 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Sal
Location: Las Vegas
Watch: Patek/Rolex/GS
Posts: 1,096
|
|
23 August 2018, 02:50 AM | #52 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: USA
Watch: BLNR/116500LN/APRO
Posts: 161
|
Do you mind my asking what it set you back? I can get a new one from my AD for 7,300 but it’s not the T series.
__________________
Current Collection, in order of wrist time Rolex326934/IWC500705/Rolex116710BLNR/Rolex116500LN/AP15400ST Wife: Rolex178274/BreitlingB13050 (My Father's) |
23 August 2018, 02:52 AM | #53 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: USA
Watch: BLNR/116500LN/APRO
Posts: 161
|
Anyone know if the T series is taller (by any significance) than the new solid caseback?
__________________
Current Collection, in order of wrist time Rolex326934/IWC500705/Rolex116710BLNR/Rolex116500LN/AP15400ST Wife: Rolex178274/BreitlingB13050 (My Father's) |
26 August 2018, 11:13 PM | #54 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Real Name: Aldo
Location: Australia
Posts: 50
|
47mm Submersible
Quote:
I would urge you 100% to buy the 1389 (or any other 47mm Sub). 615 is amazing, way over the top with a price tag to match. I love the black ceramic bezel too... The photo you took looks like it fits your "person" perfectly, look at a full body reflection - Good luck & happy hunting! |
|
7 September 2018, 11:56 AM | #55 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2017
Real Name: Chris Nichols
Location: Williston, VT
Watch: It's a battle
Posts: 4
|
Based on your photos, the 47mm looks nice on the wrist - but I'm also a huge fan of larger watches. In the end get the one that speaks to you more.
|
7 September 2018, 12:34 PM | #56 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 26,846
|
|
8 September 2018, 03:24 AM | #57 |
TechXpert
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Earth
Posts: 23,444
|
Thanks buddy!
I don't think I can justify the price for this one though... |
8 September 2018, 05:56 PM | #58 |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: USA
Posts: 99
|
The 47mm is better because personally i think the 42mm is way too small for you, but if there was 44mm it would have been a perfect choice for you
|
8 September 2018, 08:37 PM | #59 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2016
Location: roatan
Posts: 28
|
The 1389 looks perfectly fine on your wrist. Have you considered the BMG-TECH 692? It does have a slimmer profile than the 1389 due to the fact that it does not need the amagnetic protection. If not available compare the 1389 case with the 1305 case that has the same height of the 692.
|
12 September 2018, 12:45 PM | #60 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dallas
Posts: 1,303
|
They both look huge on you. Get the 42.
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.