The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Old 21 September 2017, 08:00 AM   #1
scarabei
"TRF" Member
 
scarabei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Real Name: Andrey
Location: Washington, DC
Watch: 116610
Posts: 146
Lug to Lug Width for new PAM 1392 vs 1312

I am trying to find information on the lug-to-lug distance for both PAM 1392 and PAM 1312. Can't figure out which size I want and I wasn't able to stop by an AD.

Here are the specs I have so far:
Panerai 1392
Diameter = 42.0 mm
Case thickness = 13.2 mm
Lug width = 22.0 mm
Lug to Lug - ?

Panerai 1312
Diameter = 44.0 mm
Case thickness = 15.6 mm
Lug width = 24mm
Lug to Lug - ?

Anyone have the missing info? Many thanks in advance!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
scarabei is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 September 2017, 11:01 AM   #2
sanosan34
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Arizona
Posts: 108
1312 lug to lug is 53.5 mm

I'd be curious about weight as well, but I don't have a small scale on hand.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 2017-09-20 17.27.04.jpg (172.9 KB, 390 views)
sanosan34 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 September 2017, 09:34 PM   #3
scarabei
"TRF" Member
 
scarabei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Real Name: Andrey
Location: Washington, DC
Watch: 116610
Posts: 146
That's pretty compact. The overall watch is essentially the same width as my 42mm Explorer II, if you count the bracelet overhang.


Now if someone could produce a similar pic for PAM 1392 :-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
scarabei is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 September 2017, 01:31 AM   #4
scarabei
"TRF" Member
 
scarabei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Real Name: Andrey
Location: Washington, DC
Watch: 116610
Posts: 146
So to summarize:

Panerai 1392
Diameter = 42.0 mm
Case thickness = 13.2 mm
Lug width = 22 mm
Lug to Lug = 48 mm


Panerai 1312
Diameter = 44.0 mm
Case thickness = 15.6 mm
Lug width = 24 mm
Lug to Lug = 53.5 mm

Thank you everyone! Hope this helps those trying to decide between the two.
scarabei is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 September 2017, 02:46 AM   #5
Cru Jones
2024 Pledge Member
 
Cru Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 34,376
The measurement for the thickness of the 1312 seems off. That seems more like the 312's measurement. I was under the impression that the 1392 and 1312 were the same thickness, just like the 312 and 392.
Cru Jones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 September 2017, 06:04 AM   #6
S2000_driver
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: So Cal
Posts: 268
Lug to Lug Width for new PAM 1392 vs 1312

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cru Jones View Post
The measurement for the thickness of the 1312 seems off. That seems more like the 312's measurement. I was under the impression that the 1392 and 1312 were the same thickness, just like the 312 and 392.


I think the OP got the thickness right. The 312 is close to 18mm thick. The 1312 is supposed to be around 2.5mm thinner. I’ve seen them side by side. Quite the difference.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
S2000_driver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 September 2017, 06:21 AM   #7
ap1
2024 Pledge Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: usa
Posts: 18,976
Too thin for 1392, cru is right
ap1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Takuya Watches

Bobs Watches

Asset Appeal

My Watch LLC

OCWatches

DavidSW Watches

Coronet


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.