Hey mysterio. Indeed you are right. Sorry my statement was confusing. The ZF got pretty damn close with the a7750. Honestly i dont know how they did it - hats off to them. I think they hit the limit with how thin they could get a decorated a7750 which is why its 15.8 not 15.65. As you said though its really noticeable and im really impressed with their results on this watch.But the PAM with P9010 I got is thinner than 17.9mm, and I am sure it has a decorated A7750.
Bah what was i on that day. Just reread my post - it makes no sense. What i meant to say is the 9001 was 7.9mm thick (not 17.9mm). The 9010 is 6mm. The a7750 in standard form is 7.9mm. I imagine that ultimately this will make true 1:1's hard and a 42mm (1:1) impossible. The 42mm version slims down to 13.2mm with the same movement. If you add on the 1.9mm of an a7750 you are likely looking at best a 15.1mm watch (mine is 15.6). It wears significantly different than gen.But the PAM with P9010 I got is thinner than 17.9mm, and I am sure it has a decorated A7750.
Bah what was i on that day. Just reread my post - it makes no sense. What i meant to say is the 9001 was 7.9mm thick (not 17.9mm). The 9010 is 6mm. The a7750 in standard form is 7.9mm. I imagine that ultimately this will make true 1:1's hard and a 42mm (1:1) impossible. The 42mm version slims down to 13.2mm with the same movement. If you add on the 1.9mm of an a7750 you are likely looking at best a 15.1mm watch (mine is 15.6). It wears significantly different than gen.
If panerai made the call to thin the 44mm down again (which they could technically do to 13.2mm as proven with the 42mm) i think that would kill reps for a while until something could be worked out for the movement.
https://monochrome-watches.com/intr...-new-luminor-1950-carbotech-3-days-automatic/
I was lucky enough to get to view a 9010 movement in the flesh and its amazingly thin. Makes you really appreciate the craftsman ship that went into it.
Sent from the RWI mobile app
Are there any differences of digits and inscriptions colors on the dial (REP vs GEN)? It seems to me that the color is a little bit more brownish on the official site's photos.
is this or 312 more accurate?
I'm not sure how there is any doubt on this one. The 1312 is by a long shot if you consider movement as well. Even if the ecru is a slight bit lighter on the rep it still beats the misplaced ecru on the 312 rep dial.is this or 312 more accurate?
I got a question, how come the movement is @11 in the rep and gen......:sad: in original thread owner.
I thought the gen's movement should be @7
Where @7? It's @11 (frontface) or @1 (backface) if you visualize.