{*PCTeam*} KW PAM 661 Carbotech review

[capsparbass]

Im on the fence between this one and a Bell and Ross BR03. How does it feel. Does it feel cheap and light or does it have a good weight without the sort of plastic feel
? Thanks for the great review!

 

[ALE7575]

Few things too add after the magnificent Polonus review

Just to give my opinion about this rep, always following the info and the pics from Polonus

CARBOTECH MATERIAL
Maybe the rep Carbotech is not exactly the same as gen, but the appearance, touch and weight are accurate enough. Perhaps the rep material is a bit less smooth than gen in some zones
Rep Carbotech pattern is not at all exactly the same as gen, but there is not a fixed standard about this matter and all the watches are completely different. Besides the pattern and Zebra effect of PAM 661 is much less marked than in PAM 616. All that helps regarding accuracy and we can say that the rep is accurate enough.
Maker has made a very good job in this regard.
CASE, BEZEL & CASEBACK
Overall shape is accurate, bezel is accurate, lugs are a bit fatter than gen (few noticeable) and cushion shape looks as gen.
Due to the bigger thickness of the rep movement, the main difference, as showed by Polonus, is the total thickness that is 17,24mm instead of 15,65mm. Those 1,59mm are few noticeable without side by side comparison in the hand.
Maker has wisely distributed this difference between the mid-case and the caseback. Bezel seemingly is not affected and remains accurate in shape.
The complex shape of the mid-case dissimulates a lot the difference, being the caseback the most affected part by the thickness difference. Fortunately the caseback remains almost hidden wearing the watch in the wrist,.
Anyway, this smaller thickness is the “spirit” of these new Luminor 1950 watches and it is an important feature of them. We should see this difference as a flaw to be considered, despite it is not very noticeable in practice.
Rep Caseback is made of SS DLC coated instead of Titanium like gen. This is a flaw which affects the accuracy and the weight. I don’t understand why the maker has done that, because it has carefully worked with a lot of aspects of this nice rep and a Titanium caseback is not very expensive or difficult to be made.
Caseback engravings are not at all perfect regarding layout and fonts, but are nicely made, are accurate enough and at real size look good.
The rep has no production number on caseback. Another flaw to be considered
CROWN GUARD and CROWN
Very nice job of the maker regarding these parts. Crown, CG body, CG lever, CG pin, REG. T.M. engravings are accurate and very nicely made. The chamfered of the CG corners are awesome as showed in Polonus pics.
DIAL
Dial Layout looks really good with few noticeable differences in practice
Numeral markers are accurate in font and even in lume application with clean sausage shape and a little flat contour as the gen. Very good job from the maker
Dot markers are accurate regarding size and overall shape. Just the inner lume part is flat and matt in rep whereas gen has a bit semi-matt lume material and the shape is clearly convex. The golden contour is accurate and nice.
Dial inscriptions are very good and with accurate fonts, colour and application.
Seconds sub-dial is recessed like gen and with accurate markers shape and application. The little seconds hand is accurate in shape and colour.
Dial surface is black and with the same texture as gen
Date window is accurate in placement and size, but Date wheel fonts are clearly thicker than gen
HANDS and CANNON PINION
Hands, as always, are not as sharp and well defined as gen, but have accurate shape and length with accurate lume application. The center of the rep hands is not as flat as gen ones.
CP has accurate size and looks nice and polished, but it has more rounded contour and is less flush than gen. At real size looks good enough.
CRYSTAL
Rep has a good sapphire crystal with a bit wider bevelled than gen and double AR, as commented by Polonus, whereas gen has single AR coating. If you are careful with the external AR coating this AR layer could be welcome to get clearer the dial. Anyway this is inaccurate, but you always can remove the external AR layer.
LUME COLOURS
Lume colours are quite accurate. Maybe in gen numeral markers and dots are more uniform and have the same colour. In the rep numerals are a bit darker and more orange, but overall accuracy is good and the rep looks OK.
MOVEMENT
This rep is fitted with a new A7750 movement decorated like P.9010. We can call this movement KP9010.
Gen P.9010 has the balance wheel @11. This is an advantage for the reps, because they can use the A7750 movement appropriately decorated and the balance wheel position will remain accurate. P.9000 has the balance wheel @7 and this is always a nightmare for decorated movements a7750 based.
The main problem is the thickness, P.9010 is designed to fit the new series of Luminor 1950 which is based in making a thinner watch, more wearable and comfortable. In this way P.9010 is 6mm thick, it is clearly thinner than P.9000 which is 7,9mm thick and, obviously, than A7750.
Leaving aside the thickness, makers have made a good job, and the decorated movement KP9010 looks like a P.9010. There are many obvious differences and some evident false wheels but the rep decorated movement has good appearance and having the balance wheel @11 like gen in a first glance and without a close inspection could be taken as a gen. Even better than the usual rep decorated movements of P.9000.
See below the direct comparison.

You can see the balance wheels in the same position and the usual differences of finish and jewels colour. Obviously balance wheel and balance wheel zone are the less accurate area, being all the parts bigger in the rep movement. Indeed in gen P.9010 you can see complete and clearly the balance wheel, whereas that is impossible in rep decorated movement and even a part of the real balance cock of the A7750 movement (under the decoration) hides a part of the rep balance wheel.
Since this watch has solid caseback the movement accuracy is less important.
It is no necessary to say that rep movement has not some features of the gen and that power reserve of rep decorated movement is the PR of a conventional A7750 far from the 3 days of the gen P.9010.

EVALUATION
This rep is a very good attempt from the maker. KW-V6Fac has made a nice job with this watch. Obviously it is really difficult to get some features of the gen watch and those are the main flaws of this watch.
In the pros we have an excellent manufacture, credible Carbotech quality, accuracy of the dial (aside date wheel and dots lume)
In the cons we have thickness, date wheel fonts, dots lume surface, some differences of CP and center of the hands, caseback made of SS, lack of production number on caseback. And, of course the lack of features of the rep movement in relation with the gen.
As above commented, this new series of Luminor 1950 watches was created to get a thinner case more wearable and comfortable. If the watch is not thinner we will be betraying the main “spirit” of these new models.
For this reason, although the thicker caseset of the rep could be few noticeable under some situations, we have to consider the thickness a flaw to be considered and that we cannot forget in the evaluation.
This rep has a Super rep quality of manufacture and the closed caseback helps in the evaluation, but the flaws above commented together with the thickness don’t allow more than First Class rep low level


Waiting for your comments regarding evaluation to include the final decision in PAM GUIDE

ALE

 

[lmmo]

I agree with [MENTION=35350]ALE7575[/MENTION] evaluation. It needs at least a titanium caseback and proper serial engravings to be upgraded, but will never be a Super Rep due thickness.

 

[evilpenguin]

Could it be that the watch would feel too light weight (too cheap feeling) if it had a titanium caseback?

 

[chris3007]

Thanks ALE.


Sent from my iPhone 6

 

[SuperLory]

Could it be that the watch would feel too light weight (too cheap feeling) if it had a titanium caseback?

I veer slightly from the discussion and link to this sentence: I think it's time to move on from the light=cheap theory. If it's supposed to be steel and it weighs like tin then we all know it's cheap, but titanium or carbotech or forged carbon are f light and thank chemistry for that ! I love my full Ti blue pelagos, my pam564 and my bumblebee because they are bloody light

Rant over, and evilpenguin i wasnt really direct this to you, more of a loud rant . Cheers

 

[mysterio]

I veer slightly from the discussion and link to this sentence: I think it's time to move on from the light=cheap theory. If it's supposed to be steel and it weighs like tin then we all know it's cheap, but titanium or carbotech or forged carbon are f light and thank chemistry for that ! I love my full Ti blue pelagos, my pam564 and my bumblebee because they are bloody light

Rant over, and evilpenguin i wasnt really direct this to you, more of a loud rant . Cheers

Besides, a PAM569 (Titanium) is lighter than a PAM508 (Ceramic) yet feels more substantial. So there goes the titanium caseback potentially feeling cheap theory. If it's what's on the gen, that's what should be on the rep. If the gen feels plasticky/cheap/toy-looking, then by all means should our reps follow suit.

 

[ALE7575]

About weight and price

What about this watch?
140.000 € 48 g. ( yes ! … forty-eight grams )

The Panerai Lo Scienziato Luminor 1950 Tourbillon GMT Titanio

I had this watch in my hands some weeks ago
You cannot believe the sensation and feeling

ALE

 

[nalomb]

I had this watch in my hands some weeks ago
You cannot believe the sensation and feeling

ALE

One of the few times I've ever experienced jealousy haha. Being the technical guru extraordinaire, what were your thoughts and feelings on this piece? I know the Lo Scienziato line is controversial, but it seems to be a true testament to art and craftsmanship ...

 

[evilpenguin]

I veer slightly from the discussion and link to this sentence: I think it's time to move on from the light=cheap theory. If it's supposed to be steel and it weighs like tin then we all know it's cheap, but titanium or carbotech or forged carbon are f light and thank chemistry for that ! I love my full Ti blue pelagos, my pam564 and my bumblebee because they are bloody light

Rant over, and evilpenguin i wasnt really direct this to you, more of a loud rant . Cheers

Oh don't get me wrong, I love my light weight watches! I too have a pelagos as well as a TiPO, so I'm very aware that quality vs heavy isn't 1:1. As Ale put it, it would have been easy for them to just use a titanium caseback, so I was just spit balling ideas here.

 

[mysterio]

About weight and price

What about this watch?
140.000 € 48 g. ( yes ! … forty-eight grams )

The Panerai Lo Scienziato Luminor 1950 Tourbillon GMT Titanio

I had this watch in my hands some weeks ago
You cannot believe the sensation and feeling

ALE

The case and movement almost divide the weight equally, with the P.2005/T movement being 23 grams which is 30% lighter than the P.2005/S, due to the Direct Laser Sintering method. I wonder when the factories can copy this technique (essentially the parts are 3D printed in .02mm sheets then glued together).

 

[SuperLory]

First 140k I can spend on a watch I go straight away in search of a scienziato

sent, me thinks

 

[nine]

Few things too add after the magnificent Polonus review

Just to give my opinion about this rep, always following the info and the pics from Polonus

CARBOTECH MATERIAL
Maybe the rep Carbotech is not exactly the same as gen, but the appearance, touch and weight are accurate enough. Perhaps the rep material is a bit less smooth than gen in some zones
Rep Carbotech pattern is not at all exactly the same as gen, but there is not a fixed standard about this matter and all the watches are completely different. Besides the pattern and Zebra effect of PAM 661 is much less marked than in PAM 616. All that helps regarding accuracy and we can say that the rep is accurate enough.
Maker has made a very good job in this regard.
CASE, BEZEL & CASEBACK
Overall shape is accurate, bezel is accurate, lugs are a bit fatter than gen (few noticeable) and cushion shape looks as gen.
Due to the bigger thickness of the rep movement, the main difference, as showed by Polonus, is the total thickness that is 17,24mm instead of 15,65mm. Those 1,59mm are few noticeable without side by side comparison in the hand.
Maker has wisely distributed this difference between the mid-case and the caseback. Bezel seemingly is not affected and remains accurate in shape.
The complex shape of the mid-case dissimulates a lot the difference, being the caseback the most affected part by the thickness difference. Fortunately the caseback remains almost hidden wearing the watch in the wrist,.
Anyway, this smaller thickness is the “spirit†of these new Luminor 1950 watches and it is an important feature of them. We should see this difference as a flaw to be considered, despite it is not very noticeable in practice.
Rep Caseback is made of SS DLC coated instead of Titanium like gen. This is a flaw which affects the accuracy and the weight. I don’t understand why the maker has done that, because it has carefully worked with a lot of aspects of this nice rep and a Titanium caseback is not very expensive or difficult to be made.
Caseback engravings are not at all perfect regarding layout and fonts, but are nicely made, are accurate enough and at real size look good.
The rep has no production number on caseback. Another flaw to be considered
CROWN GUARD and CROWN
Very nice job of the maker regarding these parts. Crown, CG body, CG lever, CG pin, REG. T.M. engravings are accurate and very nicely made. The chamfered of the CG corners are awesome as showed in Polonus pics.
DIAL
Dial Layout looks really good with few noticeable differences in practice
Numeral markers are accurate in font and even in lume application with clean sausage shape and a little flat contour as the gen. Very good job from the maker
Dot markers are accurate regarding size and overall shape. Just the inner lume part is flat and matt in rep whereas gen has a bit semi-matt lume material and the shape is clearly convex. The golden contour is accurate and nice.
Dial inscriptions are very good and with accurate fonts, colour and application.
Seconds sub-dial is recessed like gen and with accurate markers shape and application. The little seconds hand is accurate in shape and colour.
Dial surface is black and with the same texture as gen
Date window is accurate in placement and size, but Date wheel fonts are clearly thicker than gen
HANDS and CANNON PINION
Hands, as always, are not as sharp and well defined as gen, but have accurate shape and length with accurate lume application. The center of the rep hands is not as flat as gen ones.
CP has accurate size and looks nice and polished, but it has more rounded contour and is less flush than gen. At real size looks good enough.
CRYSTAL
Rep has a good sapphire crystal with a bit wider bevelled than gen and double AR, as commented by Polonus, whereas gen has single AR coating. If you are careful with the external AR coating this AR layer could be welcome to get clearer the dial. Anyway this is inaccurate, but you always can remove the external AR layer.
LUME COLOURS
Lume colours are quite accurate. Maybe in gen numeral markers and dots are more uniform and have the same colour. In the rep numerals are a bit darker and more orange, but overall accuracy is good and the rep looks OK.
MOVEMENT
This rep is fitted with a new A7750 movement decorated like P.9010. We can call this movement KP9010.
Gen P.9010 has the balance wheel @11. This is an advantage for the reps, because they can use the A7750 movement appropriately decorated and the balance wheel position will remain accurate. P.9000 has the balance wheel @7 and this is always a nightmare for decorated movements a7750 based.
The main problem is the thickness, P.9010 is designed to fit the new series of Luminor 1950 which is based in making a thinner watch, more wearable and comfortable. In this way P.9010 is 6mm thick, it is clearly thinner than P.9000 which is 7,9mm thick and, obviously, than A7750.
Leaving aside the thickness, makers have made a good job, and the decorated movement KP9010 looks like a P.9010. There are many obvious differences and some evident false wheels but the rep decorated movement has good appearance and having the balance wheel @11 like gen in a first glance and without a close inspection could be taken as a gen. Even better than the usual rep decorated movements of P.9000.
See below the direct comparison.

You can see the balance wheels in the same position and the usual differences of finish and jewels colour. Obviously balance wheel and balance wheel zone are the less accurate area, being all the parts bigger in the rep movement. Indeed in gen P.9010 you can see complete and clearly the balance wheel, whereas that is impossible in rep decorated movement and even a part of the real balance cock of the A7750 movement (under the decoration) hides a part of the rep balance wheel.
Since this watch has solid caseback the movement accuracy is less important.
It is no necessary to say that rep movement has not some features of the gen and that power reserve of rep decorated movement is the PR of a conventional A7750 far from the 3 days of the gen P.9010.

EVALUATION
This rep is a very good attempt from the maker. KW-V6Fac has made a nice job with this watch. Obviously it is really difficult to get some features of the gen watch and those are the main flaws of this watch.
In the pros we have an excellent manufacture, credible Carbotech quality, accuracy of the dial (aside date wheel and dots lume)
In the cons we have thickness, date wheel fonts, dots lume surface, some differences of CP and center of the hands, caseback made of SS, lack of production number on caseback. And, of course the lack of features of the rep movement in relation with the gen.
As above commented, this new series of Luminor 1950 watches was created to get a thinner case more wearable and comfortable. If the watch is not thinner we will be betraying the main “spirit†of these new models.
For this reason, although the thicker caseset of the rep could be few noticeable under some situations, we have to consider the thickness a flaw to be considered and that we cannot forget in the evaluation.
This rep has a Super rep quality of manufacture and the closed caseback helps in the evaluation, but the flaws above commented together with the thickness don’t allow more than First Class rep low level


Waiting for your comments regarding evaluation to include the final decision in PAM GUIDE

ALE

But my 661 case back is Titan, not steel ? check V6F , All caseback is Titan.

 

[nine]

I check again, caseback make sure is titanium.

 

[lmmo]

I check again, caseback make sure is titanium.

You probably need to weight it, so that people can compare the weight agains steel and titanium casebacks.

The fact that it is engraved "titanium caseback" means nothing.

 

[mysterio]

You probably need to weight it, so that people can compare the weight agains steel and titanium casebacks.

The fact that it is engraved "titanium caseback" means nothing.

Try a strong magnet. Titanium is not affected by magnetism. Remove the caseback before doing this as the magnet may interact with the steel internals and you think the caseback is magnetized and therefore made of steel.

 

[Raddave]

Try a strong magnet. Titanium is not affected by magnetism. Remove the caseback before doing this as the magnet may interact with the steel internals and you think the caseback is magnetized and therefore made of steel.

Stainless steel is not affected by magnetism either ........


But bringing a magnet next to a watch is bad news.....it can damage the movement

 

[lmmo]

Try a strong magnet. Titanium is not affected by magnetism. Remove the caseback before doing this as the magnet may interact with the steel internals and you think the caseback is magnetized and therefore made of steel.

Not the best idea [MENTION=12819]mysterio[/MENTION], as rightly pointed by [MENTION=42327]Raddave[/MENTION].
Although to be fair you can always remove the caseback before using a magnet, which anyway is something you also need to do when weighing.

 

[Raddave]

there is another test for titanium, but it is a destructive test.....

touch it with a aluminum oxide grinding wheel ...titanium will give off a purple spark, alumininum, no spark and steel an orange spark

 

[mysterio]

Not the best idea @mysterio, as rightly pointed by @Raddave.
Although to be fair you can always remove the caseback before using a magnet, which anyway is something you also need to do when weighing.

I did say remove the caseback first, didn't I?