PAM 392 - the good, the bad, the price advice

[Gotgolf52]

I am new to Panerai brand and would like to learn more about this specific model Pam 392, 42 mm watch. I am kinda clueless about this brand or this model except it look darn good in person. Can someone help me learn more about this model like when was it introduce, is there serial numbers base on year of production like Rolex, anything good or bad about this newer in house movement? Lastly, how much you think a mint condition pre-own watch worth in today market? Thanks in advance for your advices.

[eal15]

Movement came in around 2008. Same one in many other models like 312, 351, 359. It's a tank. Those are all 44mm, the 392 is the 42mm version. Recently a thinner 1392 was released. It's a great watch with little downside if any and no issues I know of. Just be sure of the 42mm size. Most choice 44mm's. YouTube the 312 or a ablogtowatch for 321. Same movement with a gmt and pr.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Gotgolf52]

Originally Posted by eal15

Movement came in around 2008. Same one in many other models like 312, 351, 359. It's a tank. Those are all 44mm, the 392 is the 42mm version. Recently a thinner 1392 was released. It's a great watch with little downside if any and no issues I know of. Just be sure of the 42mm size. Most choice 44mm's. YouTube the 312 or a ablogtowatch for 321. Same movement with a gmt and pr.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Great info, thank you for your insight. Now I might have to look at the 1392 because I have smaller wrist hence 42 is big enough for me.

[eyeheartny]

Originally Posted by Gotgolf52

Great info, thank you for your insight. Now I might have to look at the 1392 because I have smaller wrist hence 42 is big enough for me.

Make sure you try them all on. I thought I wanted a smaller one until I did some looking at the 44mm and 47mm.

[eal15]

Most male getting a 40 or 42 regret it getting a 44m. I like the 392 though but I have thousands "invested" in straps for a 44. Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Billythekid]

If going for panerai 44mm is the way to go

[Cru Jones]

The thing about the 392 is that while it is 2 mm narrower than a 312, it's just as thick, so, I'm not sure it is a better fit.

[Gotgolf52]

Next time i will try the 44 mm, my only concern is my wrist size about 6.2 inches and 44mm might look gigantic on me. Thanks for the advice.

[melrob1]

Originally Posted by Gotgolf52

Next time i will try the 44 mm, my only concern is my wrist size about 6.2 inches and 44mm might look gigantic on me. Thanks for the advice.

392 was perfect for me with 6.5 wrist. 44 pams are way to big on me. I ended up flipping the 392 to fund something else but I did love it. Im waiting to see the 1392 in person. Looks amazing!

[ap1]

392 still a large thick beast. I don't buy it when the 44/47 crew call them small. I tried the 1392 at NYC boutique. It is noticeably slimmer. I'll likely add one once they start showing up at ADs.

[lawwailok]

i had a 392 for a bit over a year, i love it since day 1, perfect size for a small wrist, i have a 6.5". but it is a top heavy watch, i had to make sure i wear it tight fit to my wrist to avoid it swings on my wrist. my last strap i paired it with was Assolutamente, no doubt it was an absolute beauty besides JV. too bad i part with it a month ago. no regret to own it, 392 is a very stunning piece, but also i love it too much, i couldn't wear it and treasure it too much to avoid any scratch on it.. ended up i sold it and get something else i can wear more often.

[pakal]

After a few months of wearing a 42 mm, you WILL regret not owing a 44 mm PAM!

[Gotgolf52]

My local Ben Bridge boutquie have both models on display, I love the 1392 except that blue second hand, I am old fashion and prefer the 392 uni-color hand better. However, the thinner case of 1392 seem to solve all the problem of top heavy in previous model. Time to decide which one will be the keeper, any suggestions from the Paneritic crowd?

[ap1]

1392 - refined case is the number one reason to add. I think the blue will grow on you

When you say Ben bridge boutique is that an AD or Pam only boutique. I had an AD tell me the boutiques would get them first for a little then septemberish for ADs.

[Ruud Van Driver]

I'm having a similar dilemma with the 312 and 1312. Whilst the 1312 is lighter, slimmer and has the new movement, I prefer the 312.

The blue second hand is quite polarising; you either like it or you don't. It put me off the 1312 and I'm also not fond of the 'Automatic' text on the dial.

As Cru says, for two references having the same movement the 42mm is equally as thick as the 44mm so comfort may be an issue. If you decide to lean towards the new movement and blue second hand, have a look at the 1312 before you pull the trigger. Same watch, just 44mm and you might find it a little more comfortable. Similarly, if you prefer the traditional, old-school Panerai then try the 312. Remember, Panerais are not jewellery or fashion watches. They're man's watches and they're supposed to be big, rugged, grrrrrr, in-yer-face and wear large.

Ultimately, it's your money and your watch. You have to love it and live with it; some have steered me towards the 47mm 372 but I can't wear it with 7.5" wrists. It looks wrong on me.

If you're worried how the 44mm will look on you, have someone take a pic of you wearing it from about 6 feet away and that will show you how it REALLY looks. Check out my pics at post #15 and you'll see what I mean:

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=486061

Finally, here's a thread I started on the 533; have a look at Nick's comments in post #23, which some of the best advice I've been given on Panerai:

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=478092

Good luck

[Babolat]

I have a 6.5 inch wrist and find the 392 too top heavy. Much prefer the 44mm's!!!

[ManUtd]

Not sure if this is a problem with you or not, in my case I needed a thinner case so it could slip it under my cuffs:



OTOH, if you go with the 1312, make sure you can live with the blue second hand. You don't want it to be the reason to get rid of the watch because you have developed a strong dislike of it after some time. I'm also kinda old fashioned in terms of my choices and something that's polarizing such as this blue second hand is something I would really think through. Good luck with your choice!

[TexasTudorFan]

I know this thread is several years old now, but it continues to appear in Google search for watch enthusiasts looking for owner perspectives on what it's like to wear the 392. For context, I'm a 40-year watch collector that has owned everything from 1930's Rolex rose gold hooded bubblebacks, 1655 Explorers, and 5512 Submariners, to dress watches from Patek and Breguet. It doesn't mean I know everything -- but rather, I've owned/worn a lot of various watch sizes and designs on my 6.75" - 7" wrist.

Back in 2008, I purchased a PAM 233 (1950 case, 8-days GMT) which to this day is my favorite Panerai of all time due to the dial design and domed crystal. I loved the watch, but I kept feeling the 44mm was slightly too big for me. Given there weren't a lot of 42mm options in the Luminor line at the time -- I traded the watch for a Vacheron dress watch. A full 15 years later, I got the itch for another Panerai and wanted the Luminor 1950 case and a clean/classic dial that would transcend trends and look great 10 years from now.

After trying on 42mm Radiomir's and a PAM 1392 Luminor (the now current replacement for the PAM 392), they seem to feel like a lightweight fashion watch. I also didn't want the shiny/polished case. When add the movement issues that Panerai has been plagued with (such as silently removing the hacking seconds feature on the P9010), I couldn't get excited about any of these 42mm watches. The 13mm case thickness on the PAM1392 simply feels too thin (especially for a Luminor) and undermines the solid feel that a Luminor should deliver. In my opinion, the PAM 1392 is a watch that tries to be a dive watch, but is proportioned to be a dress watch (in the latter situation, just buy a Radiomir).

As I spent time on this forum (and others), there are a lot of stories of guys saying that sold their PAM 392 because it "was too thick at 17mm" or "wore heavy", etc. Compared to a PAM 312, the 392 case is still 2mm narrower and 1mm thinner. After recently buying a 2015 (last year model) PAM 392 -- I am delighted with the watch and have no idea what the 392 detractors are talking about.

The watch has all the classic design elements that a proper Luminor should have:

> Crystal: slight dome curve (not as sexy as the PAM 233 -- but nicer than the flat dial on the PAM 1392).
> Dial: classic sandwich style without blue second hand
> Case: 1950 shape, 17mm thick (downsized from 18mm on PAM 312)
> Lug width: 22mm so it's not oversized and a trim proportioned buckle
> Case back: exposition style

This watch is also far lighter than I expected, so anyone saying it "wears heavy" needs to increase their gym workouts. This watch feels lighter than my Tudor Black Bay (41mm) and my Tudor Black Bay PO1 (42mm). For those claiming they can't fit a dress shirt cuff over the watch -- stop asking a bold dive watch to do the job of a dress watch (I wear a Breguet or Black Bay Pro with cuffs). Depending on your cuff size, I think you can get a cuff over this watch.

I was nearly convinced to settle for the PAM 1392 -- but am glad I stuck to my guns and grabbed a mint condition PAM 392 before people figure out how great this watch really is. If you are looking for a classic Luminor and are "on the edge" of being able to pull off the 44mm -- I cannot recommend the PAM 392 enough.