# PAM 111 vs. 112?...



## bwhitmore

hey guys

just wondered the main differences between these two?

other than the seconds hand, and the "Luminor Marina" of the 111...vs...just "Luminor" on the 112 are there any other differences internally?

and they both have the display back (is it exactly the same?) 

thanks for helping a newbie...:think:

brad


----------



## craniotes

The movement is the same, though obviously the 112 ditches the small second hand. And yes, they both have a display back.

That's pretty much it.

Regards,
Adam


----------



## MikeW

One more thing, unless this has changed in the last couple years, COSC does not certify the models without a second hand. The watches are just as accurate, just cannot be certified. 

Somebody please correct me if I am wrong on this :think:.

Best, Mike


----------



## craniotes

MikeW said:


> One more thing, unless this has changed in the last couple years, COSC does not certify the models without a second hand. The watches are just as accurate, just cannot be certified.
> 
> Somebody please correct me if I am wrong on this :think:.
> 
> Best, Mike


Nope, you're correct. This simple fact accounts for most of the price differential between the two models, since a COSC certificate costs about $400-$500.

Regards,
Adam


----------



## handwound

One more difference, though -- base dials are much, MUCH cooler.

:-db-)


----------



## craniotes

peepshow said:


> One more difference, though -- base dials are much, MUCH cooler.
> 
> :-db-)


No argument here...










Regards,
Adam


----------



## MikeW

One more small difference, although not with the watch itself. The base model is produced in lower numbers. Can't go wrong either way!

Best, Mike


----------



## link2derek

Hey Brad,

Everything said above is right on. I purchased the 111 about a year ago. And I love it, but if I had it to do over again, I would go with the 112. At the time, I thought that I would "use" the seconds hand (to measure seconds, of course). I was wrong. Now if I really need to measure some event, I wear one of my watches with a rotatable bezel or a chronograph function. My advice is go with the 112.

Hope that helps,

*D*


----------



## benjomd

IMHO, if you get one pam the 111 is the model to represent a pam but personally, I do prefer base models, theres really something in the balanced simple dial that I like, Anyway, you cant go wrong with any pam.LOL


----------



## bwhitmore

hey guys

thanks for all the input!

i am leaning towards the 112 now for basically all the reasons mentioned....i just love the simplicity of the dial

and that Panerai "9" is just so darn cool...hate to see it go...:-d

on the hunt for a 112 now!

brad


----------



## Watch_guy

Personally I like the second hand. Both are great , but the addition of the seconds dial just makes it seem lke more of a functional tool watch in my opinion. Either way, very classic look.


----------



## VazLube

I chose my PAM, the seconds dial version over base dial for same reason Watch_guy has mentioned. 

the seconds dial is the limit I go for on dail. anything more it becomes busy (chronographs for example) and detracts the classic look.


----------



## Marcin

I had the same "problem" some time ago.
The 111 is great but PAM 112 sits know on my wrist.
When I look at the 112 I see the simplicity and perfect proportions pushed to the limits.
In my opinion only historic dial (Base) gives me the feeling of absolute timeless design.

Hello to everyone on Panerai forum.
Marcin (newbie from Poland)


----------



## bwhitmore

well, guys

i ordered the PAM 112

should be here any day...thanks for all the great advice!

brad


----------



## handwound

Congrats, Brad! Welcome to the base club! You and EROKS are the newest members.

Make sure to post lots of pics when you get it!

Now the strap addiction starts. I think I had bought 3 straps for my 210 before the postman ever delivered it. LOL


----------



## MikeW

Brad - Fine choice and looking forward to the pics :-!.

Marcin - Welcome to the forums, look forward to hearing (reading) more from you.

Best to all, Mike


----------



## WatchFan56

i like the 111 cuz of the extra second subdial.....but the 112 is nice too


----------



## RunninOnEmpty

Not long ago I was in your shoes. Wasn't sure if I wanted the 000, 005, 111 or 112. Well, the 112 is what called out to me most & I love it!
Congrats on your's. :-!


----------



## magnetmandan

Congratulations on your 112 purchase. I once had a 112 and now am kicking myself for letting it go. Perfect symmetry is what I miss the most. Make sure you post some photos when it arrives.
:-Dan


----------



## bwhitmore

hey guys

thanks for all the help

i want to order some straps for my new 112

what size should i order?

i think the 112 is 24mm at the lugs...i'm leaning towards a "24/24" strap, that is the same size at the lugs and buckle, right?

my wrist is 7"...here is something i read here...

http://www.micahstraps.com/zhomehtml/faq.html

What size should you get? Here's what I suggest:

6.0" - 6.5" = 120/75
6.6" - 7.0" = 125/75
7.1" - 7.5" = 130/80
7.6" - 8.0" = 135/80
8.0" - 8.5" = 140/85

i think that if i went with a 125/75 or 130/80 i would be OK...i do like the watch to fit tight on the wrist

these straps are thick at 4mm

also, what size strap does the 112 come with?

thanks for the help!

brad


----------



## VazLube

I think Panerai straps comes in standard 115/75 strap size on them.


----------



## benjomd

bwhitmore said:


> hey guys
> 
> thanks for all the help
> 
> i want to order some straps for my new 112
> 
> what size should i order?
> 
> i think the 112 is 24mm at the lugs...i'm leaning towards a "24/24" strap, that is the same size at the lugs and buckle, right?
> 
> my wrist is 7"...here is something i read here...
> 
> http://www.micahstraps.com/zhomehtml/faq.html
> 
> What size should you get? Here's what I suggest:
> 
> 6.0" - 6.5" = 120/75
> 6.6" - 7.0" = 125/75
> 7.1" - 7.5" = 130/80
> 7.6" - 8.0" = 135/80
> 8.0" - 8.5" = 140/85
> 
> i think that if i went with a 125/75 or 130/80 i would be OK...i do like the watch to fit tight on the wrist
> 
> these straps are thick at 4mm
> 
> also, what size strap does the 112 come with?
> 
> thanks for the help!
> 
> brad


I suggest you learn about thickness first and the amount of tail you prefer before you order a strap. I have a wrist size somewhere between 7-7.25. I usually get a 125/75 if the strap thickness is less than 4.5 (usually has around 0.5-1cm of tail) if it is 5mm up, i go longger to get the same amount of tail. cheers!


----------



## watchboy

Well I know my reply is late but....I personally prefer the 111 to the 112. Why? Cos of the extra second hand. I like to time watches for their accuracy. So a second hand is a MUST for me. Besides, if there is no second hand, it look like a "quartz" to me. Like the MOVADO Museum automatic version, it looks just like its quartz version as there is no second hand.

Of course we are talking about hand winding here in 111 and 112. But that's said, the 112 is a still a very nice watch!

Now for the strap, the original strap is 24mm at the lug and 22mm at the buckle. It you intend to use the OEM buckle, then try to get a 24/22mm strap. As for a 7" wrist, I think a 125/75 will be perfect. For the 112, try to stay around 4-5mm thickness, cos 6mm and above might be too "bulky" in look for the classic base 112. 

JMO.


----------



## dkang

I really like the simplicity of the 112, but I LOVE the seconds hand on the 111. This is a debate where no one is wrong.


----------



## watchboy

dkang said:


> I really like the simplicity of the 112, but I LOVE the seconds hand on the 111. This is a debate where no one is wrong.


True.

But I am anal when I have an automatic watch and does not know its accuracy against the atomic clock. And the PAM112 has no second hands. :-(


----------



## bwhitmore

watchboy said:


> True.
> 
> But I am anal when I have an automatic watch and does not know its accuracy against the atomic clock. And the PAM112 has no second hands. :-(


yeah, but what about the "9"?

i gotta have that "9"!!!.....:-d


----------



## craniotes

watchboy said:


> True.
> 
> But I am anal when I have an automatic watch and does not know its accuracy against the atomic clock. And the PAM112 has no second hands. :-(


That's one of the reasons why I prefer the 112. Like you, I can get silly with my other watches regarding accuracy, whereas when I have the 112 on, I calm down a bit. It's also a perfect vacation watch -- nice and relaxed. Fits in on the beach wearing rubber, and looks great at dinner on a 'gator.

And then there's the power of the "9"...









[Stolen shamelessly off the web from Chinanico over at TZ...]

Regards,
Adam

PS - Also, the second hand on the 111 doesn't hack, which makes it a bear to sync up with another time source.


----------



## bwhitmore

that's a great pic!

the other thing i like about the 112 is that i don't have to set a day or date

it seems like all my other watches have those features (and they're great!) but it's kinda nice to just set the time and go...i know that's a nitpick but it's true for me...:-d

brad


----------



## Connoisseur

I received my 111 last week, purchased 2nd hand from a fellow Paneristi member. I do like the 112 too but the 111 just sang to me louder. And I just received my Sirona vintage brown strap today at work and could not get home fast enough to try it on! Awesome combo!


----------



## craniotes

Connoisseur said:


> I received my 111 last week, purchased 2nd hand from a fellow Paneristi member. I do like the 112 too but the 111 just sang to me louder. And I just received my Sirona vintage brown strap today at work and could not get home fast enough to try it on! Awesome combo!


Congrats on your Marina! As has been said ad nauseam, there's no wrong choice here -- welcome to the club.

Regards,
Adam


----------



## Bf109e

Currently I own a 111 ;-),BUT I'm also thinking of getting a 000.Be it either a base or a marina,as long as it's a Pam,it's a sure winner :-!


----------



## carman63

If all goes well, my AD will call me today to tell me he found a 112 for me. Otherwise, he has a 176 in stock that might be mine  I like the simple yet elegant 2-hand design. 

-Jim


----------



## gianton

Owned a 111 but love my 112 more. Simple is great!


----------



## Jimmie M

*111 E won the Battle for me*

Yeah, it sucks!





































NOT!!!!:-d


----------



## elazarus

*A Base represents the Original Historic Panerai <more>*










Just for reference, here is my 1A


----------



## jacksonian

I like the 176 with the titanium case better than the 112, looks a little more rugged/historic to me.


----------



## craniotes

jacksonian said:


> I like the 176 with the titanium case better than the 112, looks a little more rugged/historic to me.


More rugged looking? Sure, why not. More historic looking? Not really, seeing as all the vintage models were polished steel, just like the 112.

Regards,
Adam


----------



## jacksonian

craniotes said:


> More rugged looking? Sure, why not. More historic looking? Not really, seeing as all the vintage models were polished steel, just like the 112.
> 
> Regards,
> Adam



Ok, well, maybe what I was trying to say was "more antique" looking? I guess a shiny new steel watch doesn't make me think of historical. But obviously you're correct that the old models weren't made of titanium.


----------



## craniotes

jacksonian said:


> Ok, well, maybe what I was trying to say was "more antique" looking? I guess a shiny new steel watch doesn't make me think of historical. But obviously you're correct that the old models weren't made of titanium.


To be perfectly honest here, I'm far more of a fan of brushed steel than polished (I never really warmed up to titanium on watches -- the metal is too light for my tastes). Ideally, a Luminor with a brushed steel case and polished bezel would be my favorite combination (like the 220/299/233...), but you can't get the base caliber movement with that case style at present. I think the 127/217 LEs came like that, but there's no way in hell that I'll ever be able to afford one of them. :-(

Regards,
Adam


----------



## Jake E

craniotes said:


> To be perfectly honest here, I'm far more of a fan of brushed steel than polished (I never really warmed up to titanium on watches -- the metal is too light for my tastes). Ideally, a Luminor with a brushed steel case and polished bezel would be my favorite combination (like the 220/299/233...), but you can't get the base caliber movement with that case style at present. I think the 127/217 LEs came like that, but there's no way in hell that I'll ever be able to afford one of them. :-(
> 
> Regards,
> Adam


I'm in the same boat as Adam. My 'ideal' finish is the entire case brushed save for the bezel. Initially I thought the 'high polished' look was right for me but after receiving my 104 I had second thoughts. I'm still debating whether or not I should send the watch to [email protected] to have the 'desired' finish applied.

I've been looking at the 177 simply because of the all 'matte' finish of the titanium. If I could get something in stainless with that same appearance (some variant of the 111) I would jump on it in a heart beat.

If I do decided to have my watch 'refished' I'll be sure to post the results... I am a little worried though... for as competent as the folks at IWW are and for as much reassuring as they've provided part of me still fears that the finish won't be up to my ridiculously high standards.


----------



## jacksonian

Can you guys tell me the main difference between the Zero and the 112 other than the logo on the Zero and the display back on the 112? Why is it that the 112 is considered by many here to be the "classic Pam"? Why isn't the Zero the classic? And does the display back account for the $700 price difference between the two?


----------



## craniotes

jacksonian said:


> Can you guys tell me the main difference between the Zero and the 112 other than the logo on the Zero and the display back on the 112? Why is it that the 112 is considered by many here to be the "classic Pam"? Why isn't the Zero the classic? And does the display back account for the $700 price difference between the two?


The Zero is generally regarded as as much of a classic as the 112 is. In fact, one could argue that between its painted dial, fairly standard movement (non-Panerai bridges and no swan's neck regulator) and solid caseback, that it's even more true to its roots than the gussied up 112. Additionally, the logo harkens to the legendary 5218-201/A, which also featured -- you guessed it -- an OP logo.

I chose the 112 because I felt that the dial was cleaner without the logo, and I wanted a sandwich dial, as well as an exhibition back to show off the modded/decorated movement.

Regards,
Adam


----------



## Vito_Corleone

The combination I'm planning on is an 000 and 111. Best of both worlds, IMO.


----------

