A few pics and my intial impression of the Karree Panodate that I just acquired. I've long been a fan of G O's prior generation of Karrees and Senators, having purchased four of the former and two of the latter . . .

The current generations were introduced in 2005 (Senator) and 2006 (Karree), and were slightly larger, more polished and embellished, and more refined than the models they replaced. While they were well received, my preferences leaned towards the taut aesthetics of the prior generation. After I placed my order for my last Karree perpetual in early 2006, my attention veered towards the Pano series (especially the Panograph and Panoreserve) and to the discontinued 1845 Karrees. I had decided to purchase an 1845 Karree as I've long wanted a manual wind G O, but had been preoccupied with my favored cal 39 perpetual calendars. Then, earlier last year, Marcus posted pictures of the new 2007 Karree Panodate . . .

. . . and it only took a few moments of virtual gazing to catapult this new design to the lead of the race.

The new Karree Panodate coupled the new Karree case design with an entirely new movement . . .

 

. . . that resembled my favored cal 42 used in the 1845 Karree series, with the addition of an integral date function and sweep seconds hand. Unlike the new Karrees equipped with the cal 39 automatic movement, the new cal 22 shifted the Panoramadate display to the center of the watch, mid-way between dead center and 6:00. Additionally, the Roman numerals at the cardinal points emphasized the symmetry of the dial design, complementing the central date aperture; to my eyes, the dial seemed especially coherent and intrinsically 'right'. Of course, I had to see the watch in the metal, and on a memorable day last July, I was able to handle both steel and gold models with a white dial at a local dealership. As Mitch K will no doubt confirm, I decided then and there that this would be my next G O. Deciding on steel versus gold was easy: it had to be steel as I planned on wearing it often, and anyways, I already had two gold watches that I rarely wear - no point in getting another watch that would be trotted out only on special occasions. The tougher decision was dial color - black versus white. The black dial is the stunner, and I prefer dark dials generally . . . the white dial appears a bit more formal, and even though it has slightly better legibility due to the contrast between the edges of the hands and the dial below, the black dial was the instinctive favorite. I would have picked the white dial on it's strengths and for variety's sake (all my other G O's have dark dials), but when I finally got to compare the two side by side, the black dial was ultimately compelling by virtue of it's more casual appearance.

The case is a slightly curved rectangle, not curved enough to be considered a tonneau or even a shaped case . . .

. . . but it's also not a classical rectangular design, either . . . personally, I feel this case design deserves it's own description - perhaps a "blended rectangle". The effect on the wrist, though, is not subtle: this design feels less a mechanical artifact than my purely round Senator and angular Karree perpetuals. The gently flowing curves lends it an almost organic appearance . . . the overall effect is surprisingly subdued, as if the watch were more a part of the wrist rather than a mechanical appendage. The effect is much more pronounced with the black dial, and is one of the many reasons I settled on black rather than white.

Most of the visible surfaces of the case are highly polished ...

To read the full review, CLICK HERE  to get transported over to the GO forum

Respond to this post |