The Panerai PAM682 and PAM973 are the “old vs new” of the 42mm Submersible — same size and silhouette, but a generation apart in movement and case thickness. The PAM682 is the original 42mm Submersible with the P.9010 movement and an open caseback; the PAM973 is the slimmer successor with the newer P.900. This guide compares them so you know which 42mm Submersible to chase.
Prices and specifications as at June 2026. Both references are largely found on the pre-owned market; always verify with authorised dealers or trusted sellers.
TL;DR — PAM682 vs PAM973
Both are 42mm steel Submersibles with a rotating dive bezel and 300m water resistance. The PAM682 is the original, with the in-house P.9010 movement, an exhibition (display) caseback and a slightly thicker case (~14.4mm). The PAM973 is the newer version, using the thinner P.900 movement to shave the case down to about 13.2mm, with a solid caseback. Choose the PAM682 if you want to see the movement; choose the PAM973 if you want the slimmer, more refined wear.
Table of Contents
- Same Submersible, One Generation Apart
- Specifications Side by Side
- P.9010 vs P.900: The Key Difference
- Open vs Solid Caseback
- On the Wrist
- Price & Value
- Who Should Buy Which?
- Final Verdict
- Frequently Asked Questions
Same Submersible, One Generation Apart
The 42mm Submersible is, for many people, the sweet spot of Panerai’s dive line: large enough to have presence, compact enough to wear daily. The PAM682 and PAM973 are the two key references at this size, and they look almost identical from the front — same black dial with dot-and-baton markers, same unidirectional rotating bezel, same 300m rating. The difference is under the hood and in the case profile, the result of Panerai updating the movement between generations.
The PAM682 came first, built around the established in-house P.9010 automatic. The PAM973 followed with the newer, thinner P.900 calibre, which let Panerai slim the case down noticeably. If you have read our 42mm vs 47mm Submersible comparison, this is the next level of detail: once you have settled on the 42mm steel Submersible, do you want the original PAM682 or the slimmer PAM973?
Specifications Side by Side
| Specification | PAM682 | PAM973 |
|---|---|---|
| Collection | Submersible | Submersible |
| Case diameter | 42 mm | 42 mm |
| Case thickness | ~14.4 mm | ~13.2 mm |
| Case material | Stainless steel | Stainless steel |
| Movement | P.9010 automatic | P.900 automatic |
| Power reserve | 72 hours (3 days) | 3 days |
| Caseback | Exhibition (display) | Solid steel |
| Water resistance | 300 m (30 bar) | 300 m (30 bar) |
| Generation | Original 42mm | Slimmer successor |
P.9010 vs P.900: The Key Difference
The headline difference is the movement. The PAM682 uses the well-known in-house P.9010 — a robust automatic with a three-day power reserve that Panerai has used across many references. The PAM973 swaps in the newer P.900, a thinner automatic (also three days) developed to reduce case height. The practical upshot is that the PAM973 sits noticeably slimmer on the wrist, roughly 1.2mm thinner than the PAM682, which makes a real difference in how the watch tucks under a cuff and how planted it feels.
Neither movement is “better” in reliability terms — both are solid, modern Panerai calibres. The choice is about priorities: the P.9010 in the PAM682 is the more familiar, widely-serviced movement and comes paired with a display caseback, while the P.900 in the PAM973 buys you a slimmer, more refined case at the cost of that exhibition back.
Open vs Solid Caseback
One of the most debated points between these two is the caseback. The PAM682 has an exhibition (display) caseback, letting you admire the P.9010 movement through sapphire — a feature many enthusiasts love on an automatic watch. The PAM973 reverts to a solid steel caseback. For a dive watch, a solid caseback is arguably the more “correct” choice and contributes to the slimmer profile, but it means you lose the view of the movement. Which you prefer is a genuine matter of taste: movement view versus slimmer, more tool-like authenticity.
On the Wrist
Both wear with the same 42mm diameter, so the footprint is identical — a comfortable, versatile size for a Panerai diver. The difference you feel is thickness: the PAM973’s slimmer case sits closer to the wrist and reads as a touch more refined, while the PAM682 feels a little chunkier and more substantial. Both ride well on rubber or leather and suit a wide range of wrists. If you are weighing Panerai sizes more broadly, our size guide is a useful companion.
Price & Value
On the pre-owned market the two trade closely, with condition and completeness mattering more than the generation. The PAM682’s display caseback appeals to buyers who want to see the movement, which can support its value, while the PAM973’s slimmer, more modern profile attracts those prioritising wearability. For the broader Submersible and Panerai pricing picture, see our buying guide and the candid take in Is Panerai Worth It?
Who Should Buy Which?
Buy the PAM682 if: you want to enjoy the movement. Its display caseback shows off the in-house P.9010, and the slightly thicker case gives it a substantial, planted feel. It is the choice for buyers who value the exhibition back and the more familiar movement.
Buy the PAM973 if: you want the most refined wear. The slimmer P.900 case sits closer to the wrist and tucks under a cuff more easily, and the solid caseback is arguably the more authentic choice for a dive watch. It is the pick for everyday comfort and a more modern profile.
If seeing the movement matters to you, go PAM682. If slimness and daily wearability win out, the PAM973 is the better Submersible.
Final Verdict
This is a classic “original vs refined successor” decision. Take the PAM682 for its exhibition caseback and substantial feel, or the PAM973 for its slimmer, more wearable case and solid-back authenticity. Both are excellent 42mm steel Submersibles with the same dive credentials — the choice comes down to whether you prioritise seeing the movement or wearing it slim.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.