• Tired of adverts on RWI? - Subscribe by clicking HERE and PMing Trailboss for instructions and they will magically go away!

Noob Daytona vs ARF Daytona

ssouthall6

Put Some Respect On My Name
10/10/13
3,539
1,562
113
The noob and the ARF are excellent watches, but neither are IMO good enough to class as super reps. I have detailed why elsewhere but I'll do it again for the sake of people who don't want to read the whole thread.

The noob movement is a work of art. The pushers are good, the case is decent, the sels are good enough but the dial and bezel on the 116500 fall short of the quality required for a super rep and the bezel and especially the dial on the noob 116520 are miles off.

I'm a nitpicker, it's in my nature. If people don't like it, I don't really care. I'm not showing this to justify my own purchase, I'm not an ARF fanboy, I'm not a noob fanboy, just a daytona fan that wants the perfect watch.

Franken of a 116520 is plausible but 116500 is cost prohibitive. So ideal situation is fix these small issues and everyone wins.

G=Gen
N=NOOB
A=ARF

d0473ccf4f20dd0fd57219a5e6dfb611.jpg


Let's start with the front dial on. First observations are the lettering of ROLEX on the noob. Look at the O. Look at the tail on the R. ARF is a touch too bold but this isn't as noticeable as the poor spacing on the noob.

Also visible is the poor insert. The engravings are too shallow and too thin on the noob. A touch too deep on the ARF but still closer to gen.

Daytona on both ARF and Noob is too dark.

Pinion on gen is capped, fail for ARF and Noob.

e80e4eb3a272bd7caff821b257932c17.jpg


Subdials. Ever so slightly too wide on the noob, ever so slightly better finished on the ARF.

375fd11315aed33722e2038bd7e9bf3b.jpg


Indices. Nicely polished on the gen. Ok on the ARF. Too thick and bland on the noob.

3c06c47a6f75f6fb7746c701029b8b39.jpg


Insert. Noob has definitely improved this from v1. V1 triangle was miles too small. Now the font is still too skinny but the lines are better, they are too fat on the ARF. But the triangle is still too far away from the numbers.

e66a7d8293280e340217446a4af21190.jpg


Lugs. Better on the noob. Not sure what ARF were doing here. Too skinny and completely the wrong shape. Amusingly Noob have added the little indentation that they failed to put in the v9 116610, even though it doesn't exist on the daytona.

So yes, I'm pretty finicky as you can tell, but that dial and insert aren't quite good enough for me. I've seen a noob v2 ceramic go up today with slightly better subdial printing but again, not quite good enough to tempt me

eb94fd52382b08c1c08674ccdb12c4a8.jpg


This picture doesn't show it so well, but from what I can see:

Marginally better spacing of ROLEX on v2
Printing on the subdials is better (v1, grooves look like they've been applied post printing of numbers, v2 looks clearer)

Still a non-starter with that bezel insert sadly

Now for the 116520

This is the watch that is IMO nowhere near super rep due to the dial and the bezel.

On the dial on the 116500, whilst it doesn't look great, it's not far off. This one is frankly crap.

I read early someone questioning my knowledge etc and saying the nuances could be explained away with dial variations through the years, so I've taken images from a 12, 8, 6 and 4 year old 116520 to prove the point.

5e1a833a0255fe5b238cef90d22466c7.jpg


Let's start with the lettering, the branding, the thing everyone sees first.

As you can see some variations over the years. ARF could easily fit into one of these categories. Noob is quite clearly using the font from the ceramic dial. Total fantasy.

6119f42fb54194dc222f931ea95b6a92.jpg


Next bezel. ARF is a touch long in the numerals but close enough. Noob - oh dear. Everything far too skinny. Very obvious from quite a distance.

7b7261386b6b657c88bc6d79a7a0ac5d.jpg


Subdials. Well credit where credit is due, at least all of the noob ones work ???? but what is that strange inner circle?!

Noob doesn't look too far away from the 6 year old Daytona but the numbers are top angled. Look at the 60.

ARF don't win any awards here either. Look at the numbers, too bold, although straighter. The lines reach to the end of the subdial, which is wrong. Noob doesn't, which is correct.

DAYTONA lettering. Completely wrong on ARF and Noob.

I couldn't be bothered to even look at the rehaut, lugs, sel etc on this one, I will at some point.

Again - I'm not knocking either watch, they are what they are, but if you want the watch to look as nice as possible, these are the bits that need fixing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

thinwhiteduke

I'm Pretty Popular
21/2/16
1,052
232
63
ssouthall6, thank you for this very well laid out comparisons. Truely very informative and objective statement of facts backed up by pictures. Thank you!


Sent from my iPhone using RWI
 
  • Like
Reactions: ssouthall6

vcappp

I'm Pretty Popular
20/6/18
1,000
296
83
The noob and the ARF are excellent watches, but neither are IMO good enough to class as super reps. I have detailed why elsewhere but I'll do it again for the sake of people who don't want to read the whole thread.

The noob movement is a work of art. The pushers are good, the case is decent, the sels are good enough but the dial and bezel on the 116500 fall short of the quality required for a super rep and the bezel and especially the dial on the noob 116520 are miles off.

I'm a nitpicker, it's in my nature. If people don't like it, I don't really care. I'm not showing this to justify my own purchase, I'm not an ARF fanboy, I'm not a noob fanboy, just a daytona fan that wants the perfect watch.

Franken of a 116520 is plausible but 116500 is cost prohibitive. So ideal situation is fix these small issues and everyone wins.

G=Gen
N=NOOB
A=ARF

d0473ccf4f20dd0fd57219a5e6dfb611.jpg


Let's start with the front dial on. First observations are the lettering of ROLEX on the noob. Look at the O. Look at the tail on the R. ARF is a touch too bold but this isn't as noticeable as the poor spacing on the noob.

Also visible is the poor insert. The engravings are too shallow and too thin on the noob. A touch too deep on the ARF but still closer to gen.

Daytona on both ARF and Noob is too dark.

Pinion on gen is capped, fail for ARF and Noob.

e80e4eb3a272bd7caff821b257932c17.jpg


Subdials. Ever so slightly too wide on the noob, ever so slightly better finished on the ARF.

375fd11315aed33722e2038bd7e9bf3b.jpg


Indices. Nicely polished on the gen. Ok on the ARF. Too thick and bland on the noob.

3c06c47a6f75f6fb7746c701029b8b39.jpg


Insert. Noob has definitely improved this from v1. V1 triangle was miles too small. Now the font is still too skinny but the lines are better, they are too fat on the ARF. But the triangle is still too far away from the numbers.

e66a7d8293280e340217446a4af21190.jpg


Lugs. Better on the noob. Not sure what ARF were doing here. Too skinny and completely the wrong shape. Amusingly Noob have added the little indentation that they failed to put in the v9 116610, even though it doesn't exist on the daytona.

So yes, I'm pretty finicky as you can tell, but that dial and insert aren't quite good enough for me. I've seen a noob v2 ceramic go up today with slightly better subdial printing but again, not quite good enough to tempt me

eb94fd52382b08c1c08674ccdb12c4a8.jpg


This picture doesn't show it so well, but from what I can see:

Marginally better spacing of ROLEX on v2
Printing on the subdials is better (v1, grooves look like they've been applied post printing of numbers, v2 looks clearer)

Still a non-starter with that bezel insert sadly

Now for the 116520

This is the watch that is IMO nowhere near super rep due to the dial and the bezel.

On the dial on the 116500, whilst it doesn't look great, it's not far off. This one is frankly crap.

I read early someone questioning my knowledge etc and saying the nuances could be explained away with dial variations through the years, so I've taken images from a 12, 8, 6 and 4 year old 116520 to prove the point.

5e1a833a0255fe5b238cef90d22466c7.jpg


Let's start with the lettering, the branding, the thing everyone sees first.

As you can see some variations over the years. ARF could easily fit into one of these categories. Noob is quite clearly using the font from the ceramic dial. Total fantasy.

6119f42fb54194dc222f931ea95b6a92.jpg


Next bezel. ARF is a touch long in the numerals but close enough. Noob - oh dear. Everything far too skinny. Very obvious from quite a distance.

7b7261386b6b657c88bc6d79a7a0ac5d.jpg


Subdials. Well credit where credit is due, at least all of the noob ones work ???? but what is that strange inner circle?!

Noob doesn't look too far away from the 6 year old Daytona but the numbers are top angled. Look at the 60.

ARF don't win any awards here either. Look at the numbers, too bold, although straighter. The lines reach to the end of the subdial, which is wrong. Noob doesn't, which is correct.

DAYTONA lettering. Completely wrong on ARF and Noob.

I couldn't be bothered to even look at the rehaut, lugs, sel etc on this one, I will at some point.

Again - I'm not knocking either watch, they are what they are, but if you want the watch to look as nice as possible, these are the bits that need fixing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

great comparison post! thank you


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: ssouthall6

Hidenjoy

Renowned Member
8/9/15
709
251
63
The noob and the ARF are excellent watches, but neither are IMO good enough to class as super reps. I have detailed why elsewhere but I'll do it again for the sake of people who don't want to read the whole thread.

The noob movement is a work of art. The pushers are good, the case is decent, the sels are good enough but the dial and bezel on the 116500 fall short of the quality required for a super rep and the bezel and especially the dial on the noob 116520 are miles off.

I'm a nitpicker, it's in my nature. If people don't like it, I don't really care. I'm not showing this to justify my own purchase, I'm not an ARF fanboy, I'm not a noob fanboy, just a daytona fan that wants the perfect watch.

Franken of a 116520 is plausible but 116500 is cost prohibitive. So ideal situation is fix these small issues and everyone wins.

G=Gen
N=NOOB
A=ARF

d0473ccf4f20dd0fd57219a5e6dfb611.jpg


Let's start with the front dial on. First observations are the lettering of ROLEX on the noob. Look at the O. Look at the tail on the R. ARF is a touch too bold but this isn't as noticeable as the poor spacing on the noob.

Also visible is the poor insert. The engravings are too shallow and too thin on the noob. A touch too deep on the ARF but still closer to gen.

Daytona on both ARF and Noob is too dark.

Pinion on gen is capped, fail for ARF and Noob.

e80e4eb3a272bd7caff821b257932c17.jpg


Subdials. Ever so slightly too wide on the noob, ever so slightly better finished on the ARF.

375fd11315aed33722e2038bd7e9bf3b.jpg


Indices. Nicely polished on the gen. Ok on the ARF. Too thick and bland on the noob.

3c06c47a6f75f6fb7746c701029b8b39.jpg


Insert. Noob has definitely improved this from v1. V1 triangle was miles too small. Now the font is still too skinny but the lines are better, they are too fat on the ARF. But the triangle is still too far away from the numbers.

e66a7d8293280e340217446a4af21190.jpg


Lugs. Better on the noob. Not sure what ARF were doing here. Too skinny and completely the wrong shape. Amusingly Noob have added the little indentation that they failed to put in the v9 116610, even though it doesn't exist on the daytona.

So yes, I'm pretty finicky as you can tell, but that dial and insert aren't quite good enough for me. I've seen a noob v2 ceramic go up today with slightly better subdial printing but again, not quite good enough to tempt me

eb94fd52382b08c1c08674ccdb12c4a8.jpg


This picture doesn't show it so well, but from what I can see:

Marginally better spacing of ROLEX on v2
Printing on the subdials is better (v1, grooves look like they've been applied post printing of numbers, v2 looks clearer)

Still a non-starter with that bezel insert sadly

Now for the 116520

This is the watch that is IMO nowhere near super rep due to the dial and the bezel.

On the dial on the 116500, whilst it doesn't look great, it's not far off. This one is frankly crap.

I read early someone questioning my knowledge etc and saying the nuances could be explained away with dial variations through the years, so I've taken images from a 12, 8, 6 and 4 year old 116520 to prove the point.

5e1a833a0255fe5b238cef90d22466c7.jpg


Let's start with the lettering, the branding, the thing everyone sees first.

As you can see some variations over the years. ARF could easily fit into one of these categories. Noob is quite clearly using the font from the ceramic dial. Total fantasy.

6119f42fb54194dc222f931ea95b6a92.jpg


Next bezel. ARF is a touch long in the numerals but close enough. Noob - oh dear. Everything far too skinny. Very obvious from quite a distance.

7b7261386b6b657c88bc6d79a7a0ac5d.jpg


Subdials. Well credit where credit is due, at least all of the noob ones work ???? but what is that strange inner circle?!

Noob doesn't look too far away from the 6 year old Daytona but the numbers are top angled. Look at the 60.

ARF don't win any awards here either. Look at the numbers, too bold, although straighter. The lines reach to the end of the subdial, which is wrong. Noob doesn't, which is correct.

DAYTONA lettering. Completely wrong on ARF and Noob.

I couldn't be bothered to even look at the rehaut, lugs, sel etc on this one, I will at some point.

Again - I'm not knocking either watch, they are what they are, but if you want the watch to look as nice as possible, these are the bits that need fixing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This has to be pin on the forum
Please mods pin this post
 

shaKi47

Known Member
5/4/16
167
45
0
I do not understand the comparisons between Noob and ARF. For me is the ARF not a full Rep. Sry but we talk here about a Watch what cant use the full Functions. So it is only a half Rep for me. I would never buy a Rep if it has only half as many features as the originals.

This is not FOR ME the definition of "replica"


I would say too, that the Design from the ARF is A LITTLE BIT better. But we talk here about VERY small better things. I prefer to go to Noob. The movement makes it a better watch for me
 
Last edited:

Rep Enthusiast

You're Saying I Can Sell?
31/3/18
61
38
18
shaKi47

People buy watches for different reasons. some of them are attracted to the design, others want to get the feeling that the brand carries to to the outside and others are fascinated by the technology. The current offer has something for everyone. Personally, I put the technique first, so the ARF is out of the question. The comparison for others may be very useful.
 

Bezelover

You're Saying I Can Sell?
11/8/18
30
14
8
After getting 2 NOOB Daytona 4130 models, I will hold off my purchase for the other models in the line-up for now and WAIT until NOOB improves the ceramic bezel and dials. Or maybe ARF will beat them to it and issue a true chronograph movement with further aestehetic refinements in the future. Who knows. Patience is a virtue, easier said than done, specially when you can grab these fine babies for $600 shipped
 

knol

Active Member
17/8/16
273
29
28
I have the ARF V2 as 116520 with white dial. The Noob (clone 4130 with chrono) is ordered as 116500 and already shipped.
I am now already curious to compare the ARF and the Noob and about the result and feelings afterwards :)
Hopefully I can do also a comparison between ARF 116520 / Noob 116500 and a GEN 116520 ..... looking forward.

would be great to see. you got it already ?
 

mari115

Put Some Respect On My Name
9/6/18
4,439
2,478
113
Nearer than you think
this is awesome, i wonder why only few people are talking about this, isn't this Clone movement some kind of revolution in the rep world? it seems awesome to me
 
  • Like
Reactions: timnic54