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

114060 Comparison: Gen / VSF / CF

CycleBuyer

Active Member
Supporter
15/7/13
289
41
28
I don't like the low placement of the 6 baton on the VSF or (brace yourselves!...) the gen either.

CF wins there.

So does my old Noob V7 - ETA.

Otherwise though, nobody except a dedicated hobbyist with a magnifying glass is sorting them apart IMO.
 

Casing23

Active Member
Patron
Supporter
Certified
22/1/24
394
421
63
EU
Maybe it's time for a quick summary, unless you'd like me to touch on some other aspect of the differences between the factories and the gen?

Here we go:
  1. Case – the win goes to CF. Better crown guards and the area where the crown integrates into the case looks much cleaner, without sticking out past the bezel. 1 point for CF. (1:0)
  2. Bezel – the feel of the bezel often depends on gasket placement and greasing, so I’m judging only the insert here. VSF takes the point with a better-executed lume pip. (1:1)
  3. Bracelet – I’d go for VSF, but only on the condition that it gets a proper SPA treatment. Sorry, ARF/CF fans. 1 point for VSF. (1:2)
  4. Dial – another point for VSF thanks to more accurate printing. One of you noticed that the applied index at 6 o’clock sits a bit too low. Still, CF’s printed indices are just too thick and sit too close to the rehaut for my taste. 1 point for VSF. (1:3)
  5. Handset – CF’s hour hand is simply too thick. VSF replicated it much better. 1 point for VSF. (1:4)
  6. Crystal – surprisingly, 0 points for both. VSF’s AR coating doesn’t match gen specs, and CF’s chamfering is way off. Removing the AR? Sure, but you risk damaging the crystal. Honestly, gen might be the way to go here. (1:4)
  7. Rehaut – clear win for CF, no debate here. 1 point for CF. (2:4)
  8. Movement – not comparing here, since you can get both versions with a DD3130 if that’s what you’re after.

FINAL SCORE: 2:4 for VSF

Dimensions:​

  • Thickness (with caseback stickered):
    GEN: 12.7mm, VSF: 12.6mm, CF: 12.7mm
  • Lug to lug:
    GEN: 47.9mm, VSF: 48.0mm, CF: 47.5mm
  • Including SELs:
    GEN: 50.8mm, VSF: 51.2mm, CF: 51.0mm

So, if I were to build the best possible 114060 from the two factories mentioned, my setup would look like this:
  • Case – CF
  • Bezel – VSF
  • Bracelet – VSF
  • Dial – VSF
  • Handset – VSF
  • Crystal – GEN
Would you go the same route as I did?
 

RoXeW22

Known Member
Patron
Supporter
Certified
27/6/22
167
119
43
Maybe it's time for a quick summary, unless you'd like me to touch on some other aspect of the differences between the factories and the gen?

Here we go:
  1. Case – the win goes to CF. Better crown guards and the area where the crown integrates into the case looks much cleaner, without sticking out past the bezel. 1 point for CF. (1:0)
  2. Bezel – the feel of the bezel often depends on gasket placement and greasing, so I’m judging only the insert here. VSF takes the point with a better-executed lume pip. (1:1)
  3. Bracelet – I’d go for VSF, but only on the condition that it gets a proper SPA treatment. Sorry, ARF/CF fans. 1 point for VSF. (1:2)
  4. Dial – another point for VSF thanks to more accurate printing. One of you noticed that the applied index at 6 o’clock sits a bit too low. Still, CF’s printed indices are just too thick and sit too close to the rehaut for my taste. 1 point for VSF. (1:3)
  5. Handset – CF’s hour hand is simply too thick. VSF replicated it much better. 1 point for VSF. (1:4)
  6. Crystal – surprisingly, 0 points for both. VSF’s AR coating doesn’t match gen specs, and CF’s chamfering is way off. Removing the AR? Sure, but you risk damaging the crystal. Honestly, gen might be the way to go here. (1:4)
  7. Rehaut – clear win for CF, no debate here. 1 point for CF. (2:4)
  8. Movement – not comparing here, since you can get both versions with a DD3130 if that’s what you’re after.

FINAL SCORE: 2:4 for VSF

Dimensions:​

  • Thickness (with caseback stickered):
    GEN: 12.7mm, VSF: 12.6mm, CF: 12.7mm
  • Lug to lug:
    GEN: 47.9mm, VSF: 48.0mm, CF: 47.5mm
  • Including SELs:
    GEN: 50.8mm, VSF: 51.2mm, CF: 51.0mm

So, if I were to build the best possible 114060 from the two factories mentioned, my setup would look like this:
  • Case – CF
  • Bezel – VSF
  • Bracelet – VSF
  • Dial – VSF
  • Handset – VSF
  • Crystal – GEN
Would you go the same route as I did?

Great summary and detailed photos in all major areas -- thanks @Casing23! I know VSF 114060 is always said to be "gen-spec" and therefore compatible for frankening -- can the same be said of the CF 114060s as well, after looking at everything?

I feel like I ended up seeing way more VSF bases for franken builds VS CF bases
 

RobSe1

goes Deepsea
Supporter
Certified
23/6/17
2,309
2,750
113
Exactly, but overall, CF rehaut is still the better option out of the box. With a bit of polishing, it can be improved even further. On the other hand, VSF really messed up the crown guards area, and while the crystal with AR is cool, it’s still not quite like the genuine one. That makes choosing parts for a hybrid build less straightforward than it seems.

For example, I used to think the VSF crystal was the obvious choice, but now, seeing how overly clear it is and how it gives the dial a cooler tone, I’m not so sure anymore. The CF crystal, meanwhile, sits too high. You could shave down the gasket to lower it, but you'd still have the issue with the chamfering not being accurate.

So maybe the best option for a hybrid build is just going with a genuine xtal? Whether it’s worth it... I’m still not sure.
I know what you mean. The problem is when we start comparing the watches in this detail even the smallest things seem like a dealbreaker.

And it's often not that easy to build a hybrid because factories make the same watch but its often different manufactured. So swapping parts ist often not a straight way.

I also ordered the VSF, should arrive next days. And i still think its the overall "winner"

But both watches are great and you can't go wrong with both.

I think for the no date a gen crystal is not worth it as we have no cyclops which is the deal-breaker-part mostly. And the DW sure.
 

SS72

Respected Member
Supporter
Certified
27/9/12
3,113
11,485
113
Australia
I know this is an unpopular thing to critique on the dial, but that "Floating 'm'" on the CF dial is so damn obvious. And, I know there are some gen 11X dials with that 'm' sitting a little higher than other variations of the same dial, but not to this extreme. The CF 12X Sub is the same and I wish they'd fix it. But, the VSF dial's 6 o'clock maker sits too close to "SWISS MADE", which is another one of those things I can't unsee. However, that is not as visible on the wrist to me as the 'm'.

Give me a CF with a VS3230, Deep Xtal and gen dial, and that's my perfect Franken.

@Casing23, thanks for the time and effort to put this comparison together. Nicely done.
 

TimeBandit70

Getting To Know The Place
Supporter
10/1/25
61
50
18
Washington DC
Maybe it's time for a quick summary, unless you'd like me to touch on some other aspect of the differences between the factories and the gen?

Here we go:
  1. Case – the win goes to CF. Better crown guards and the area where the crown integrates into the case looks much cleaner, without sticking out past the bezel. 1 point for CF. (1:0)
  2. Bezel – the feel of the bezel often depends on gasket placement and greasing, so I’m judging only the insert here. VSF takes the point with a better-executed lume pip. (1:1)
  3. Bracelet – I’d go for VSF, but only on the condition that it gets a proper SPA treatment. Sorry, ARF/CF fans. 1 point for VSF. (1:2)
  4. Dial – another point for VSF thanks to more accurate printing. One of you noticed that the applied index at 6 o’clock sits a bit too low. Still, CF’s printed indices are just too thick and sit too close to the rehaut for my taste. 1 point for VSF. (1:3)
  5. Handset – CF’s hour hand is simply too thick. VSF replicated it much better. 1 point for VSF. (1:4)
  6. Crystal – surprisingly, 0 points for both. VSF’s AR coating doesn’t match gen specs, and CF’s chamfering is way off. Removing the AR? Sure, but you risk damaging the crystal. Honestly, gen might be the way to go here. (1:4)
  7. Rehaut – clear win for CF, no debate here. 1 point for CF. (2:4)
  8. Movement – not comparing here, since you can get both versions with a DD3130 if that’s what you’re after.

FINAL SCORE: 2:4 for VSF

Dimensions:​

  • Thickness (with caseback stickered):
    GEN: 12.7mm, VSF: 12.6mm, CF: 12.7mm
  • Lug to lug:
    GEN: 47.9mm, VSF: 48.0mm, CF: 47.5mm
  • Including SELs:
    GEN: 50.8mm, VSF: 51.2mm, CF: 51.0mm

So, if I were to build the best possible 114060 from the two factories mentioned, my setup would look like this:
  • Case – CF
  • Bezel – VSF
  • Bracelet – VSF
  • Dial – VSF
  • Handset – VSF
  • Crystal – GEN
Would you go the same route as I did?

I just wrapped up my hybrid build (no Gen parts) and went with a slightly different setup. This was my first build, and aside from the pending crystal swap, it was very straightforward and easy.

Build details: Hybrid CF and VSF Sub 124060 41mm No Date

  • Case + rehaut: CF
  • Crystal: CF (swapping to Deep)
  • Bezel: CF
  • Bracelet: CF
  • Movement: VSF VS3230 (serviced)
  • Dial: VSF
  • Hands: VSF
  • Clasp: VSF

Some quick thoughts:

CF and VSF are great OOTB, so building this hybrid is unnecessary! However, I wanted to combine the best of each to make the best Sub Clone available (without buying Gen parts).

Bezel: CF's bezel is noticeably better than VSF's. It has a tighter, more satisfying click. VSF’s has some play and a higher-pitched sound that doesn’t feel close to Gen. Also, swapping bezels on six-digit Subs is no joke, which is why I haven't installed the Deep crystal yet.

Bracelet vs. Clasp: These should be judged separately. CF's bracelet is smoother, has better tolerances and finish, but the glide lock is stiff and clunky. VSF's glidelock is super smooth and way more refined.

Case & Rehaut: Some people rate the case and rehaut separately, but they’re one piece, so not separable. VSF’s rehaut can be polished to look more Gen-like, but CF wins for a more accurate case profile and better rehaut OOTB.

Second Watch: Once I install a VSF Clasp (ordered), polish the rehaut, and smooth out the sharp edges, I will have two great Subs with one slightly better in all aspects. I may also install a rubber strap and a Deep crystal.


Edited for clarity
 
Last edited:

Casing23

Active Member
Patron
Supporter
Certified
22/1/24
394
421
63
EU
24g0rK.jpeg


I got tempted and found a bit of free time, so I went for a build. I used the CF case and crown and swapped in the VSF dial and handset. I ended up using the VSF crystal as well, because even after shaving down the gasket, the CF chamfering still didn’t look close enough to the gen for my liking. So I removed it again and went with the VSF gasket and crystal instead. (For the record, there’s about a 0.2 mm difference in gasket height between the two.)

The bezel and insert are both from VSF. I didn’t want to risk cracking the insert just to fit it into the CF bezel. In the end, I actually went with the CF bracelet, since the SELs seemed to fit better visually to CF case. The bracelets are interchangeable. I did keep the VSF clasp though.

I gave the rehaut a light polish using a few different cloths to clean up the look a bit. Unfortunately, I ran into the usual frustration with movement components, mainly the cheap screws. One of them snapped clean in half with just a gentle touch of the screwdriver, so I carefully positioned it and secured it in place using two small drops of Pattex Repair Epoxy to stabilize the movement inside the case. It worked just fine for me, solid and resistant to shocks. If needed, IPA 99 can clean it up easily. I even tried to nudge the 6-hour indice upward. Maybe it moved just a little, but I didn’t push too hard, didn’t want to risk damaging it or the dial.

As you can see, the rehaut engraving isn’t perfectly centered. But to be fair, like we’ve said before, even the genuine piece has it. Overall, I’m really happy with how it turned out. I didn’t press the retaining ring all the way into the case, leaving about a tiny gap to keep that springy bezel feel and a slight lip between the case and the bezel. When Subs arrive from China, their bezels always sit very close to the case, leaving no gap at all.
I also tested it for water resistance. It passed 6 ATM just fine, so yes, it’s shower-safe!

Some of you asked whether parts from different factories are interchangeable. Yes, they are, fully. There are some minor differences, such as the height of the crystal gasket, but overall everything fits together fine. In my build, for example, I used the CF crystal retaining ring along with the VSF bezel and other parts without any issues.

Right now, the watch measures 12.4 mm in thickness. Personally, I prefer it on the slimmer side. I saved 0.2 mm by using the VSF crystal gasket, and another 0.1 mm by finally removing the case back sticker :)
What could be better? Well, the rehaut is never quite perfect, and the crystal could use that slight foggy look like the genuine one. That would make it even better.

To my eyes, you would really need to look very closely and have a genuine piece next to it to say this is a replica. The crown guards and case are spot on, the crystal sits low with the correct chamfering, there is a slight springy feel to the bezel and a visible lip between the bezel and the case. The handset looks good as well, and it keeps time properly with high amplitude and low beat error.

Overall, I am happy. Although I do still have second thoughts about replica watches and the idea of copying someone else’s work. At the same time, I see it more as a hobby, like toys for grown-up boys. I guess the time will come when I grow out of it. It is just a matter of time.
 

rockdaytona

Respected Member
Supporter
Certified
17/12/19
4,061
3,616
113
Parts Unknown
24g0rK.jpeg


I got tempted and found a bit of free time, so I went for a build. I used the CF case and crown and swapped in the VSF dial and handset. I ended up using the VSF crystal as well, because even after shaving down the gasket, the CF chamfering still didn’t look close enough to the gen for my liking. So I removed it again and went with the VSF gasket and crystal instead. (For the record, there’s about a 0.2 mm difference in gasket height between the two.)

The bezel and insert are both from VSF. I didn’t want to risk cracking the insert just to fit it into the CF bezel. In the end, I actually went with the CF bracelet, since the SELs seemed to fit better visually to CF case. The bracelets are interchangeable. I did keep the VSF clasp though.

I gave the rehaut a light polish using a few different cloths to clean up the look a bit. Unfortunately, I ran into the usual frustration with movement components, mainly the cheap screws. One of them snapped clean in half with just a gentle touch of the screwdriver, so I carefully positioned it and secured it in place using two small drops of Pattex Repair Epoxy to stabilize the movement inside the case. It worked just fine for me, solid and resistant to shocks. If needed, IPA 99 can clean it up easily. I even tried to nudge the 6-hour indice upward. Maybe it moved just a little, but I didn’t push too hard, didn’t want to risk damaging it or the dial.

As you can see, the rehaut engraving isn’t perfectly centered. But to be fair, like we’ve said before, even the genuine piece has it. Overall, I’m really happy with how it turned out. I didn’t press the retaining ring all the way into the case, leaving about a tiny gap to keep that springy bezel feel and a slight lip between the case and the bezel. When Subs arrive from China, their bezels always sit very close to the case, leaving no gap at all.
I also tested it for water resistance. It passed 6 ATM just fine, so yes, it’s shower-safe!

Some of you asked whether parts from different factories are interchangeable. Yes, they are, fully. There are some minor differences, such as the height of the crystal gasket, but overall everything fits together fine. In my build, for example, I used the CF crystal retaining ring along with the VSF bezel and other parts without any issues.

Right now, the watch measures 12.4 mm in thickness. Personally, I prefer it on the slimmer side. I saved 0.2 mm by using the VSF crystal gasket, and another 0.1 mm by finally removing the case back sticker :)
What could be better? Well, the rehaut is never quite perfect, and the crystal could use that slight foggy look like the genuine one. That would make it even better.

To my eyes, you would really need to look very closely and have a genuine piece next to it to say this is a replica. The crown guards and case are spot on, the crystal sits low with the correct chamfering, there is a slight springy feel to the bezel and a visible lip between the bezel and the case. The handset looks good as well, and it keeps time properly with high amplitude and low beat error.

Overall, I am happy. Although I do still have second thoughts about replica watches and the idea of copying someone else’s work. At the same time, I see it more as a hobby, like toys for grown-up boys. I guess the time will come when I grow out of it. It is just a matter of time.
Left is the better parts??
 

CycleBuyer

Active Member
Supporter
15/7/13
289
41
28
It may be somewhat the lighting but your photo of the two watches makes the differences in crystals but particularly crown guards very stark. I like either watch (the left more so) but there is a pronounced contrast between them I think.
 

Casing23

Active Member
Patron
Supporter
Certified
22/1/24
394
421
63
EU
It may be somewhat the lighting but your photo of the two watches makes the differences in crystals but particularly crown guards very stark. I like either watch (the left more so) but there is a pronounced contrast between them I think.
The one on the left is a built replica, and the one on the right is the gen. The VSF crystal actually provides better visibility than the genuine one. That's why there's a difference in contrast.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BeeWeez

CycleBuyer

Active Member
Supporter
15/7/13
289
41
28
To my eye the best feature on the left is the canon pinion. There's no divet that I can see.
 

BeeWeez

Getting To Know The Place
29/8/24
28
14
3
Thanks for those informative review and build. Now that VSF Subs come in cheaper variants (non-clone movements), one could argue that they make sense financially as donors for the crystal, dial and clasp so as to improve a CF in one go without having to source parts left and right. Leaving you enough parts to make a lesser yet functional watch too. Well if anything Casing23's last picture makes a compelling case (no pun intended) for the bitza route.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TimeBandit70

wiyra

Do not accept unsolicited offers
21/5/25
1
1
3
Maybe it's time for a quick summary, unless you'd like me to touch on some other aspect of the differences between the factories and the gen?

Here we go:
  1. Case – the win goes to CF. Better crown guards and the area where the crown integrates into the case looks much cleaner, without sticking out past the bezel. 1 point for CF. (1:0)
  2. Bezel – the feel of the bezel often depends on gasket placement and greasing, so I’m judging only the insert here. VSF takes the point with a better-executed lume pip. (1:1)
  3. Bracelet – I’d go for VSF, but only on the condition that it gets a proper SPA treatment. Sorry, ARF/CF fans. 1 point for VSF. (1:2)
  4. Dial – another point for VSF thanks to more accurate printing. One of you noticed that the applied index at 6 o’clock sits a bit too low. Still, CF’s printed indices are just too thick and sit too close to the rehaut for my taste. 1 point for VSF. (1:3)
  5. Handset – CF’s hour hand is simply too thick. VSF replicated it much better. 1 point for VSF. (1:4)
  6. Crystal – surprisingly, 0 points for both. VSF’s AR coating doesn’t match gen specs, and CF’s chamfering is way off. Removing the AR? Sure, but you risk damaging the crystal. Honestly, gen might be the way to go here. (1:4)
  7. Rehaut – clear win for CF, no debate here. 1 point for CF. (2:4)
  8. Movement – not comparing here, since you can get both versions with a DD3130 if that’s what you’re after.

FINAL SCORE: 2:4 for VSF

Dimensions:​

  • Thickness (with caseback stickered):
    GEN: 12.7mm, VSF: 12.6mm, CF: 12.7mm
  • Lug to lug:
    GEN: 47.9mm, VSF: 48.0mm, CF: 47.5mm
  • Including SELs:
    GEN: 50.8mm, VSF: 51.2mm, CF: 51.0mm

So, if I were to build the best possible 114060 from the two factories mentioned, my setup would look like this:
  • Case – CF
  • Bezel – VSF
  • Bracelet – VSF
  • Dial – VSF
  • Handset – VSF
  • Crystal – GEN
Would you go the same route as I did?
Thank you so much for this - such a valuable comparison.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rockdaytona