I got asked by a few people to create this as a separate thread so it can be a sticky, so here it is. 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 and has been priced out of the gen dial and bezel market because of this new noob movement!
Let me start by saying, I like both watches. They are both excellent interpretations of the gen. The noob and the ARF are excellent watches in their own right and we know that Noob is a working chrono, ARF is just a moving chrono seconds hand, but neither are IMO good enough to class as super reps.
The noob movement is a work of art. The pushers are not perfect but very good, the case is not perfect but decent, the sels are good enough with good QC 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. The ARF movement doesn't work like the gen, is noisy, has lots of reports of low power reserve and the consensus seems to be the rotor is not right for the watch. The case construction for the noob is perfect, the ARF requires lots of modification. The noob case is 316L, the ARF is 904L.
The bracelet splits opinion, as does the clasp. It appears the noob v2 has improved over v1.
Franken of a 116520 is plausible but 116500 is cost prohibitive. So ideal situation is fix these small issues and everyone wins.
So, ceramic first. I'm going to just judge the white dial models.
G=Gen
N=NOOB
A=ARF
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.
Subdials. Ever so slightly too wide on the noob, ever so slightly better finished on the ARF.
Indices. Nicely polished on the gen. Ok on the ARF. Too thick and bland on the noob.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
Subdials. Well credit where credit is due, at least all of the noob ones work [emoji3] 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. They've used the font from the ceramic dial again.
I couldn't be bothered to even look at the rehaut, lugs, sel etc on this one, I will at some point add this to the thread.
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.
I'm not sure which TD's are close to Noob or ARF any more, or even if they care, but hopefully if any are reading they can pass this feedback on.
Let me start by saying, I like both watches. They are both excellent interpretations of the gen. The noob and the ARF are excellent watches in their own right and we know that Noob is a working chrono, ARF is just a moving chrono seconds hand, but neither are IMO good enough to class as super reps.
The noob movement is a work of art. The pushers are not perfect but very good, the case is not perfect but decent, the sels are good enough with good QC 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. The ARF movement doesn't work like the gen, is noisy, has lots of reports of low power reserve and the consensus seems to be the rotor is not right for the watch. The case construction for the noob is perfect, the ARF requires lots of modification. The noob case is 316L, the ARF is 904L.
The bracelet splits opinion, as does the clasp. It appears the noob v2 has improved over v1.
Franken of a 116520 is plausible but 116500 is cost prohibitive. So ideal situation is fix these small issues and everyone wins.
So, ceramic first. I'm going to just judge the white dial models.
G=Gen
N=NOOB
A=ARF
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.
Subdials. Ever so slightly too wide on the noob, ever so slightly better finished on the ARF.
Indices. Nicely polished on the gen. Ok on the ARF. Too thick and bland on the noob.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
Subdials. Well credit where credit is due, at least all of the noob ones work [emoji3] 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. They've used the font from the ceramic dial again.
I couldn't be bothered to even look at the rehaut, lugs, sel etc on this one, I will at some point add this to the thread.
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.
I'm not sure which TD's are close to Noob or ARF any more, or even if they care, but hopefully if any are reading they can pass this feedback on.
