New 16610 out? Experts?

[Kayatsu1]

Oh wow I think thats ok as a base for a franken the lug chamfers in person hopefully don't look too bad the dial indicies do not look round and the dw looks barf but its in the right steel now. Its also the only option we have now so it's suck it up or go with the 6 digits

I agree. Plus 6 digits reps are not that better then this one (until now)

 

[KJ2020]

Thank you for your opinion.

The dial coronet actually looks good. The second hand lume plot was blocking part of it in the other pic.

 

[Daryl70]

The dial coronet actually looks good. The second hand lume plot was blocking part of it in the other pic.

The difference in colours could be the lighting in which the photo was taken. I cant see the difference between the coronet of gen vs arf other that colour.

 

[Kayatsu1]

I checked the QC against some Gen pictures and I have to say it’s not bad. Lugs slightly but close. CGs very wrong. Dial well made. Also the bezel seems nice. It seems a good frankening material

 

[Francy93]

These are my QC pics

 

[KJ2020]

ARF CGs look a little smaller and thinner, although the pic angle may be slightly different.

Here you can see how much wider the lug chamfers are on the ARF. It's not ugly IMO, just not gen-like. Increasing a chamfer is a lot easier than reducing one though it can be done. You would lose a little case width in the process. Most will just choose to live with it I think.

 

[lamkinpark]

Crown guard is same old JF, smaller compare to gen. Chamfer is too much for non hole gen rolec case, chamfer was more pronounce for holed case.

 

[Tollo74]

Who qc is that is there any more pictures? Does this mean its official we can order it from our tds?

it'mine....the watch has been sent to me yesterday, as they told me....i'm waiting for the tracking number....

 

[Daryl70]

it'mine....the watch has been sent to me yesterday, as they told me....i'm waiting for the tracking number....

Damn its nice congrats!

 

[Daryl70]

The tip of the L is slightly different angle to this gen dial but there is so many different dials on the 16610 and this is also so small

 

[Daryl70]

The 2 also is slightly longer than this gen bezel insert again so small I don't think you could tell in person we are talking like 2mm difference. Also there could be a gen version of the bezel insert that they have matched this up too

 

[Tollo74]

Here the other qc pics that Puretime send me....


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

 

[SHB]

Great to see some qc pics, looking forward for lv version

 

[ROXOLO]

it might just be the pictures, but the bracelet seems way too shiny and smooth- almost polished. Easy fix if that would be the case, but still.

 

[shel504]

it might just be the pictures, but the bracelet seems way too shiny and smooth- almost polished. Easy fix if that would be the case, but still.

On Tollo's top pictice above, you can see the brushing well

 

[KushBandit]

This is a hard decision for me, and I regret not getting the JF when it was available. The chamfered lugs are an eye sore for me, and why I got rid of my BP 16710. I may just order one and live with it though, cause I need a 16610 in my life!

Thanks for the QC photos fellas, I'm excited to see wrist shots when you guys receive your watches :xj4:

 

[ROXOLO]

This is a hard decision for me, and I regret not getting the JF when it was available. The chamfered lugs are an eye sore for me, and why I got rid of my BP 16710. I may just order one and live with it though, cause I need a 16610 in my life!

Thanks for the QC photos fellas, I'm excited to see wrist shots when you guys receive your watches :xj4:

Those chamfered lugs are barely visible to MY eyes It's funny how picky we have become when it comes to Rolex reps. A very good PatekPhilippe rep like the PPF has much more obvious deviations from gen when you look at the case only (crown guards, bezel...) and is still considered a very very good rep. But yes, Rolex reps are usually the best so we expect them to be perfect.
I think this ARF really isn't bad at all.

For those interested, there's a 16610LV in the M2M sales section, apparently using the new ARF 904L as base. Worth checking it out!

 

[ROXOLO]

What bothers me more is SEL fitment to be honest. ARF is usually spot on, here it seems a little bit too flush AND somehow a bit asymmetrical...?... like more flush on one side than on the other?

 

[andyc]

Those chamfered lugs are barely visible to MY eyes It's funny how picky we have become when it comes to Rolex reps. A very good PatekPhilippe rep like the PPF has much more obvious deviations from gen when you look at the case only (crown guards, bezel...) and is still considered a very very good rep. But yes, Rolex reps are usually the best so we expect them to be perfect.
I think this ARF really isn't bad at all.

For those interested, there's a 16610LV in the M2M sales section, apparently using the new ARF 904L as base. Worth checking it out!

The 16610LV that was sold via M2M recently was a very strange offering. Firstly, none of the TD's are able to get this watch at the moment - apparently it came from a "Chinese contact" that the seller had and it was apparently a pre-release of the much anticipated new ARF version. But the watch that was sold had rehaut engraving, and the new ARF does not.......

 

[ROXOLO]

The 16610LV that was sold via M2M recently was a very strange offering. Firstly, none of the TD's are able to get this watch at the moment - apparently it came from a "Chinese contact" that the seller had and it was apparently a pre-release of the much anticipated new ARF version. But the watch that was sold had rehaut engraving, and the new ARF does not.......

Indeed. But it also has the ARF chamfered lugs (IIRC?) They might have tested an engraved rehaut version and then decided to market the non-engraved rehaut instead? it actually didn't look like any of the JF or BP I've seen so far - but then I'm far from a specialist so I may be completely wrong