-
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
- Thread starter guru
- Start date
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
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 ???? 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
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
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 ???? 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
- 21/2/16
- 1,078
- 276
- 83
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
Sent from my iPhone using RWI
phdsjain
I'm Pretty Popular
- 6/3/14
- 2,008
- 893
- 113
ssouthall6 Thank you for taking the time to compile the extensively detailed comparison. This ought to be a sticky and it's own thread.
- 12/3/18
- 34,664
- 66,756
- 113
Looks like if you morphed the Noob and ARF lugs together it would look like the gen, lol. Neither one is particularly close.
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
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 ???? 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
Hidenjoy
Renowned Member
- 8/9/15
- 710
- 252
- 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
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 ???? 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
- 28
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
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
Getting To Know The Place
- 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.
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.
- 12/3/18
- 34,664
- 66,756
- 113
Here's the combo I would love to put together. How awesome is this?
Rep Enthusiast
Getting To Know The Place
- 31/3/18
- 61
- 38
- 18
Here's the combo I would love to put together. How awesome is this?
Haters would say bezel is not aligned ???? just kidding...
Love your choice!
Bezelover
Getting To Know The Place
- 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
Arf will not be releasing a full clone movement, confirmed by Angus @puretime
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
Excellent illustrated critique of the Noob Daytonas @ssouthall6 Everything you point out is valuable and correct.
knol
Active Member
- 17/8/16
- 276
- 32
- 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 ?
Unfortunatelly not :-( Should be here already. But had some delay from the shipping from CN to UK. But now it is on its ways
Can't wait to receive this nice watch
mari115
Respected Member
I agree I don't understand why anyone is even talking about the ARF.