RAF 16610, New 5 Digit Factory

[KJ2020]

I just got QC for my RAF and not sure does this look like ARF?
Sticker reads AR.
Timeographer was +15 seconds so need to ask to have it regulate

That looks like an ARF to me bro. But there likely is no difference to a RAF. Just a different batch or build, same or similar parts sources. Personally I wouldn't take a watch on which the tube hole wasn't countersunk properly. This makes the tube base flange sit on on top of the case and not flush with it. That was a frequent ARF issue - plenty of examples of it though many were on 6 digit Subs. It's why the crown sticks out like that, if it can't be screwed down any further.

These CGs are stubby enough without further accentuating it with a protruding crown. That looks so bad.

 

[rockdaytona]

That looks like an ARF to me bro. But there likely is no difference to a RAF. Just a different batch or build. Personally I wouldn't take a watch on which the tube hole wasn't countersunk properly so the tube base flange sits flush with case and not on top of it. That was a frequent ARF issue, plenty of examples of it though many were on 6 digit Subs. It's why the crown sticks out like that, if it can't be screwed down any further.

These CGs are stubby enough without further accentuating it with a protruding crown. That looks so bad.

Thanks KJ the RAF was lauded on this thread as an impressive improvement on the former ARF. I will reject this QC

 

[KJ2020]

Thanks KJ the RAF was lauded on this thread as an impressive improvement on the former ARF. I will reject this QC

Two random gens

 

[vcelkama]

There are still some discussions whether RAF 16610 is / isn’t the same as ARF. If it helps anyone I have in my hands the bezel from ARF and the gen one now. I think ARF is very close to the gen. The main difference is the shape / quality of the teeth (click action). And scalops have a little bit different shape. But it is really minor and you likely won’t recognize it if you don’t compare it side by side with gen. Make your opinion gen always on the right:

 

[Clarkent]

gen bracelet + raf superfranken.

 

[Clarkent]

TC case isn't 1:1, very beautiful aesthetic lines but has different shapes and sizes than the gen. this is a bad example of how the sel of the gen bracelet fits very badly with the TC case. I repeat that the only real strong point of TC is the length, but otherwise I prefer Raf (which is almost certainly in my case it is a JF, the watch arrived in December, therefore first batches Raf)

 

[StreetFighter]

Yep, I noted that the TC case has too wide lugs to fit a gen bracelet..and as consequence, the TC bracelet will not fit another watch because the SEL is wider than normal to fit the TC.
Also, cannot fit a gen 3135 in a TC(V6), I tried that too.

However, the TC case still kicks the ass of a JF/RAF/ARF in my opinion. It's the only 16610 rep that ever got the crown guards right and the bezel action is 1:1 with gen imo too. For all intents and puposes, it's the better rep. I have mine modded with gen crown,tube,crystal, insert, it's had the lugs chamfrred and serials added, this is as far as I could take it, gen movement and bracelet will not fit.

If the RAF/ARF or whatever they call it would sort out the crown guards I'd have another but it's a watch I look at and I can see it's fake instantly, and that will not change no matter how many gen parts I put on it.

I think If I had to have a 16610 today the RARF 16610 would scratch the itch, but I'd be looking out for a TC, it wouldn't sit well me knowing there was a better rep and I didnt have one! It took me over 12months to get a TC and it cost me double after customs and the courier that stole the watch I swapped it for.

I have read that other versions of TC may be different and the lugs may take a gen bracelet and the case may take a gen movement, but I must have drawn the sort straw with the V6.

 

[shotgun]

My RAF with old noob 93250…SEL is recessed..love it…

 

[Clarkent]

Yep, I noted that the TC case has too wide lugs to fit a gen bracelet..and as consequence, the TC bracelet will not fit another watch because the SEL is wider than normal to fit the TC.
Also, cannot fit a gen 3135 in a TC(V6), I tried that too.

However, the TC case still kicks the ass of a JF/RAF/ARF in my opinion. It's the only 16610 rep that ever got the crown guards right and the bezel action is 1:1 with gen imo too. For all intents and puposes, it's the better rep. I have mine modded with gen crown,tube,crystal, insert, it's had the lugs chamfrred and serials added, this is as far as I could take it, gen movement and bracelet will not fit.

If the RAF/ARF or whatever they call it would sort out the crown guards I'd have another but it's a watch I look at and I can see it's fake instantly, and that will not change no matter how many gen parts I put on it.

I think If I had to have a 16610 today the RARF 16610 would scratch the itch, but I'd be looking out for a TC, it wouldn't sit well me knowing there was a better rep and I didnt have one! It took me over 12months to get a TC and it cost me double after customs and the courier that stole the watch I swapped it for.

I have read that other versions of TC may be different and the lugs may take a gen bracelet and the case may take a gen movement, but I must have drawn the sort straw with the V6.

I have here with me the TC nos case, as already said in terms of aesthetics it is beautiful, but on my raf I installed the ring bezel, bezel, insert, crystal all gen, for me it was unthinkable to have a gen bracelet available and not be able to use it because the case did not accommodate it. my preference went to raf, having a gen bracelet tastes completely different. below CG raf on the left and CG tc on the right. Both new cases

 

[KushBandit]

I have here with me the TC nos case, as already said in terms of aesthetics it is beautiful, but on my raf I installed the ring bezel, bezel, insert, crystal all gen, for me it was unthinkable to have a gen bracelet available and not be able to use it because the case did not accommodate it. my preference went to raf, having a gen bracelet tastes completely different. below CG raf on the left and CG tc on the right. Both new cases

You could always have the crown guards laser welded and reshaped to get them correct. It seems the TC v6 only has the RAF beat with the CGs.

 

[Clarkent]

You could always have the crown guards laser welded and reshaped to get them correct. It seems the TC v6 only has the RAF beat with the CGs.

the cg Raf are fine for my eyes ( JF for my ideas )

 

[KushBandit]

the cg Raf are fine for my eyes ( JF for my ideas )

I would agree that they're definitely acceptable. I have no plans to do it with mine when it eventually shows up.

How does the RAF bracelet hold up compared to your gen?

 

[GrandmasterChime]

Just received

I would agree that they're definitely acceptable. I have no plans to do it with mine when it eventually shows up.

How does the RAF bracelet hold up compared to your gen?

My black just turned up. Clasp is very rattly, overall fit and finish of the watch head is pretty good. My reference for comparison is a gen 16710. Bezel is a little light but not terrible.

 

[KushBandit]

Just received

My black just turned up. Clasp is very rattly, overall fit and finish of the watch head is pretty good. My reference for comparison is a gen 16710. Bezel is a little light but not terrible.

Sounds like the typical JF/ARF/RAF clasp they've had over the years. Is your coronet centered or slightly to the right on your clasp?

The most consistant upgrade I've heard with these is getting a gen clasp. Not that it even matters, but I wonder if the watch and bracelet are actually 904L, considering there hasn't really been much upgrades since I first saw the JF back in 2018. Back when they were only 316L and $380, before the 904L claim and upcharge.

All in all, a good watch out of the box, but needs some work to be great. Still the only good franken candidate for a 5 digit Sub. Still excited to get mine, I'll do a write up and add a bunch of photos for documenting.

Thank you for giving a comparison

 

[Clarkent]

I would agree that they're definitely acceptable. I have no plans to do it with mine when it eventually shows up.

How does the RAF bracelet hold up compared to your gen?

the raf bracelet compared to the gen is a poop. here's why :

 

[KushBandit]

the raf bracelet compared to the gen is a poop. here's why :

Really though...How exactly did that happen? Were you pulling the permanent link apart or did you just wear it too tight? I mean, it's not good either way lol

 

[Clarkent]

Really though...How exactly did that happen? Were you pulling the permanent link apart or did you just wear it too tight? I mean, it's not good either way lol

unfortunately it is a historical defect of JF.. they have an extremely thin pin and cannot support the load of the whole watch. I wore it very little and it wasn't tight, but it can be repaired and reinforced with strong pins in a fairly simple way

 

[Clarkent]

important information for those who buy raf: the bracelet has springs with a diameter of 1.8 which are not suitable, the sel is not stable on the case. buy the springbars with a diameter of 2.0 and replace them

 

[heska]

unfortunately it is a historical defect of JF.. they have an extremely thin pin and cannot support the load of the whole watch. I wore it very little and it wasn't tight, but it can be repaired and reinforced with strong pins in a fairly simple way

Fun fact: this flaw is also present on some gen 93250: https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=385016

It broke on my jf bracelet eventually but thankfully it’s fixable: https://forum.replica-watch.info/th...-93250-bracelet-rolex.10917911/#post-11018860

I imagine that it was easier for Rolex at some point to just have one similar band for several references and just different SEL

 

[heska]

But I wonder if this flaw is still present on RAF bracelet as I find it quite different from JF