VSF New GMT Pepsi 126710 with Clean and GEN Comparison

[steve_theonewatches]

Hello everyone,

We’ve taken a batch of higher-quality photos and welcome all friends to share your thoughts and discuss in the comments.

Additionally, VS Factory has announced that they will release all GMT models. As soon as we receive the latest updates, we’ll be the first to share them here.

Front view



Bezel view



Teeth of bezel



Crystal view



Cyclops view


Calendar font



Bezel engraving















Dial font view





Markers view





Hands view





Center axis view




Rehaut view



Crown view

 

[steve_theonewatches]

Lugs view



Case side view





Case back view



Movement view



Bracelet & Clasp view








Feel free to contact us via the email or whatsapp.
email:[email protected]
whatsapp: +86 135 0241 3035

 

[Reaps]

• Crystal difference is obvious. - VSF wins on mag and clarity.
• Rehaut - Clean wins, rehaut on VSF is poor compared to Clean/Gen clearly, especially at certain angles.
• Dial - VSF dial has advantages - it's printing is thicker and full, more like gen you can also see the thinner print of Clean/ARF issues from pre Dec 2024. (Look at the E in ROLEX print as the easiest comparison between VSF and Clean).
  • The complaints about the rounded date window from Clean are unfounded, since gen also has the same. Noone wins or lose here regarding datewindow
• Markers - this may or may not be distortion, but look at how VSF polished the sides whereas Clean/Gen is jagged/unpolished! Hahaha. But otherwise the triangular marker lacks a little depth. So 50/50.
• Hands - Clean does the hands better, slightly more full/3D, but unpolished sides rears it's head again.
• Bracelet - looks the same, no issue, need in hand to evaluate the feel of them.
• Case - looks the same, need better evaluation. I know in the VSF advertisement they said Clean's lugs were a little thicker.
  • I did hear the thing that Clean was using a 116710 case more than a 126710 case, which is why this could be. But it's subtle and I couldn't tell on this comparison.
• Bezel inserts are the same, Clean's is probably used model - it's a little dirty.

I'm curious to see if VSF sent out the best promotional model, and if really all these hands will be polished on the sides.

Overall, I think VSF takes it over Clean OOTB. Clean boss better step up or they'll lose a large money maker for them (;

 

[bcwatcher]

Clean still wins...imo...swap the crystal and run.
Not that vs didn't give it a good go...

 

[derjenigewelcher]

Wondering about the bezel cliclk feeling on the vsf if its wobbly as CLEAN

 

[2841]

Both watches would still need a gen crystal, overall, the details on the CF are better imo

 

[sting]

• Crystal difference is obvious. - VSF wins on mag and clarity.
• Rehaut - Clean wins, rehaut on VSF is poor compared to Clean/Gen clearly, especially at certain angles.
• Dial - VSF dial has advantages - it's printing is thicker and full, more like gen you can also see the thinner print of Clean/ARF issues from pre Dec 2024. (Look at the E in ROLEX print as the easiest comparison between VSF and Clean).
  • The complaints about the rounded date window from Clean are unfounded, since gen also has the same. Noone wins or lose here regarding datewindow
• Markers - this may or may not be distortion, but look at how VSF polished the sides whereas Clean/Gen is jagged/unpolished! Hahaha. But otherwise the triangular marker lacks a little depth. So 50/50.
• Hands - Clean does the hands better, slightly more full/3D, but unpolished sides rears it's head again.
• Bracelet - looks the same, no issue, need in hand to evaluate the feel of them.
• Case - looks the same, need better evaluation. I know in the VSF advertisement they said Clean's lugs were a little thicker.
  • I did hear the thing that Clean was using a 116710 case more than a 126710 case, which is why this could be. But it's subtle and I couldn't tell on this comparison.
• Bezel inserts are the same, Clean's is probably used model - it's a little dirty.

I'm curious to see if VSF sent out the best promotional model, and if really all these hands will be polished on the sides.

Overall, I think VSF takes it over Clean OOTB. Clean boss better step up or they'll lose a large money maker for them (;

Do you not think the Clean rehault engraving has a prominent out line, whereas the Gen and VSF don't in these pictures? IMO VSF definitely takes the crown now if you intend to keep the watch stock, if you want to start switching parts then it's going to be subjective

 

[Reaps]

Do you not think the Clean rehault engraving has a prominent out line, whereas the Gen and VSF don't in these pictures? IMO VSF definitely takes the crown now if you intend to keep the watch stock, if you want to start switching parts then it's going to be subjective

Everything has nuance, I left it general, VSF vs Clean can be an endless battle, it's all personal preference,

I think you'll notice rough polishing on daily wear on rehaut way more than some font difference/lettering difference imho, Clean just looks deeper and better, but that's me,

Should have stated in the post "it's just my opinion"

 

[suppish]

vsf edges it out for me

it's a bit odd to me that there is a difference is the rehaut when they both have the same serial - which means they are:
1) use the same case, and therefore rehaut should be same
2) use different case but have decided to use the same serial as Clean

 

[TerryRobot]

• Crystal difference is obvious. - VSF wins on mag and clarity.
• Rehaut - Clean wins, rehaut on VSF is poor compared to Clean/Gen clearly, especially at certain angles.
• Dial - VSF dial has advantages - it's printing is thicker and full, more like gen you can also see the thinner print of Clean/ARF issues from pre Dec 2024. (Look at the E in ROLEX print as the easiest comparison between VSF and Clean).
  • The complaints about the rounded date window from Clean are unfounded, since gen also has the same. Noone wins or lose here regarding datewindow
• Markers - this may or may not be distortion, but look at how VSF polished the sides whereas Clean/Gen is jagged/unpolished! Hahaha. But otherwise the triangular marker lacks a little depth. So 50/50.
• Hands - Clean does the hands better, slightly more full/3D, but unpolished sides rears it's head again.
• Bracelet - looks the same, no issue, need in hand to evaluate the feel of them.
• Case - looks the same, need better evaluation. I know in the VSF advertisement they said Clean's lugs were a little thicker.
  • I did hear the thing that Clean was using a 116710 case more than a 126710 case, which is why this could be. But it's subtle and I couldn't tell on this comparison.
• Bezel inserts are the same, Clean's is probably used model - it's a little dirty.

I'm curious to see if VSF sent out the best promotional model, and if really all these hands will be polished on the sides.

Overall, I think VSF takes it over Clean OOTB. Clean boss better step up or they'll lose a large money maker for them (;

My thoughts are the same The VSF does look to have maybe more pluses than the Clean used in comparison, however maybe @steve_theonewatches could confirm if the Clean is one of their latest models or an older one, Im pretty sure some models do have some different parts used from time to time when stock might be low so some Clean's or other brands might be sub par to their normal offerings depending on the if demand and stock didn't work out when being built.

The Gen look pretty battered but you can see the lip on the bezel is more pronounced but that the clean an VSF do have a small lip compared to the older versions.

Id be inclined to try a VSF if they did come as tidy as these unless like you say this is a show piece launch where it shows how good they can be but production models might make use of what parts they have available at time of building.

Looks good though and some of the shots the bezel insert looks better than the gen. The Gen model looks to be not the latest bezel insert as the 23 on models often have a much darker blue and that looks to be a little lighter, but this just goes to show that even gens have differences.

Great work Steve

 

[derjenigewelcher]

Both watches would still need a gen crystal, overall, the details on the CF are better imo

Ive seen all now and can die. VS xtal come on why go gen

 

[2841]

Ive seen all now and can die. VS xtal come on why go gen

If you are happy with the VS crystal, then there is no need

Personally I think the new B25/7035 GMT crystals are a huge upgrade.

 

[purplehaze89]

Both watches would still need a gen crystal, overall, the details on the CF are better imo

My opinion is the more blatant details I would say VSF edges Clean. The GMT hand on the Clean are the wrong shade of red, dial print is too greyish on Clean , yes the DW are still too rounded at the corners and have a bigger slope, and the CF lugs are indeed thicker (although probably not noticeable on the wrist). My Clean caseback does not pop out like in the pic Steve posted and sits flush. That seemed like VSF propaganda where they unscrewed the Clean caseback a bit lol

 

[GMTlover]

Can’t wait for the first QC pics and in hands review. Also on bezel action. Competition is good. Usually VSF doesn’t disappoint.

 

[Uhr70]

Trying to be as unbiased as possible here, but looking at the side by side pictures, Clean for me. Waiting to see in hand reviews to confirm whether VS crystal and bezel action are better than CF.

 

[Reaps]

My opinion is the more blatant details I would say VSF edges Clean. The GMT hand on the Clean are the wrong shade of red, dial print is too greyish on Clean , yes the DW are still too rounded at the corners and have a bigger slope, and the CF lugs are indeed thicker (although probably not noticeable on the wrist). My Clean caseback does not pop out like in the pic Steve posted and sits flush. That seemed like VSF propaganda where they unscrewed the Clean caseback a bit lol

This is not insulting those who care about this but I think this really is not a thing to be discussing lol, I get every other Clean complaint but this is the one that boggles my mind, I can barely see the date window edges on a regular GMT on wrist, you cannot even make out the corners, I always say, if you have to zoom 100x, show me the comparison to gen, and point it out, it's never an issue, that's nitpicking for nitpicking sake, we can easily give the same critique such as the caseback teeth are not the same cut, the bezel grooves are not the same depth, etc,

How come we criticize Clean for this but then give ARF a pass? It's only Clean that has to be held to high scrutiny standards lol

 

[purplehaze89]

This is not insulting those who care about this but I think this really is not a thing to be discussing lol, I get every other Clean complaint but this is the one that boggles my mind, I can barely see the date window edges on a regular GMT on wrist, you cannot even make out the corners, I always say, if you have to zoom 100x, show me the comparison to gen, and point it out, it's never an issue, that's nitpicking for nitpicking sake, we can easily give the same critique such as the caseback teeth are not the same cut, the bezel grooves are not the same depth, etc,

How come we criticize Clean for this but then give ARF a pass? It's only Clean that has to be held to high scrutiny standards lol

that picture is the comparison with gen. if clean didn't have their window so zoomed in, i'd bet it'd be less noticeable. But as the rep nerd saying goes, once seen it cannot be unseen. Like the floating M on VSF subs, some silly things bother people more than other people, and people here scrutinize reps on RWI. It is what it is, and why many of us are interested in comparison pics lol. I would say the date window is behind the inconsistent v3 dial print (not a flaw in earlier Clean versions) in up front noticeable differences.

ARF has only released one 'red UV' insert model IIRC with a VR3285, not counting their older 3186 GMTs. And they never released propaganda directly comparing their watch to the Clean so less discussion on differences lol.

 

[Reaps]

that picture is the comparison with gen. if clean didn't have their window so zoomed in, i'd bet it'd be less noticeable. But as the rep nerd saying goes, once seen it cannot be unseen. Like the floating M on VSF subs, some silly things bother people more than other people, and people here scrutinize reps on RWI. It is what it is, and why many of us are interested in comparison pics lol. I would say the date window is behind the inconsistent v3 dial print (not a flaw in earlier Clean versions) in up front noticeable differences.

ARF has only released one 'red UV' insert model IIRC with a VR3285, not counting their older 3186 GMTs. And they never released propaganda directly comparing their watch to the Clean so less discussion on differences lol.

Gen dial, about 1.5k,-2k will be perfect (;

Rep nerds always have picky nature, but empty wallets - the definition of choosing beggars

 

[purplehaze89]

Gen dial, about 1.5k,-2k will be perfect (;

Rep nerds always have picky nature, but empty wallets - the definition of choosing beggars

what's funny is i think this is true on reddit but not for many in this community. Just look at Collector's Corner. I know some watch nerds (me) on here are gen owners who franken the shit out of most their watches because they enjoy hunting watch parts like they're an autistic pirate on a treasure hunt. But most importantly because they own and know what gen looks and feels like, so some stock reps don't cut it

 

[SHB]

Well, so it's a clean watch with a vs crystal