I have a 190mm, f/5.6 Optar in my Graflex Super-D. It is
indeed an excellent lens with none of the faults found in
the f/4.5 Optar/Raptar lenses. It could well be that
Wollensak used the Kodak design, there is probably no way to
know at this late date. Certainly Wollensak had the ability
to make the lenses physically. They were also one of the
first lens makers to routinely hard coat their lenses. The
poor design of the Raptar is a puzzle to me because they are
_so_ bad. Although very sharp in the center they appear to
have either a very great deal of coma or of oblique
spherical aberration (they look much the same), so that the
image away from the center is not sharp even when stopped
down to f/32. In comparison the Kodak Ektar and Zeiss Tessar
of similar speed are sharp to the corners at around f/9.
Oblique spherical is an inherent problem with Tessar lenses.
Evidently, something got miscalculated. I don't think its
from manufacturing variation because I've observed it on
every one of these lenses I've had access to and it also
seems to be the same for both the 135mm and 101mm versions.
The Enlarging Raptar seems to have a similar problem. When I
set up a darkroom again some years ago I obtained a 50mm
Enlarging Raptar in excellent condition. I was puzzled as to
why the prints didn't look right until I replaced it with an
Enlarging Rokkor and shortly after a Schneider Componon-S.
The E-Rokkor is BTW a very good lens. I have a couple of
Enlarging Ektars. Its very hard to seen any difference
between the 75mm Ektar and an 80mm Componon.
    As far as Wollensak is concerned I remember their
lenses having a poor reputation. Curiously, they were in
general not cheap. OTOH, Wollensak shutters are excellent.