Mechanical movements are irretrievably fragile. Yes, even the self-styled "tool" watches.
In the U.S. 2/3rds comes from burning "fossil" fuels (coal and natural gas). Very little comes from rainbows and unicorn farts. Only 20% (or is it 30? I forget) comes from nuclear (should be MUCH more, but there's an irrational stigma).In some cases, the wind.
In some cases, the sun.
In some cases, splitting atoms.
In every other case, something much more efficient than an ICE.
As for automatic G-Shocks - I'd say, why not?
Same here. I'd also love to see Casio release a high quality quartz movement, similar to the Grand Seiko 9f. A '3 hander' from Casio with a 'top-notch' quartz movement would be interesting.I agree. Would be very interesting. But, yeah... I'd buy one in a second, if I liked the esthetics.
I'd be content with a solar quartz movement with smooth-moving seconds hand. I reckon it would be easier to develop than a shock-resistant mechanical movement.Same here. I'd also love to see Casio release a high quality quartz movement, similar to the Grand Seiko 9f. A '3 hander' from Casio with a 'top-notch' quartz movement would be interesting.
Your political agenda is showing. Try reading my post again.not from coal? bit of an oversight on your part, i'd say...
you missed the joke, man. sorry for offending you!Your political agenda is showing. Try reading my post again.
Mountaineers Go First!! By the way, I LOVE fossil fuels. Coal, heavy oil, diesel, all that. I roll in it, baby. I roll that coal out the tailpipe of my two diesel Land Rovers. Turn that fuel mixture all the way up up up.
Electric cars for now and for the future. Electric cars forever.
Whatever Casio's tests are, isn't the principle behind a G-Shock durability in tough environments?An automatic movement that can stand up to all of Casio's tests? I doubt that's possible, no matter the casing and suspension. Be interesting to see them try, and at what cost. But I still suspect the result would be a G-Sock with caveats, or a "G-Lite" in the worst sense which would dilute the brand. Maybe if they just called it an Edifice?
Hmm, interesting philosophical question; What exactly makes a G-shock a G-shock? The big clue is in the name - Shock. Like hitting the watch with a hockey stick or dropping it out a third story window onto concrete. Exactly the sort of thing that will reliably scramble an assortment of tiny delicate pieces. That's why I hope that, if Casio ever does try an automatic, they call it something else.Whatever Casio's tests are, isn't the principle behind a G-Shock durability in tough environments?
If we'd all agree to that, then no single movement would have a monopoly for all use-cases, right?
For example: one way to protect quartz electronics against magnetic fields is an iron back plate that can conduct flux along the surface. An automatic movement on the other hand, especially one with a silica mainspring, would be mostly impervious to magnetic fields including an EMP due to, say, an exploding transformer, industrial equipment, a nearby lightning strike, etc.
Beyond the all-use-cases durability, would be the emotional aspect: if the G-Shock principle is the toughest watch you can own, then given automatic & spring drive would be that other two movements that G-Shock doesn't make ...
Said differently, wouldn't "G-Shock Automatic: The toughest automatic timepiece money can buy" be a no-brainer adjacency to their existing products?