WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

Casio digital : G-Shock vs non G-Shock.

6K views 16 replies 13 participants last post by  Siberian cat 
#1 ·
Having couple cheap digital Casio watches, not Gshocks.


Im not very extreem and dont mine trona for breakfast but it looks to me like they can handle same beater activities as Gshocks. ( Biking, kayaking , camping...)

Is there any features in regular standard Gshocks ( except special like Pathfinder) that make them better than cheep digital Casio?




Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk
 
#4 ·
G Shock can literally take a beating including drops and direct hits. While other watches cannot, then again, who cares if you break a $25 watch? McDonalds for two costs just as much.

All of these are disposable watches unless you are getting into collectibles....based on rarity or value.

For Example this, a $30 watch but cant be replaced once broken, it was made 36 years ago.

Watch Automotive lighting Hood Gadget Wood
 
#6 ·
For those of us who don't drop their Casio off multi-story buildings the differences are probably these.
1. Improved crystal protection from being inset and using hardened mineral glass.
2. Improved protection of pushers reduces the chance of damage and inadvertent operation.
3. Improved water resistance.
4. Classic rugged G Shock looks.

I enjoy my retro styled Casio B640WD a lot. However in those criteria it comes up short.
 
#7 ·
I would presume the differences are most demonstrable with analog models. I am pretty sure G's have technology to specifically address shock resistance for physical hands.

I think all of the physical designs and technology are there to prevent catastrophic damage (to the functioning internals) from extreme conditions. Up until that point, however, I think an f91w is equal to the task.

So, no, if you aren't breaking your basic casios, then G's aren't an improvement 8n that department. One caveat: G's rake scratches pretty well. Those painted casios don't.
 
#10 ·
yes, you are right
but just as any car can get you from point A to point B, but some drive Hummer and some drive Corolla
just as any woman could be your companion, some pick the one that cooks well, and some pick the one that has the bigger ( . ) ( . )
lolz
pick what emotional-appeals to you,
 
#16 ·
yes, you are right
but just as any car can get you from point A to point B, but some drive Hummer and some drive Corolla
just as any woman could be your companion, some pick the one that cooks well, and some pick the one that has the bigger ( . ) ( . )
lolz
pick what emotional-appeals to you,
Im so confused....

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk
 
#11 ·
What John MS said.
I got my first G-Shock way after i got many regular Casio watches and i never got the point of extra shock resistance in sense where i will need it. Really. Nothing broke my digital Casio before apart from moron in mall kiosk who replaced battery.
How they look yes. Extra crystal protection... yes. Dropping them from 10m.... many non G Casio watches can take it.
Historically it did made sense in 1980 when digital watches been fragile but that not the case any more.
Sure thing you get extra protection but it's more than you ever gonna need.
 
#13 ·
Sure thing you get extra protection but it's more than you ever gonna need.

Of course there are other watches that can take quite a bit of punishment and can be used for the purposes you mentioned. The point with G-Shocks is that they were designed from the ground up, as it were, to have specific shock-resistance (and water resistance) capabilities. Which they meet. That is the whole basis for the brand, and for Casio standing behind it as a shock-resistant watch.

If you think Casio's other watches are just as tough, you're almost certainly mistaken. If you think G-Shocks are tougher than they need to be, well maybe. It depends entirely on what you intend to do with it and how much of a margin you want in the design for unforeseen use or unforeseen occurrences. When it comes to physical impact, G-Shocks can handle a lot. Other Casios can handle much less.

Is there any features in regular standard Gshocks ( except special like Pathfinder) that make them better than cheep digital Casio?
First of all - I'm willing to be corrected on this - I think Pathfinder is a predecessor or a subgroup of the ProTrek range, so they're not G-Shocks at all. As to what's better than you find in a cheap digital, better is a loaded word. Cheap, simple, reliable, well designed, and tough are hard to argue with, and that could be an F91W or any number of Casio models that come below the cheapest G-Shock. If it meets your expectations and you like the way it looks and feels, you need no more justification than that for owning a watch at any price.

G-Shocks are tougher, and many of them have a lot more features than the low-end Casios. That doesn't make them better per se, just more suited to certain users. I have a Rangeman, which has exactly the feature set I need, and (happily) almost none that I don't. It's particularly well-suited for commuting/hiking/air travel/mountain use. It's why I bought that rather than a Mudmaster or a Frogman or some other G-Shock. All of these are chunky watches, by the way, and visually, can be an acquired taste, so that's another reason why you might pass on them.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top