WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
396 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I have seen these discussions on various topics but can't seem to find one that says it all, apologies for starting one if there are already others. Anyway..

Having just received my Rangeman makes me wonder, the different models, namely Riseman, Gulfman, Mudman, Frogman, even the Aviation series and now Rangeman, what are the differences in "toughness", ie Mudman claims to be "mud-resistant", does that mean other are not resistant to mud? Frogman is clearly differentiated with "Diver's 200m" rating. Riseman doesn't seem to be more "altitude resistant" than any other (are the Aviation series more resistant to altitude other than G-force?), Gulfman is not more "water resistant" than others, and the latest Rangeman is.. Geez I don't know where it stands?

I just wonder if all these are more marketing than functionality.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,220 Posts
Civic98, the Aviators were designed to withstand acrobatic aviation if I remember correctly, something like 12 G's. I'd imagine pretty difficult for an analog.

Gulfman is corrosion resistant due to titanium backplate and screws.

Mudman has mud resist buttons and sleeve over edge of backplate to make it tougher for mud to get inside the module. Both ideas have been incorporated into other watches.

Riseman. Well,this one hasn't exactly been recognized as tough, but a few people love the size of it and it is still a G-Shock.

Hope this helps, not an end all of an answer but hopefully gives some insight.

sent with aloha
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
528 Posts
I just wonder if all these are more marketing than functionality.
You answered your own question there.

In my opinion, in 99.99% of the situations normal people find themselves in, any G-Shock would survive just fine including those designed as far back as in 1983. What minor variations there are in terms of functionality and design are just there to attract a wider audience of tastes and to exploit the collector streak in some of us. Shock resistance and 20BAR WR are what attracted most of us to G-Shocks back in the day, and if a certain model happens to be marketed with an extra level of resistance, it doesn't mean that it is unique it this quality. "Resistance" is overrated, but as most of us on WUS would testify, it is also "futile" (yes, that was a Star Trek reference -- admittedly too nerdy even for a watch forum). ;-)
 
  • Like
Reactions: civic98

·
Registered
Joined
·
396 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Thanks Chrisek & alexs12. I guess it's safe to say that any G-Shock is just as water, mud, corrosion, shock etc resistant as any other G-Shocks, FOR our ordinary use/exposure. Apart from the Frogman which is Divers' dedicated, and the Aviators G-force specific.

I'm more inclined to think G-Shocks are more of a "fashion" statement & collectibles. Even so, is there a reason not to own them all? LOL..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
528 Posts
Thanks Chrisek & alexs12. I guess it's safe to say that any G-Shock is just as water, mud, corrosion, shock etc resistant as any other G-Shocks, FOR our ordinary use/exposure. Apart from the Frogman which is Divers' dedicated, and the Aviators G-force specific.

I'm more inclined to think G-Shocks are more of a "fashion" statement & collectibles. Even so, is there a reason not to own them all? LOL..
My main reason is I am not made of money :)
For many years, I frequented blade forums and collected folding knives, Eastern swords, even big and heavy Khukuri knives. That's all over now and it's on to other addictions for me. Watches are more practical than two-pound choppers and far less scary to normal people. I am not cured, but I am feeling better and my symptoms are less troublesome :)
I wonder what toys I will fancy next... I hope they are cheap whatever they are.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,522 Posts
All G's are plenty tough, as already wrote by alexs12, probably more than enough for 99.99% of all people and situations. However in my opinion some are still tougher than others.

First - I would rule out all analogs, 'cause no matter what marketing and all kind of experts say, it is simply a physical fact, that no analog watch with hands and gear-wheels can have the same toughness as a pure digital with no moving parts at all (except for the quartz itself of course).

Second - the button design might be an factor. As much as I like models with a dedicated fifth light button right under the display at 6 o'clock, it is my understanding that less is more and a four buttons models simply decreases the chance of water leakage by 20%.

Third - all G's with sensors of some kind are more likely to fail than those without any. Same goes for all G's with atomic and solar, the more technique is crowded in such a small housing, the more they are likely to fail.

Fourth - the illumination. I hate to say this, since I absolutely love a good el-backlight and I'm not a fan of the newer LED illumination at all but say what you will, a LED is very rugged and extremely unlikely to fail while an el-foil is not. Additionally the LED's require next to nothing power while an el-foil requires a lot.

Fifth - Only a G made of resin can have maximum shock protection due to the softness of the material and reduced weight. No metal G - be it steel or titanium - can have the same shock absorbing abilities as one made of plastic.



Consider all that and I'm willing to bet that the GD-100 series (and similar models) is among the toughest G'shock's ever made.


cheers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,106 Posts
Cal..45 and Chrisek make very salient points, so there's not much to add. All I can contribute is this:

The 5600 series is extremely tough, the GX-56 even more so. These are models without any sensors. The basic 5600 does not have button covers, but the gap in the bezel surrounding the buttons is extremely minute. Note that ANY Mudman exposed to lots of mud will inevitably suffer "silt creep". It's going to get in between the bezel and the case. But then, any sensible user of said watch will pop off the bezel after those heavy duty activities are over and give their watch a good rinse.

Frankly, if CASIO released another King (GX-56, GXW-56) but with a well light balanced LED instead of EL back light and made the digits a little larger, I would say that it is the King of G-Shock toughness over any other model, and I'd probably buy one just to have the "toughest" in my collection. Even over a Frogman, because without such thick resin covering the case it is more susceptible to damage.

There is also something to be said of screw back all stainless steel cases. For a time CASIO made them available in some moderately priced standard models, but have since provided them only in the high priced Frogman line or special anniversary editions of the 5000 series. Vintage standard line models like the DW-9600, G-2000, and GL-110 are seriously tough and will hold up better to water ingress than a basic back plate 5600.


But the marketing... yes. When considering your average G-Shock owner, I'd say the watch is likely over-engineered. For example, I've yet to see a screw back case with rust or pitting. Who really needs titanium, if only to just lighten the load a little? And the Frogman... well, I don't think it has anything over other screw back models in terms of water resistance. But the machining and button functions are top notch, qualities you'll see when you own one. That's part of what makes it command such a high price.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
396 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Very valid points cal..45 and I totally agree with xevious, I would do the same, get the toughest G-Shock ever for the collection. And at this point I'm looking at the Frogman.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,877 Posts
Frankly, if CASIO released another King (GX-56, GXW-56) but with a well light balanced LED instead of EL back light and made the digits a little larger, I would say that it is the King of G-Shock toughness over any other model, and I'd probably buy one just to have the "toughest" in my collection. Even over a Frogman, because without such thick resin covering the case it is more susceptible to damage.
+1 on buying that re-designed King. Put a vibe alarm in it for a total package. That would be awesome.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,298 Posts
All G's are plenty tough, as already wrote by alexs12, probably more than enough for 99.99% of all people and situations. However in my opinion some are still tougher than others.

First - I would rule out all analogs, 'cause no matter what marketing and all kind of experts say, it is simply a physical fact, that no analog watch with hands and gear-wheels can have the same toughness as a pure digital with no moving parts at all (except for the quartz itself of course).
No, it is not a fact: it is simply something you have said. Engineering hands to be shock resistant costs more money - which is why analog G's cost more than all-digitals. It does not necessarily mean that once that engineering had been done and the cost paid that the analog will be weaker than any digital, especially given that the analog models can be very much more expensive, leaving budget to pay for more engineering in other weak areas.


Third - all G's with sensors of some kind are more likely to fail than those without any.
This is appalling logic. Yes, a sensor adds complexity. But you are assuming that all modules are otherwise the same! It's quite possible that other design variations wipe out this effect. You can say that one can suspect a tendency for sensor models to be more failure prone, but your much stronger claim is just silliness.

Fourth - the illumination. I hate to say this, since I absolutely love a good el-backlight and I'm not a fan of the newer LED illumination at all but say what you will, a LED is very rugged and extremely unlikely to fail while an el-foil is not. Additionally the LED's require next to nothing power while an el-foil requires a lot.
Do you have any prooof that EL is less rugged? It doesn't seem as if you do... anything at all?


Fifth - Only a G made of resin can have maximum shock protection due to the softness of the material and reduced weight. No metal G - be it steel or titanium - can have the same shock absorbing abilities as one made of plastic.
Completely wrong. Firstly the amount of cushioning that can be provided by a standard resin bezel (they're not really cases - take one off and have a look) is minute compared to the energy a G is designed to withstand. (Because 2as = vee squared - u squared, yes?) Secondly you are assuming that it is the ONLY cushioning or impact resistance method - which is not the case. For example, some upper range modules have internal alpha-GEL buffers around the module - and this stuff can absorb a lot more energy than a 1mm thick plastic bezel. Oh - and a lot of shock absorbing systems require a rigid outer shell for full effectiveness, which a metal shell will provide better than a standard resin bezel. (Hint: look at a motorcycling helmet - the shell is hard not soft for a reason!)

Basically, a lot is going to depend on details of internal construction that we just don't know - eg the method of mounting the quartz crystal. It's certainly easier and cheaper to make a tough watch that's all digital, but more you spend, the more engineering you can do. Other than that, extra case size will give more room for cushioning - but this is possible toughness, not definite toughness - it depends how that room is used.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,298 Posts
This gives an idea how silly is talk about the quite ordinary and very thin plastic of a G-Shock bezel as being an overriding factor in shock resistance:


...The dedicated shock absorbing materials materials than some - not all - G's use as part of their construction are several orders of magnitude better at absorbing shock.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
528 Posts
Scuttle,
Thank you for editing your initial post to make it less offensive, but I wish you had gone even further in that direction. One can make all the points you make while still remaining entirely respectful at all times. That said, thank you for your input; this turned into an interesting discussion now. I like that video of Beta gel too! Those new technologies are exciting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,106 Posts
I do realize a lot of engineering has gone into the tough movement of analog G-Shocks. However, the fact that you still have movement, it means that there are stress points. Thus under extreme G's, there's a greater chance for something to give or distort than with a completely solid state movement. But then... the degree is probably far more extreme than most people will ever subject their watches.

With the EL back light, it is a fragile foil that can detach from the module under the right circumstances. But where I think cal..45 is coming from is that the LED is more robust for longevity.

Not all sensors are created equal, and earlier versions are more susceptible to failure than current ones. But that's the sensor--not time keeping. It looks to me like the V3 sensors are solid state and completely contained--no issue for water ingress. As for the compass, I do wonder if the sensor is completely solid state. That there's a magnetically sensitive disc as opposed to something moving around in reaction to magnetic fields.

A hard resin case has a little more flexibility to it over a stainless steel case. It can endure enough stress to begin distorting and then return to its original shape, while the steel case will bend and stay that way. However, this is not indicative of superiority. A hard resin case will likely crack/split before a steel case does.


In any case, that video is amazing. Not only was the egg dropped from several stories up, but the guy pitched the egg rather hard against the shock absorbing mat. Simply amazing! Use that Beta Gel in a G-Shock and your worries are over, no room for doubt about an extremely high degree of shock absorption and energy dispersal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,980 Posts
@ scuttle
Well, you called cal..45 "silly" twice now - maybe a little reminder about forum rule #2 is in order:
2. Members will be kind and courteous, and respectful to other members and the moderators. No direct or indirect personal attacks or insults of any kind will be allowed. Posts which antagonize, belittle or humiliate other members and/or the moderators will not be tolerated, nor will racism, sexism, bigotry or foul language.
cheers, Sedi :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,980 Posts
Completely wrong. Firstly the amount of cushioning that can be provided by a standard resin bezel (they're not really cases - take one off and have a look) is minute compared to the energy a G is designed to withstand.
You can be sure that cal..45 knows that the bezels are removeable - fact of the matter is that Casio calls the case-material "resin" as well.

cheers, Sedi :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
396 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Shock absorbing shell/case is only one part, while it protects the watch from shattering, it doesn't guarantee the internals from being shaken apart. That's where the above points by cal..45 becomes very valid.

But that gel.. Endless possibilities..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
153 Posts
I think it's 90% marketing but with anything marketing it does have some truth behind it, for instance

Frogman: The only ISO6425 certified watch in the G shock lineup, and has been tested for salt water corrosion, shock resistance, thermal shock and condensation tests that other G shocks 'might' withstand but has not been tested. In the days of the dive computer however, many divers don't even wear dive watches anymore...

Gulfman: As discussed above, titanium back and screws, more resistant to corrosion than a steel back, and comes with weather sensors as well.

Aviator: An analog G shock having a stepper motor designed to work fine up to 15Gs

Gaussman: An older G shock specifically designed to work perfectly under very strong magnetic fields, required if you were for instance a chemist using H NMR spectrometers, physicists working with synchrotrons, electric plant workers etc.

Mudman: Normal G shock with flaps that cover the buttons, many in Iraq/Afghanistan have reported fine sand getting in through the first of 2 gaskets of their G shocks, the Mudman will provide a greater deal of resistance to mud and fine dust/sand.

Riseman: Nothing additional in terms of structural toughness, more of a name that indicates its function.

Like i said, 90% of it is marketing, and the different G shocks only really demarcate the different functions within the watch, however each of the Master of G lineups have additional structural modifications that will allow it to be tougher when taken to the edge. Hope that helps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,298 Posts
Scuttle,
Thank you for editing your initial post to make it less offensive, but I wish you had gone even further in that direction. One can make all the points you make while still remaining entirely respectful at all times.
Saving someone's face when they been that silly is a lot of work; I really didn't feel like the extra effort was justified. If you are going to make definite statements on a subject, then make sure that you know something about it!

Or at least engage common sense - if you've ever taken the bezel of a resin G off then it should be obvious that it is too thin to absorb a significant amount of shock. And if you've not even done this, when why tell everyone that you know which G-Shock to buy as the toughest model?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,298 Posts
I think it's 90% marketing but with anything marketing it does have some truth behind it, for instance

Frogman: The only ISO6425 certified watch in the G shock lineup, and has been tested for salt water corrosion, shock resistance, thermal shock and condensation tests that other G shocks 'might' withstand but has not been tested. In the days of the dive computer however, many divers don't even wear dive watches anymore...
And a lot of the ones who do wear ordinary G's as a back up. Otoh a friend of mine worked as a diver manager for a year on a volunteer project with a lot of people working on the site for a couple of months and didn't see a single Frogman. The Frog is really made as a collectible, not a working diver's tool. There's nothing wrong with it - it's just too expensive when a watch is only worn as a back up, or because you can't afford a dive computer.

Like i said, 90% of it is marketing, and the different G shocks only really demarcate the different functions within the watch, however each of the Master of G lineups have additional structural modifications that will allow it to be tougher when taken to the edge. Hope that helps.
That's about it: the Japanese are obsessive collectors - think Poekemon. Casio's marketing strategy to have a vast range of tempting toys with different themes in the G-Shock range, and there is nothing at all wrong with that.
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Top