No it's not, GA-1000 gives more bang for the bucks. But you have to understand, that this is just my opinion.

 

definitely not ... I read somewhere the strap must be removed to open the back to change batteries? also that watch sells for an unbelievable $366 on the UK high street ... granted it looks good, but the price, even at $200 in the US seems to me to be a waste of cash.

 

definitely not ... I read somewhere the strap must be removed to open the back to change batteries?

This actually applies to a LOT of G-Shocks and at least a few Pro Treks.

After five years and a few dozen Casio watches, I think it's less of a "design flaw" and more of a feature to keep idiots from attempting to open a watch that they shouldn't be working on in the first place.

 

Read my post few hours ago for more info on the GG1000 model and picture comparison to related models. It's heavily based on the PRG280, which was MSRP at $220 USD when it was released and later dropped to as low as $99 as I've seen. Remember the PRG280 is V1 sensors with 20 seconds compass, and the GG1000 is using the same sensors. Given the GG1000 does have mud resist buttons, as well as similar strap design to the real Mudmaster GWG1000, I say it does worth a little bit more. Some do like it because of its similarity to the GWG1000, so it's mostly based on personal taste.

As for me, the answer to the title question is No. If you can get it under $200, then may be worth it. But anything above, no. Especially not ~$300, you can spend that for lot better watches.

 

If you like it, then absolutely YES! First off, it is equally as comfortable to wear as its bigger brother, and just ask GWG owners how much they love the way that one fits. It is a cool looking watch, and obviously you agree as it seems to strikes you as such, so I say go for it. For $200 (around what I paid for mine also), IMO you are still getting a helluva lot of watch for the money.

That being said, I do not think it is worth the MSRP asking price. Also, the reason I got mine is because I liked the desert tan version. If there had been a tan GWG (there actually is one forthcoming now in camo), I would have likely saved up for that one.

One more thing, I agree with pocky that the ga1000 is also a great option and an excellent value, especially if you consider the FC version on the composite bracelet. I agree with Watch_Geek too, if you are talking strictly about functions there are other options for less cash, but that doesn't take into account that feeling you get when a particular watch just grabs you.

But in the end, you only go around once. If you want it then drop the $200, it will be worth it to you.

 

Thanks for the pics, to be honest I quit the G-shock world a couple of years ago and this watch is the most appealing to my eyes since... very attempting...

I just read about the GWN-1000 as suggested above and it's true that the GWN-1000 is more advanced, it also looks nice, but it doesn't have the rotating disc and the tide graph is 101% useless to me

I like the GG-1000 mostly for its look, only a couple of things preventing me from pulling the trigger, size (I have small wrist, don't want to go over 40/42mm), battery life, CDT limited to 60 minutes.

 

Definitely NOT

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

I owned this watch some months ago, I love it, more than the big Mudmaster GWG, I think you must evaluate without to ask all pro, if you like it, buy.

 

I really like it's looks, maybe even better than the GWG 1000.

I could live without the barometer/altimeter combo, but I can't live without Multiband 6.

Also I think it is kind of pricy. These days you can find often GWG 1000 for around $450.

 

It might be worth it for you but MY next G will be solar.

 

I wore my GW-9200 Riseman / G-5600 in the past so I know about solar and atomic things, I could say that I even prefer a battery powered watch instead of solar, but I found that 2 years between battery change is a little too short especially on a $200 Gshock watch.

I'm a professional [desk] diver.

 

Yes, I have an old PAG40 3v, have changed the batteries twice myself, aside from a few niggles I got used to it, and I reckon the 40 is one of the best watches I ever owned. My other is a prg 240, solar so not a problem. My 40 goes for three plus years between batteries.

Since buying the prg 240 I dont think I'd buy another non solar Casio watch, especially the GN, GG & similar models with short battery life. Perhaps if Casio do an update to the GG they could at least include solar, although as the GG is a 2016 model I am guessing any update could be a long time.

 

I dont think I would even attempt a battery change under such circumstances, so the GG 1000 for me is a no no just on that point alone. I did ask the shop I tried the GG in, they quoted £25 for a battery change. Every two years to pay that for batteries .. think I'll pass!