WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
708 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Can I get some comparison pictures between these two please. I see the measurements on the GW9400 and it's fairly close to the GX/GXW-56 be it I know it's the sensor bulges that do it.

So in short some direct aide by side/top/ whatever pictures would be great!

Thanks all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
554 Posts
DSC_0833.JPG


I'm guessing you are at the same place I was a week ago. I was 'poisoned' by the sheer size of my 4 Kings and could not allow myself to buy anything that was smaller. I agonised over the dimensions. When it arrived I initially felt it was too small. But having worn it all day today it is just right, like a King but with the corners rounded off. Astonishing quality and build. Yes to an extent it is made thicker by the sensor bulges. But that means the gorgeous screen is recessed and better protected from glancing blows (how many times a day does my King rattle off door handles?). This is of Frogman quality but at half the price. Very sophisticated functions, I love having the light button on the front. On my scales it weighs 93 grams, my atomic King weighs 88. It feels solid and weighty, lots of function and quality packed in. I was looking at my Rangeman under a stereo scope today in the lab where I work. Finish and detailing are both superb. King quality is good but this is better IMHO. One thing about the King is (and i love my kings to bits) that you do get a sense that the bulk of the casing is mostly just that, bulk/volume just for the hell of it. The Rangeman packs in 6 buttons, not 4 and also 3 sensor systems as well. It's a solid and tough chunk of pure technology on your wrist. I have not actually paid for this one yet but I'm hooked. Already scheming about how I can get myself Rangeman number 2.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
528 Posts
I was looking at my Rangeman under a stereo scope today in the lab where I work.
Nice. Do you have the capability of taking pictures at high magnification?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
554 Posts
I was using a manual stereo zoom scope. We do have some other scopes but although they have video monitors I think they are just live images with no capture ability. Having said that my boss was raisng a request today for a powerful PC to run with some sort of fancy Nikon scope we have just bought. So possibly not right now but soon I hope... Sorry this seems a bit vague but there is a lot of kit in there, some of it I know inside out and yet other pieces a few feet away that I simply don't have a clue about and have never touched.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
528 Posts
...they have video monitors...
Then, I guess one could take a picture with a separate camera of whatever the monitor is showing. I was just wondering, that's all. It seems like you have an interesting job. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
708 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Excellent break down Carrot. Can you grab a face shot of the two side by side, please?
 

·
Moderator G-Shock Forum
Joined
·
21,586 Posts
@ Civic98, are you sure the watches were at the same distance of the lens. In my 50 Gs comparison of two weeks ago the difference looks much smaller.




Cheers,

Sjors

Sent using Tapatalk!
 

Attachments

·
Banned
Joined
·
473 Posts
Re Carrot's comment that he senses that the Kings' size doesn't really correlate to a specific technical advantage, but is more just for the sake of being big, I must disagree.

The King has two types of A-Gel (one layer soft and one hard) which significantly improves shock/impact resistance, and arguably makes the King the toughest G ever.

In fact, many reviews, both professional and user authored, have highlighted how cool it was that Casio decided to use the extra space in a practical way, which is befitting of the G-Shock brand that was originally designed to be practical first and cool second.

Cheers,
Ash

Sent from my XT890 using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
528 Posts
I hear you... yet... have so many DW-5600 watches failed so miserably before that we would need to compromise with the comical size increase just for the sake of the added shock resistance? Although, one could argue that owners of the 5600 series don't put their watches through the same torture as they would a King, but I doubt that's really the case for most people. The truth is that the 5600 and other G's are plenty tough as they are without the admittedly cool alpha gel. To my mind, the King is definitely situated on the diminishing-returns side of the spectrum of making a watch shock resistant. If the digits had grown proportionately, then you would be adding another variable to the mix that may justify the growth in size, but if it is all for the sake of added shock resistance, then I am not sold on it. All that said, I am totally happy to justify the purchase of a King (or two of them, or ten...) on the grounds of liking the design and enjoying the watch and its extra toughness. All I am arguing above is that if someone doesn't like the size or the design, they are probably best advised to get a "normal" G-Shock instead of compromising with its size in order to get an illusive increase in shock resistance they probably won't benefit from in the first place. I don't think wearers of "normal" G's should have an inferiority complex or "alpha-gel envy" when their watches get the job done and are more suitable for daily wear and more low-key, especially on a smaller wrist. After all, how many times do you think a person wearing another G-Shock has found themselves breaking it and thinking: This a piece of [email protected]#$, I should have gotten a King instead!

I am not trying to argue at all and I respect your opinion and the opinions of the reviewers you allude to, and I personally love the King model. I agree with you that its size is not all for show, but it has a some functional cause behind it. I am just suggesting that extra shock resistance can be blown out of proportion by marketing, and potential buyers would be better served weighing their options carefully so they are not disappointed with their purchase after falling for "group think" that sometimes tends to favor superlatives: the toughest this or that, the most tactical this or that, the biggest this or that, the latest this or that... you get where I am going with this...

Re Carrot's comment that he senses that the Kings' size doesn't really correlate to a specific technical advantage, but is more just for the sake of being big, I must disagree.

The King has two types of A-Gel (one layer soft and one hard) which significantly improves shock/impact resistance, and arguably makes the King the toughest G ever.

In fact, many reviews, both professional and user authored, have highlighted how cool it was that Casio decided to use the extra space in a practical way, which is befitting of the G-Shock brand that was originally designed to be practical first and cool second.

Cheers,
Ash

Sent from my XT890 using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: jbg7474

·
Registered
Joined
·
708 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Thanks for all the shots guys. I think another question would be if we can remove that cheap looking dw6900-esque buckle and place a king one in it?!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
528 Posts
I know, right? You would think that by now all Master-of-G models would come with that buckle standard! I had my fingers crossed when the Rangeman was just rumored, but it wasn't to be sadly.
I don't particularly mind the buckle on my Rangeman; it is rather standard and comfortable, like the one on the Riseman.

How would you go about finding a King buckle, though. Wouldn't you have to buy the whole strap just for the buckle? I hope someone would chime in about whether the screw-bar frrom the King's buckle would even be able to fit in the tiny whole meant for the pin from the Rangeman's buckle.

Edit: On second thought, one may argue that, if both the bezel and the buckle are attached to the strap with screw-bars, it would leave no natural "failure point" that may be necessary for your personal safety if your watch is caught dangerously on something, and you would rather lose the watch than the hand.


Thanks for all the shots guys. I think another question would be if we can remove that cheap looking dw6900-esque buckle and place a king one in it?!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
473 Posts
I totally agree that the extra toughness that the King's A-Gel affords is not for most a required specification. I'm just saying that it's nice to know that there's some practical enhancement even if one doesn't really need it, as that is the core philosophy of this brand.

Let's face it, most G owners don't push their watches to anywhere near the limits of capability. How many Aviator owners ever pull 15Gs when going round a corner on the way to the local mall?! How many Frogman owners look down at their timepiece with a smug smile as they dive below a 200m depth?!

I think most of us take huge pleasure in owning a piece of kit that 'could', even if in practice it doesn't.





Cheers,
Ash

Sent from my XT890 using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
554 Posts
Re Carrot's comment that he senses that the Kings' size doesn't really correlate to a specific technical advantage, but is more just for the sake of being big, I must disagree.

The King has two types of A-Gel (one layer soft and one hard) which significantly improves shock/impact resistance, and arguably makes the King the toughest G ever.

In fact, many reviews, both professional and user authored, have highlighted how cool it was that Casio decided to use the extra space in a practical way, which is befitting of the G-Shock brand that was originally designed to be practical first and cool second.

Cheers,
Ash

Sent from my XT890 using Tapatalk
Yep sure I get your point. I suppose what I was trying to say is when you look at the Rangeman it gives you the feeling that a lot of the King is (at least in terms of functional electronics) empty space. I do feel sure that the same amount of electronics and (what many comment on) the relatively small display area (don't forget the plastic bar that bisects the King display takes quite a bit of area away) could have been squeezed into a smaller case even allowing for the two layers of gel. The King is a big watch and it suits people like me who are relatively large in the wrist department. I'm still liking my Kings but as I've said elsewhere the Rangeman IMHO has stepped up a level in terms of the amount of function and quality it offers, and it isn't wearing any extra 'fat' to do it. If it ever happens I could still be interested in a Rangeman 'X' model like the recent GD-X6900 of which I am pleased to have one also...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
788 Posts
Hi all. May I request for a side by side and a thickness comparison shot between the rangeman and the GR-7900?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
708 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
I think another question is, who of us really need ABC watches? It's neat but I don't need it so the King really does suffice. I'd like one to play with though but it'd never be used to its fullest (gw9400).
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
473 Posts
Yep sure I get your point. I suppose what I was trying to say is when you look at the Rangeman it gives you the feeling that a lot of the King is (at least in terms of functional electronics) empty space. I do feel sure that the same amount of electronics and (what many comment on) the relatively small display area (don't forget the plastic bar that bisects the King display takes quite a bit of area away) could have been squeezed into a smaller case even allowing for the two layers of gel. The King is a big watch and it suits people like me who are relatively large in the wrist department. I'm still liking my Kings but as I've said elsewhere the Rangeman IMHO has stepped up a level in terms of the amount of function and quality it offers, and it isn't wearing any extra 'fat' to do it. If it ever happens I could still be interested in a Rangeman 'X' model like the recent GD-X6900 of which I am pleased to have one also...
I guess what constitutes good use of space is fairly subjective. For me as a regular off road mountain biker I fully appreciate the added shock/vibration resistance of a King, and have no use for a barometer, altimeter, or thermometer.

I'd be interested to know if Casio have improved the accuracy of said functions, as from what I understand they've been less than great in previous models - the thermometer in particular has been widely slated as being wholly inaccurate unless used unattached from one's wrist!

As I said though, it's subjective, and I totally appreciate your perspective of the Rangeman and it's merits. If you want the aforementioned features it's a cool G.

Cheers,
Ash

Sent from my XT890 using Tapatalk
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top