EDC watches: Are you guys still wearing those and what do you wear?

[Sylvain]

There's 2628 in a box, but I think that's the battery, then there's "FTW-100D". After that, they start in about stainless steel and whatnot. The FTW-100D seems to be the model. Understand, I've had this for several years, so it's probably obsolete, but there are some still available, and most likely a near equivalent still being manufactured.

This one?

 

[Mr Evilwrench]

More like

sorry.

 

[Sylvain]

More like

sorry.

Looks like it's not part of the G-Shock line unless it says it on the back.

 

[Mr Evilwrench]

I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure there's some G-shock in there somewhere. It's hurt me a lot more than I've hurt it, anyway.

 

[shibumiseeker]

Are they really tougher than the other Casio who are not G-Shock?
I never broke mine who is not shock rated.

Yes, by quite a bit. But I am also extremely hard on watches. I've broken Timex's toughest watch at the time. I once had a G-Shock save me from getting a broken wrist or amputated hand when a garage door spring assembly I was working on came off and the full weight of the loaded pulley system and door came down on my wrist which was resting on the ledger board. The watch had a small dent and my wrist was numb for an hour. I generally replace G-Shocks when the resin armor around the watch is worn away. Every other watch I have owned, two non-G-Shock and three Timex, has become unreadable or broken within 6 months whereas I get 5-8 years out of a G-Shock.

 

[Hexlobular]

I have this Casio G-Shock MTG-1000. Atomic and solar. Was purchased in Japan years ago, so I don't know if it's still available.

https://www.google.com/search?q=cas...ph-watch-mtg-1000-1aer-p99932962.html;800;800

 

[Redtbird]

I just looked at a few watches I have and notice one is 2 or 3 minutes late, another almost a minute early compared to the time on the computer.

A person with one watch has a pretty good idea what time it is. A person with two watches is never sure...

 

[FishnHunt]

This is the watch I wear every day - Reactor 53501 Gamma SS 2-tone Black First good watch I've had and I like it. Not real cheap though.

 

[perry]

I got tired of killing $100 - $200 watches all the time, so I decided to just switch to a $40 Timex Ironman. Works like a charm. Solar powered so I have never needed to replace the battery.

 

[ashby koss]

THAT. IS. BEAUTIFUL.

 

[jamil]

I have a Casio G-Shock GA-110-B.

G-SHOCK - Watches - Classic

Looks cool and it's tough, but I'd only give it a 4/5.

I'm very picky about watches. I don't care as much about what they look like, but they need to be precise, dual analog/digital display, functional, durable and inexpensive. This meets that criteria pretty well, though I'd rather have atomic precision. The quartz movement does keep good time, as it only gains a minute or so over a year. I generally reset it every month because I'm anal about precision.

The biggest reason I rate it a 4 instead of 5 is poor display contrast, which makes it difficult to see in low light. The LCD digital readout is difficult enough to read unless you're in direct light, but at night it is impossible. The analog hands are easy enough to see in most light. It does have a lamp that illuminates for either 1.5 or 3 seconds after pressing the button. The lamp is good enough that you can see the analog hands with it in the dark but forget trying to see the LCD readout in the dark even with the lamp. Just not enough contrast on the readout.

There are several versions of this watch that has much better contrast on LCD readout. I wish I'd have known about that because I'd probably rate those a 4.5/5.

 

[Sylvain]

I have a Casio G-Shock GA-110-B.

G-SHOCK - Watches - Classic

Looks cool and it's tough, but I'd only give it a 4/5.

I'm very picky about watches. I don't care as much about what they look like, but they need to be precise, dual analog/digital display, functional, durable and inexpensive. This meets that criteria pretty well, though I'd rather have atomic precision. The quartz movement does keep good time, as it only gains a minute or so over a year. I generally reset it every month because I'm anal about precision.

I also like the dual analog and digital display.
The model I wear most of the time is not G-Shock but I have yet to break it even after a few years of use (few trips across the big pond, swimming, yard work, hiking, biking etc ... not a sratch).
It has a steel case and a mineral glass.
The world time feature is great for trips in other time zones.You just have to press a button to get the local time once you land somewhere.

I would like to update to a wave ceptor one (atomic clock) but looks like they dont make too much models who are both analog/digital AND G-shock AND solar.

 

[pack-indy]

Luminox A.1921.BO here: Land | Luminox

 

[Alamo]

I need to get the user manual out anytime I want to set the time on mine.It has lots of fonctions, I even discovered the other day that I could store phone numbers in it.

Sometimes simple is good.

'zackly. My smart phone is enough complexity for me, don't need to add more with my watch.
Oh, and I forgot to mention the watch I linked to is very very flat, does not catch on stuff. I hate big lumpy watches.

 

[sepe]

I use to really like Timex Weekenders as a cheap every day watch. I got tired of buying different bands to get some color into it so I picked up one of these bad boys and I've never been happier.

 

[jamil]

I use to really like Timex Weekenders as a cheap every day watch. I got tired of buying different bands to get some color into it so I picked up one of these bad boys and I've never been happier.

The hands don't provide much contrast from the dial.

 

[chezuki]

I've never really wanted a watch, but not this stupid thread has got me looking... Damn you Frenchman!

I have a Casio G-Shock GA-110-B.

G-SHOCK - Watches - Classic

Looks cool and it's tough, but I'd only give it a 4/5.

I'm very picky about watches. I don't care as much about what they look like, but they need to be precise, dual analog/digital display, functional, durable and inexpensive. This meets that criteria pretty well, though I'd rather have atomic precision. The quartz movement does keep good time, as it only gains a minute or so over a year. I generally reset it every month because I'm anal about precision.

The biggest reason I rate it a 4 instead of 5 is poor display contrast, which makes it difficult to see in low light. The LCD digital readout is difficult enough to read unless you're in direct light, but at night it is impossible. The analog hands are easy enough to see in most light. It does have a lamp that illuminates for either 1.5 or 3 seconds after pressing the button. The lamp is good enough that you can see the analog hands with it in the dark but forget trying to see the LCD readout in the dark even with the lamp. Just not enough contrast on the readout.

There are several versions of this watch that has much better contrast on LCD readout. I wish I'd have known about that because I'd probably rate those a 4.5/5.

That is one I've been looking at. Since I'm lazy, and it appears you've already done the research, which ones have the better contrast?

 

[sepe]

The hands don't provide much contrast from the dial.

Yeah, I know. That is why I also wear this one.

 

[Mr Evilwrench]

Well, ya want time, or ya want ponies?

 

[jamil]

I've never really wanted a watch, but not this stupid thread has got me looking... Damn you Frenchman!



That is one I've been looking at. Since I'm lazy, and it appears you've already done the research, which ones have the better contrast?

Depends on which color you want I guess. Any of the ones with a dark foreground/light background. The one I have has a light foreground/dark background, so the lighter digits don't really show up against the dark background. If I had it to do again I'd probably go with the black watch with red trim.