I do not always wear a watch. But when I do, it's a Casio. Stay punctual, my friends.

LOL, I like that. When I wear a watch it's also a Casio (MTG 900 Stainless). If you wear a Rolex you need to wear it always so it stays wound or buy one of those storage cases that slowly winds the watch for you. I'd rather wear a fairly good looking watch that needs virtually no maintenance.

My G-Shock is solar so the battery doesn't need to be replaced. I park it by a window so the battery charges during the day and coincidentally puts it in good location to receive the WWV timing signal at night.

There are also fairly cheap automatics (Seico sells some around 100€).
Seico, Casio and Citizen sell quartz watches with solar panels and radio control for accuracy. Those watches also start around 100€. Their water resistance is sufficient unless you are a scuba diver. A mechanical watch can hardly compete with their accuracy. The components could be sealed in solid block of resin. That would provide total WR without relying on gaskets. And it would not depend on gaskets.
Rolex watches are still an excellent design. With modern manufacturing methods their movements are not as outstanding as they used to be.
I am still a fan of mechanical movements. I wear them daily. I keep a couple of pocket watches running too. However I came to the conclusion that a Rolex does not offer enough function for the money. I do not envy anyone who owns one.


That may offer quite a surprise. In the GDR they used to make a pocket watch that sold for 5 Mark (which was really cheap at that time). If you can get one, you might have to spend around 500$. Try to match that quota with a regular Rolex.

Technology changes and as near as I can tell its hard to beat the overall reliability and durability that a G-Shock can provide. I'm thinking specifically about models with features like tough solar, atomic time, shock & low temperature resistance ... they seem pretty much bomb proof, the solar provides a newer-tech version of the automatic and the atomic time keeps you accurate and even automatically compensates for DST (I had a Casio Waveceptor at one point in time and, while not all that durable, the atomic time was a nice feature).

When it comes to choosing a watch specifically with reliability and durability in mind it's hard for the G-Shock not to land on the top of list. Frankly, I'm not a huge fan of the aesthetics of most of the models, but from a pure practical stand point they seem to have anything you'd need.

I'm with you. My ideal watch would be digital, solar powered, super reliable and durable, be thin and look great. I would cheerfully pay for a compass, barometer/altimeter, and useful temperature gauge.

There's a Casio Pathfinder PAW1500T around here someplace -- Tough Solar, Atomic, Digital Compass, Altimeter, Barometer, Thermometer, yada yada yada, Titanium case and wristband -- All that and it's too big and doesn't want to fit my wrist. A real Casio dealer might be able to adjust the band. Other than not fitting it's a nice watch.

A useful temperature gauge in a wristwatch is an illusion. Tissot sells watches with temperature gauge. Last time I looked in a manual it said that you need to take the watch off and let it sit for about 15 minutes before you get a fairly accurate measurement. It seems they use the gauge for compensating temperature influence on the oscillator and allow to display it as one more gadget.
A thin watch might be quicker with the reading.
Maybe designing and building a watch like your ideal watch could become a project for the ETS community.

I need a "like" button for that comment.



Analog time with numbered indices
Digital date, countdown timer, stop watch, and (3) alarms with vibration option functions.
Indigo style backlighting (stays lit for however long the button is pressed)
GITD hand and face hour markings
2032 battery (nice long battery life)
Battery replacement with ordinary tools
FRP (fiber reinforced plastic) case
Acrylic lens (easy to repair)
100M water resistant
<$100 MSRP

Since so many people love the Casio G-Shock, I took a look out of curiosity. My, are they ugly! The acceptable ones (MT-G black or silver metal) are really expensive ($900-$1,000)! You'd think they'd be able to hit upon a good color scheme when making so many different combinations.

As for the "water resistant down to 200m" thing, wouldn't you rather have a dive computer on your wrist? If your watch can survive a swim in the pool, that's more than what most people will ever need. How come when it comes to watches, most guys want the specs for Navy SEAL space superhero?

Keep in mind water resistance ratings are kinda weird, they don't mean what you might think they mean because it's a static measurement applied to dynamic situations. Essentially the rating system looks like this:

30m means it can get wet (rain/brief submerge)
50m means you can dunk it/light swimming
100m is swimming/light snorkling
200m is for extended snorkling/light recreational diving

Many consider a 200m rating to be the bare minimum for an all around watch, as it's water resistant enough to cover any activity the average person might partake in.