On top of the nasty hit to battery life requiring USB charge for advanced functions, this watch loses the 24h count-down timer and multi-band daily time sync from my beloved M5610BC (the latter is worked around with phone syncing but I don't generally carry a phone). The new pixelated display looks great though.
I love the fact that my watch is this wonderful, self contained unit that I never have to bother with charging or setting. It is in fact my second one - my first one got run over by my tractor and then got a ride through the attached lawnmower. I only found it months later twenty feed away hidden in a patch of zucchini squash. The band was destroyed and the case was mangled, but the display still worked and the time was accurate to the second. Incredible. When Casio says these watches are tough, believe it.
They're indestructible, I was diving on my first deep technical dive with a rebreather and was so preoccupied with my gear that I left one of these on with my dive watch, as I was descending I noticed but figured its gone and got on with my dive.
We went just over 60m, when I finished up I saw the thing was still fine. After that, I believed their claims of bar pressure etc, when I see other watches that claim 50m etc, I wouldn't dare trust them to survive.
I've taken several watches on dives just to see if the ratings are real.
Timex Easy Reader, says 30m, failed on a dive that was no more than 15m.
Seiko SKX-007 OTOH, rated to 200m, I have taken it to about 30m with no ill effect.
I've since learned you can have a watch repair shop test this with a pressure chamber and a finely-calibrated displacement-measuring instrument, no water required.
Water resistance ratings of 30 meters don’t mean that you can dive with it up to 30 meters. Those ratings are related to static pressure tests.
Generally 30 meters shouldn’t be submerged, 50 meters is okay for swimming, above that diving is acceptable to certain limit. True diving watches start with 200 meters and preferably ISO diver's certification (which SKX has).
The funny thing about the 200m WR rating on true diver's watches is that that's more than even 99.9% of divers are ever going to use. Recreational diving tops out at 40m (that's a deep dive!), let alone 200m. The actual number of people diving to deeper than that in an entire year, worldwide, is a 3 digit number.
Of course I say all that and yet I have a Seiko spring drive tuna 600m saturation diver, even though it's never been deeper than a few meters and very unlikely ever to do so. But the engineering is fun to appreciate even if it'll never do even 1% of what it's capable of.
I only wear G-Shocks for this reason, though I also love the more aesthetic models. I have a dressier one that I wear to nice/fancy events, but my daily driver is the solar powered multi-band radio adjusted one. In the first month of owning my daily driver, I hit a giant pothole on my commute ride home from construction that hadn't been marked yet and took a huge fall; I was biking at 17 mph unfortunately since I was at work late and the streets were pretty empty. The crash gave me some pretty bad road rash, some bruises, and destroyed my helmet.
The G-Shock hit the ground first and slid along with me. Other than disfigurement on the part of the bezel that slid, the watch was fine. Later on, I filed off some of the chewed up parts of the rubber and the watch now only looks minorly scuffed. Years later it's been on swims, dives, hikes, camps, long bike rides, been with me through carpentry, and travel, and it's still going strong with mostly the scuff marks to show for. I also frequently shower with it. I love never having to think about it; the watch just works. I sometimes fall asleep with it on and forget I even had it.
Does this mean it has two separate batteries, or what? If only one battery, then you could keep it charged up on solar and only occasionally do a HR reading, without ever having to plug it in.
I have a 5610 that I bought recently with the 3495 tough solar module, as context.
You're right, I was accidentally exaggerating a little. I just checked my Amazon order history and mine was 40 bucks. still unbelievably cheap for a watch that is bomb proof. ordered mine in 2019. I think I've worn it 90% of the time since then. still going strong. It's beaten out fitbit's and Garmin instincts.
I really wish they made a health tracker without a watch on it like the old original fitbit bracelets.
I would just wear the G-Shock plus the health tracker bracelet be perfectly happy.
I bought an F-91W after destroying my M5610BC for whenever I'm messing around in the yard. It's great! So cheap that I don't worry about getting dirt in it, scratching the bezel, or whatever. It keeps great time, is easy to read, and weighs nothing. What's not to like for that price???
The watch doesn't "require" charging for fitness functions, unless I'm reading what Casio announced wrong. According to them, the watch will recharge enough with the solar panel quickly enough to use the fitness functions for 7 hours a week(1 hour a day). Sure, for some people that's not enough, but I imagine for a lot(like myself) who only do 1-2 hours of actual exercise where I want to use the tracker per week, that's more than enough. I can't wait to order it, and I plan on never using the USB charger - will see if that proves doable.
> unless I'm reading what Casio announced wrong. According to them, the watch will recharge enough with the solar panel quickly enough to use the fitness functions for 7 hours a week(1 hour a day).
You are reading it wrong. What it says is that if you use fitness one hour per day, you will have to manually charge it once a week
> a wired charger is also included. On a full charge, which takes around three hours, the watch will run for about a week when using the added fitness features for an hour a day.
Right, but surely there is some level of use that is not high enough to make the USB charging necessary, right? I plan to use mine 1-2 hours for fitness a week, I expect it will replenish that from the solar panel alone.
It's not clear. It's possible that even if you don't use the fitness at all, you'd still have to plug in once a month. Or maybe your situation would work, i.e. it could regenerate an hour worth over the span of a week.
Closest memory I had to these are airline meal carts, and Sony camcorders. Maybe because mine is a used and beaten up example, but the latch is too solid for an aluminum luggage case, yet seems a bit flimsy for a military hardware. The body is light for its thickness, modules have gaps not enough to rattle but enough to be able to be removed in all situations, and if disassembled, it’s obviously at least IP5X just by the looks of edge seals.
Mine is CF-19 Mark 2, a Core Duo(32bit). Takes old ThinkPad AC fine when I need a paperweight with an LCD :p
The title says “Casio Adds Fitness Features to Original G-Shock Digital Watch”.
They haven’t added features to the ‘original’ one at all. They’re releasing two _new_ G-Shock watches with more features, including some fitness features.
Distinction without a difference. When Chevrolet added a convertible top to the original Corvette they didn’t go in people’s driveways and cut the roofs off
In my mind G-Shock is a brand of watch and there are many different ones.
So the statement “Casio releases a G-Shock watch with fitness features” makes sense. “Casio adds fitness features to G-Shock digital watch” also makes sense. The “original” is a bit confusing to me. And judging by the comments here others, too.
I get why it’s in the headline. This fitness watch is sort of styled like the very first (= “original”, though given the plethora of G-Shock watches and their enormous diversity that seems like a weird way of framing it) G-Shock watch from 1983.
Maybe “Casio releases 40th anniversary G-Shock watch with fitness features”.
The difference is between "Company releases new product in current line with X feature" and "Company releases software update that provides X feature to current products in the field". "Company updates product line with X feature" is ambiguous between the two.
I'll always love my F91W for being able to tell me the time, date of the month, and day in wording, all on my wrist, for $14,00, at a 7 year battery life
Casio also has the best bang for the buck when it comes to classic dial watches. The LCW-M100TSE-1AER features a titanium wristband and casing, sapphire glass, tough solar and wave ceptor (and a shitty light). It costs about 250€ and should do its job for a few decades.
Unfortunately Casios comparable digital display watch, the MRG-B5000D-1DR, costs about ten times as much.
LCWs really are fantastic watches at a bargain. If I ever had to replace my current watch, I would likely get another LCW. I've worn mine constantly for around 3.5 years and it has always kept accurate time without having to adjust. It is also impressively durable and has always kept itself charged.
I prefer the F-105W. It's almost the same but it replaces the mediocre led backlight with a beautiful EL backlight. Fixes the only drawback of the 91 and hardly costs any extra.
I have an Apple Watch Ultra which is nice. (The added battery life vs. the standard model makes a big difference.) But it's mostly for hiking. Day-to-day I just wear my $30 Timex a lot of the time.
20 seconds a month is about normal for a quartz watch.
Quartz is (generally) accurate to about 0.5 seconds a day. (It varies, mostly by temperature.) Compare to a good quality mechanical watch, which is accurate to about 3-5 seconds a day. Cheaper mechanical watches, considerably less.
Casio "wave ceptor" watches receive the time signal every night, and so don't drift. Some other more expensive watches sync with the GPS signal, or with bluetooth to your phone.
If you demand accuracy without a regular sync, so called "high accuracy quartz" watches do exist, which can be accurate to about 15-30 seconds per year. The Bulova "Precisionist" line of watches are good examples of these.
> 20 seconds a month is about normal for a quartz watch. [...] so called "high accuracy quartz" watches do exist, which can be accurate to about 15-30 seconds per year.
Heh, you can get much better quartz watches than that if you're willing to pay for it. I have a Grand Seiko 9F super high accuracy quartz watch (SBGP017 is the model number if you're curious) that has gained just a little over a second in the year that I've had it. Citizen also makes high end quartz watches with similar accuracy (look up the Chronomaster).
Diminishing returns, probably, especially if you live in a location where you're going to be setting your watch twice a year anyway for daylight saving.
My SBGP017 has a jump-hour movement that I can use for DST (or while traveling) to set the hour hand without hacking the seconds hand. That's how I know its accuracy over an entire year, even though I've adjusted it for DST twice since I got it and done some international traveling as well. I'll literally only ever need to set the time once every battery change.
Of course it's diminishing returns regardless, but the accuracy achievable is nevertheless impressive.
That's actually a normal amount for any watch. A well-maintained Rolex is +- 5 seconds a day. AFAIK, only the 'atomic' watches or ones sync'd against your cellphone do better.
Also, 20 seconds means <2 min drift between the adjustments you make for daylight savings time.
The F91W is like $20 though. You're expecting too much from something so cheap. If you pay a bit more than that you'll get a better product. The profit margins on a $20 watch are too low to individually calibrate the rate accuracy of each one, which is the bare minimum that you need to compensate for the manufacturing differences on each individual quartz crystal. And then for accuracy beyond that you would need thermo-compensated quartz, though you only see that on models costing in the 4 figures so if you only care about price performance, you'd sooner get a radio/GPS-controlled model.
Who's telling you that? Although I know of this story, I've been wearing one all this time, save for a few years of folly with an Apple Watch 4. In fact, I just picked up a new one two days ago since I left my old one in another country. No police has ever given me trouble (e: am from Middle Eastern country and have had more LE interactions at the airport than most people)
I love not having to charge it and not having to worry about bumping it into anything.
(My new watch is a slightly updated model - W-217H-9AVCF, which is a little bigger and has a brighter, more even light in amber)
PS: Nobody's going to think you're a terrorist if you drive a Toyota, either.
It started out with “your watch is so old it probably had a Wikipedia page” and the person jokingly looked it up scrolled down and it was an “oh shit” reaction…
I love the watch and I still have it..
They're pretty different designs mainly because of different regulations, but have the same purpose. Old Hiluxes are famously near-indestructible; Top Gear once drove one into the ocean and it still started.
…btw, "technical" means it has a machine gun mounted in the back.
I even tried googling for it, but couldn't find any articles referencing both Guantanamo and casio watches, aside from the general ones talking about the whole phenomenon of Al-Quaeda preferring those watches or pieces talking about incidents where the watch was actually used as an IED component.
By any chance are you Arab? If so, then I can see why that might sting (and why the others were, unfortunately, taking the tack). If you're not though, then meh, easy to dismiss.
I love my solar powered triple sensor g shock watch. I keep it in a window to get light every day when not wearing it and it's run fine for 10 years and counting. The lack of any smart features or wireless connectivity is a feature IMHO. It's got three main sensors (atmospheric pressure, magnetometer, temperature) and all the interface to access them on the device. It's perfect.
The famous Rangeman GW9400. Probably the best bang for the bucks in the G-Shock lineup. I particularly love the Sunrise/sunset feature between winter and spring when I want to know where i'll be able to enjoy the sun as soon as I wake up or spend more time outside after work. I love G-shock. They're a little bit gimmicky but I absolutely enjoy their "low tech" awesomeness.
I haven't needed to shop for another G-Shock since buying my solar a decade ago, so I was a bit surprised by their collection and the "up to 35 hour charge" of the new line.
I might replace the battery soon; the battery drained early this year from wearing my jacket. In years past, it always survived through winter and into spring. It's been so reliable, I find it hard to blame the watch.
35 hour battery life? Compare this to Garmin's most modern watch (the Venu 2) with OLED screen and it's just not even worth considering. I get 6-8 days with mine, but I don't use GPS at all.
This G-Shock only gives basic data too. I like the look of it, but $300 is just way too much. Part of the appeal of the G-Shock is 10 year battery, so you'd think they would go for something a little better.
"On a full charge, which takes around three hours, the watch will run for about a week when using the added fitness features for an hour a day. With them left on all the time, it will be dead in about 35 hours."
If this is like other high-end G-Shocks, you only get a hit to battery life if you actually use the smart features. E.g. GPS-enabled Rangeman runs fine off solar if GPS is only used sporadically.
I wonder if Casio's heart rate sensing is far more power hungry than Garmin's, or is it just that Casio undersized the battery because they could make a lower baseline power draw than Garmin manages. Garmins with MIP LCD screens are more comparable to the Casio line, and they have longer battery life than the OLED models.
Many such Garmins can last for weeks with constant health tracking via wrist heart rate and accelerometer. It is mostly location tracking which increases discharge, e.g. ~5% per day health tracking and ~5% per hour GPS tracking. The heart rate sensor might just use ~1% per day for 24x7 usage.
I am of the understanding that much of the allure of the G-Shock is the 2-15 year battery life. This offering takes what I assume is one of the biggest benefits of a G-Shock and trades it for fitness tracking capabilities that are available through many other solutions that offer much better battery life.
How? I can't wait to order one, there's nothing quite like it on the market. Garmin has a similar watch but it's bigger and heavier - I'm not interested in that.
The fact that this G-Shock is smaller and thinner likely explains the shorter battery life. It's definitely a trade-off that some people (like you) are interested in making. I have a Garmin Fenix 5 and that thing is HUGE.
That seems to exist in a price and battery life no man's land between a true smartwatch and a basic $30 LCD watch that gets years of battery life. Both smartwatches and cheapo time pieces have their place. Not sure about this sort of in-between model.
Personally, this watch seems pretty cool and right in the niche of what I would want in terms of 'dumbness' and also aesthetic, and the battery life does not sound intolerable to me.
But $300 sure is a lot for it, although my impression has always been that "G-Shock" watches were inexplicably more expensive than they look, presumably as a branding thing. This is something I'd wait for to go on sale.
The basic G-Shock (e.g 5600 model) will be around $50 which I think is a fair price given the ruggedness of the thing. More expensive models (like 5610) will be in $100 range since they have solar cells and self-adjust based on radio signals from atomic clocks. I think that's fair (I don't have one though, I'm cheap :) ).
It's taking the mickey. Even with adding VAT, US prices are still much lower than Europe an all consumer goods made overseas, Casios, MacBooks, etc. A G-Shock in US is 50 USD, in Europe it's 80 Euros, which i 88 USD. Insane difference. An M2 MacBook air starts from 1200 USD while it's 1500 Euros or 1650 USD. We're being taken for a ride.
You might be. OTOH, you have far more robust consumer protection laws - ISTR reading that UK law requires that you be able to return a product to the place where you bought it for two years or so and get warranty service or replacement. Don't know how it works in EU countries, but that was a pre-Brexit anecdote.
In the US, there are numerous products for which any warranty service requires you to send it to the manufacturer. Only DOA can be addressed at the point of purchase.
I just don't buy that markets there are so inefficient that all electronics manufacturers are colluding to artificially increase prices over other markets. There must be other reasons why prices are higher. In addition to VAT/tariffs, maybe the consumer protection laws lead to more returns for refund, or something.
I got the 5610BC so I'd get the combi-bracelet with clasp and it was well worth the extra money. It is very adjustable, durable, comfortable, and looks great.
Yeah, I can't see why someone would choose this when you can get a Garmin forerunner 45 for $199 (or even cheaper as it's on sale right now) with better battery life and more features. The smartwatch market has categorically left casio behind and it'll be really hard to try to catch up now.
I think you underestimate the number of G-Shock collectors out there and how well loved the brand is. Casio has sold more than 100 million G-Shocks. Price and features matter for some, but not so much to watch collectors in general.
For the smart watch market, it's entirely price and features that matter. It could be that there's enough g-shock fans to sustain a product here, but it's not going to grab any of the smart watch market.
I say this as someone who loves their F91-W. It's a great watch and I like it. But I don't want to use it for the things I want to use a smartwatch for.
I'm not disagreeing, but the observation that Garmin is doing the Instinct series which is basically an elaborate G-shock counter suggests that Casio is onto something.
Yeah, some of the Garmin models have a place if you're focused on getting a fitness/hiking/etc. watch and not really on a smartwatch as such--especially if you're not bought into the Apple ecosystem. You can get better battery life and maybe get a better price (though at the high end the Fenix is pretty pricey).
I have a Garmin watch and am baffled when I hear people say they charge their Apple Watches every day. I had to add my watch charger cable to my vacation checklist because I often forget I need to charge it.
Having had both, I ditched the AW and now have fenix 6 sapphire for less money (~$300 new) than used AW 8. The thing is indestructible (practically), battery lasts for weeks, and it has less smart features and more onboard “stuff”, which I like.
Instinct 2 is now $200 at Costco.
I think the watch technology is pretty mature. I feel cutting edge with a 3 year old watch. Sensor maybe not as good as AW but for anything that really matter you would wear a chest strap hrm anyways.
The Ultra is a bit better but battery life is definitely a downside. However, as soon as you get below the better part of a week of battery life you pretty much need to remember to charge now and then. I'm not sure there's a big difference between charge every couple of days and charge once a week.
On the other hand I never have to remember to charge my cheap Timex.
I'm puzzled by the whole range. There are some that look just like a £10 digital watch but sell for £100. The difference seems to be the robustness but not that many jobs or hobbies put your watch in constant danger.
Some notable models in the line-up of classic looking digital watches:
- Casio F-91W: $14 which gets you a basic watch
- Casio AE1200: $40, modern module with timezones, stopwatch, timer
- Casio G-Shock DW-5600: $50, Similar to AE1200 in functionality, adds shock-proofing
- Casio G-Shock GW-M5610: $110, Similar to DW-5600E but adds solar, radio time-sync
- Casio G-Shock GW-5000: $300, Similar to GW-M5610 but has a stainless steel case instead of plastic
- Casio G-Shock GMW-B5000: $400, Similar to GW-5000 but has a stainless steel bezel and bracelet
- Casio G-Shock GMW-B5000T: $1100+, Similar to GMW-B5000 but in titanium
I used a Garmin vivofit 3 for about a year and a half without a battery change. I liked it and it felt a little bit like an F91W. I switched to an Apple Watch 4 for a while and I'm back on Casio for now but I might consider another vivofit if they keep making them.
> Activity Tracker with Garmin Move IQ Automatic Activity Detection Features 1-year battery life Shows steps, calories, distance, intensity minutes and time of day on backlit display; monitors sleep Auto activity detection classifies activity type on Garmin Connect . . . it DOES NOT include a built-in wrist heart rate monitor.
The step counters always seemed wildly inaccurate to me and they're pretty much useless for hiking. But I'm generally not really into the quantified health stuff.
Ah, I never really bothered to verify and instead used it to measure whether I walked as much as I did the previous day. I assume it does a bit better at this. Thanks for pointing that out.
This one does seem too expensive for what it is. The GBD-200 at $150 seems much more appropriate for a smartwatch-lite, besides scratching the itch for a modern take on the old Casio squares [1].
The main battery life killers seem to be the full-screen always-on display of many smartwatches and GPS. If you can dump those you can do a lot better it seems. Though in my case I have no interest in a fitness tracker without GPS.
I use a Mi Band which I wouldn't really recommend on the whole, but it gets great battery life and one reason might be that AIUI it piggybacks the phone's GPS rather than doing GPS tracking itself.
I wish it could keep the fitness features but ditch the Bluetooth.
I've got a friend that's been looking for a good fitness-tracking watch he can wear to work -- a government contractor that disallows use of personal wireless devices past the main entrance. No phones, smartwatches, nada.
on previous bluetooth models I've had experience with, the feature is fairly easy to ignore completely. Probably not to the same degree with this version.
The B5000 series has a press-and-hold to connect to bluetooth, otherwise pairing is not automatic. When it connects it will sync the clock to GMT (handy if multiband is not available) and also log your geolocation if you choose to configure that in the app.
I bought an Amazfit Neo awhile back for a cheap heart monitor. This is a smartwatch clone of the gshock with a much better value ($30?) and battery life (a month).
I then got the real G-Shock gm-5610u for a daily watch and love it. I think Casio does great with non-smartwatch but I don't know who the submission's watch is for other than a collector. It can run for a day and a half on a charge at that price point? Go buy a Garmin.
The Amazfit Neo serves well as a rough estimate for heart rate and give good value for just $30 (currently even just 10€ it seems).
But if you e.g. enable the detailed heart rate and sleep measurement the battery life is not more than a week and the quality of the measurement cannot be fully trusted & bigger latency (plus in the app the resolution of heart values is just one value per 5 minute). So it is not that good quality ... still worth the money.
Maybe some variability with batteries, even with everything on I get around 3 weeks. Agree with the rest of what you said though, it's not a high-end device but I don't really have to care where I bring it for the price point. I think their Bip was a better rounded device but I like physical buttons like the Pebbles had.
(Oh and without a phone the Neo's clock drifts multiple seconds per week, vs about a 2 second drift for my F-91W over the course of TWO YEARS.)
I'll second this but add _without a subscription_. I like the idea of Oura or Whoop but I don't want want the monthly fee, and just want the minimal amount of data (acceleration, heart rate, maybe temperature), in something I can wear along side a legit mechanical watch.
I had 2. They were borderline useless at health tracking. HR widely inaccurate. Good for telling you heart is probably still beating but otherwise worse than a just taking a guess/rated perception.
This is going to have a huge response with Casio connoisseurs. They took the original design and added heart rate tracking which is MVP what those people want from their watch. Great play.
Has anyone noticed a recent "counterculture" movement against fitness trackers, at least for casual wear? Sure, people at the gym will wear them, but more and more I see people wearing normal (and more fashionable) watches for regular activities that aren't fitness related. If you have a nice outfit on, be it suit, dress, even just nicer casual wear...fitness trackers just look comically bad even with non-sports straps.
I see others have mentioned Amazfit but this is an important comparison.
The G-Shock range is famed for being simple, robust, and inexpensive, with epic battery life.
This is expensive, complex and has a poor battery life.
My 5YO Amazfit Bip was £60 new, still lasts a month on a charge even though used
daily since 2018, can show notifications, screen and reject or take calls, and monitor my heart rate (badly) for 6 weeks when new. It has a daylight-readable full-colour display.
Yes, if I turn on activity tracking, it burns through a charge in days, but I rarely do.
I expected Casio to match or exceed that. This fails on all points.
Interesting! My ‘hubby’ actually sold me her Apple Watch and I gave her a G-Shock in exchange as she felt the Apple Watch to be a little too much - but she actually recently (only yesterday) did the Toronto Marathon (so proud of her!) and I couldn’t help but feel like she could’ve maybe used or kept some interesting data from her runs in general.
I immediately sent her this and with her birthday coming up I’m thinking this could be a great gift. :)
What else is there in the 35-hour battery life/$300 range?
Apple Watch SE starts at $249 and frequently goes on sale at $199. A regular Apple Watch of a previous generation can be bought at $299. Last-generation Apple Watch is $399 but is sold at $329 frequently.
For people who have iPhones it's a no-brainer.
I love G-Shocks and I hope this model will get down to more reasonable $170-180 range.
I just bought a fossil hybrid gen 6 and like it very much. It's an E-Ink display with fitness tracking. It has about two weeks of battery life for about an hour of charge.
I would also recommend using it with GadgetBridge, and combined with Tasker you can do pretty much anything you want on it.
Too many casio purists here. But I'm happy to see this. There are not a lot of design choices available in fitness trackers. Apple watch works only with iOS. Samsung watch is too round & cute to suit wrists of a grown man, the build quality of Fossil is questionable. Garmin is too expensive. I'll wait for some reviews and then consider buying this.
I don't consider unlimited battery life (meaning battery will likely last longer than the watch itself), water resistance, and ruggedness to be part of "casio purism". I don't want to charge my watch daily or weekly, like I don't charge my clothes or shoes or umbrella.
Then......good news, you don't have to do this with this one! If you use it as a watch, and only use the fitness functions sporadically, then it will work forever just off solar power, like any solar powered casio for the last 20 years.
I’m wondering how this stands up against Garmin’s MIPS display fitness watch. I love GShock design, but Garmin seems to be winning the fitness enthusiast market. This Gshock watch is a collaboration with Polar.
Check out Gadgetbridge: Gadgetbridge is an Android application which will allow you to use your Pebble, Mi Band, Amazfit Bip and HPlus device (and more) without the vendor's closed source application.
I'm not a big G-Shock person but a quick google led me here [0]. Sounds like it does what you want?
>GPS and a digital compass combine to guide you to your destinations, while the watch tracks your routes and stores waypoint information in memory, making this the perfect tool for survival activities.
Curious if that does the trick. I've occasionally considered a g-shock watch here or there but I always get lost in the hundreds of possible configs, and can't quite figure out what the master list of options I can choose from is.
The Instinct is probably the most practical smartwatch on the market. They did a great job with it. I had the first generation for a year and a half before making the jump the Fenix. The full GPS came in handy a handful of times (paddling down a river) but it was nothing I couldn't have used my phone -- other than that I think I probably could have been just as well off sticking to the Instinct.
I love the fact that my watch is this wonderful, self contained unit that I never have to bother with charging or setting. It is in fact my second one - my first one got run over by my tractor and then got a ride through the attached lawnmower. I only found it months later twenty feed away hidden in a patch of zucchini squash. The band was destroyed and the case was mangled, but the display still worked and the time was accurate to the second. Incredible. When Casio says these watches are tough, believe it.