4 ms·

I'm a big fan of the F105W which is basically the same watch with a vastly improved backlight that lights up the whole LCD. It makes a great watch extremely usa

I'm a big fan of the F105W which is basically the same watch with a vastly improved backlight that lights up the whole LCD. It makes a great watch extremely usable at night. I'd also recommend the Casio G-Shock GWM5610 which admittedly is about 5 times more expensive at $111 but it has UTC time and is absolutely bulletproof, along with radio sync and solar with solar charge indicator. It's currently my favorite among my modest under $200 collection of watches because it's so practical. I love unconnected watches because they tell the time and have a few other basic features without vendors competing for your eyeballs in constantly evolving ways. Side note: I'd avoid Seiko even though they kicked off the quartz crisis by launching the world's first quartz watch in 1969, their product quality is crappy these days with missing features on some nice looking watches, and some bugs in their mechanical movements. On a separate note, I find the luxury watch market to be quite hilarious (especially the pretentiously eloquent way a customer will describe their "acquisition") but I do keep an eye on it for fun and classics like the Rolex Sub Date have dropped by over 20% in price on the used market in the past 10 months (source is Chrono24 which charts prices). My guess is we'll see the used luxury market flooded in 2023/24 as extravagant purchases made during boom times are liquidated for cash.

haunter 4y ago
>radio sync Such and underrated feature! There is a good list of Multiband watches that works across multiple continents that way https://shockbase.org/function_page_dyn.php?function=multi_band_6 https://shockbase.org/function_page_dyn.php?function=multi_b...
TedDoesntTalk 4y ago
> F105W which is basically the same watch with a vastly improved backlight Can’t stress this enough. The F-91W is useless at night because the backlight brightness is terrible. The F105W has an indiglo-style “EL” light that is very effective. The two watches are nearly identical from an aesthetic perspective. The functions are identical as are the buttons.
- 3pac 4y ago
  Indiglo has good looks and function. What I dislike is that it requires a high-voltage driver. As tiny and low-current as that may be, it is electrically and even slightly acoustically noisy, and not something that belongs in a low-voltage wristwatch.
  - TedDoesntTalk 4y ago
    Considering I might turn it on once per night for a second or less, I’m not concerned. Is the risk that it affects the timekeeping?
  - myself248 4y ago
    Why not? An incandescent backlight _physically gets hot_, I'd argue that has even less place in this application. It's just what they had at the time. But in either case, it's perfectly safe. There's no way to touch either the hot parts or the high-voltage parts. And even if there was, the battery doesn't have enough oomph to do anything more than tingle once the prickly part was trying to drive something as massive as a fingertip. I noticed the noise too, when I owned one, but I figure silencing it would've cost size, weight, and power. And the noise was never more than a curiosity, so I'll take it!
    - Brian_K_White 4y ago
      They aren't talking a out safety, they're talking about efficiency and accuracy. A boost converter is inefficient and you don't have power to waste like that in a watch. And electrical noise perturbs the timekeeping parts. However your comparison to incandescent and your point about the momentary nature are both valid I'd say. If they had magic, they'd have used it. So they took something fundamentally inefficient and added engineering to make the best of it. A bad thing, done as well as possible, You could say almost the same things about incandescent. It's not electrically noisy, but temperature sure does perturb the timekeeping, and incandescent definitely wastes power. Especially if you need the filament to last indefinitely instead of replacing it easily.
- galangalalgol 4y ago
vasqw 4y ago
I love my GWM5610, the only thing I dislike is how hard to press the buttons are and the bad display angles. But other than that it's a damn brick. And the radio sync is magic.
jansan 4y ago
I had been wearing the F105W for about two decades and then decided that I want an upgrade. I tried to get as much value for my money and ended up buying the LCW-M100TSE-1AER from Casio's Lineage collection for 240€. Features are - Titanium casing and strap - sapphire crystal glass - Wave ceptor (radio signal receiver) - Solar cell - Light (not great, but usable) If Casio combined these features in a classic looking LCD watch that does not cost a fortune, I would not only buy one, but three of them. I know, there is the MRG-B5000D-1, but with a price tag of 3500€, which is more than then times the price of my watch with fewer features (no waveceptor) this is a bit expensive IMO.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
jimmyjazz14 4y ago
I don't really understand your comment about avoiding Seiko (and yes as a Seiko collector I'm a bit triggered). In my experience Seiko makes absolutely great quality watches still with maybe the only issues generally being the occasional misaligned chapter ring though I pretty much only collect Seiko mechanical watches so maybe the situation is different with their quartz watches. Citizen also makes some particularly interesting quartz watches the Chronomaster series (which is a Japanese domestic market exclusive) has one of the most reliable watch movements ever with a rating of +/-5 seconds a YEAR.
- dougSF70 4y ago
  Seiko 5 automatic movement is on a par with the Rolex automatic movement according to my friend who is an official Rolex repairer.
  - jimmyjazz14 4y ago
    They are often quite similar in design though I'm guessing the Rolex uses quite a bit higher quality materials.
  - aidenn0 4y ago
    Quality of Seiko 5 is pretty good, but IIRC the Rolex movement is more compact.
  - lmz 4y ago
    Well they're both Automatic mobements with a Swiss lever escapement design, but the Rolex is finished better and has better balance adjustment (free-sprung balance). It is also factory adjusted as opposed to the Seiko 5 movement.
- mickael-kerjean 4y ago
  I'm in the same boat, won't ever touch a seiko and refuse to do so for for 2 main reasons: 1. They have the gut of naming their watch "save the ocean" and doing things with PADI when the country they operate in is involved in commercial whaling, still go on fishing species of tuna that are on the verge of extinction or throw sharks back in water still alive after removing their fins just to make some soup. That's appalling, if North Korea would make a watch called "human right" we'd all laught and move on but, I'm not to support a company that make "dive watch" pretending to care about the ocean and not saying/doing anything toward what's actually happening in the country they operate in. 2. I'm a yema fan boy and seiko used to own yema in the 90s. Under their stewardship, they introduced plastic to hold the movement in place instead of the previous metal piece and did change the case onto a cheap low cost copy of what was available before and removed the original hands by some mercedes hands, copying everything Rolex was doing in a cheap package. That period in Yema's history was terrible, hopefully they ended up selling the brand after a few years but boy how did they make a mess
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
koonsolo 4y ago
I have a casio g-shock MTG with solar and radio sync that I bought more than 10 years ago. Wear it almost every day. Battery indicator is still at full. Once I had to buy a small metal rod (for a few euros) for the metal strap, and still going strong.

haunter 4y ago

>radio sync Such and underrated feature! There is a good list of Multiband watches that works across multiple continents that way https://shockbase.org/function_page_dyn.php?function=multi_band_6 https://shockbase.org/function_page_dyn.php?function=multi_b...

TedDoesntTalk 4y ago

> F105W which is basically the same watch with a vastly improved backlight Can’t stress this enough. The F-91W is useless at night because the backlight brightness is terrible. The F105W has an indiglo-style “EL” light that is very effective. The two watches are nearly identical from an aesthetic perspective. The functions are identical as are the buttons.

3pac 4y ago
Indiglo has good looks and function. What I dislike is that it requires a high-voltage driver. As tiny and low-current as that may be, it is electrically and even slightly acoustically noisy, and not something that belongs in a low-voltage wristwatch.
- TedDoesntTalk 4y ago
  Considering I might turn it on once per night for a second or less, I’m not concerned. Is the risk that it affects the timekeeping?
- myself248 4y ago
  Why not? An incandescent backlight _physically gets hot_, I'd argue that has even less place in this application. It's just what they had at the time. But in either case, it's perfectly safe. There's no way to touch either the hot parts or the high-voltage parts. And even if there was, the battery doesn't have enough oomph to do anything more than tingle once the prickly part was trying to drive something as massive as a fingertip. I noticed the noise too, when I owned one, but I figure silencing it would've cost size, weight, and power. And the noise was never more than a curiosity, so I'll take it!
  - Brian_K_White 4y ago
    They aren't talking a out safety, they're talking about efficiency and accuracy. A boost converter is inefficient and you don't have power to waste like that in a watch. And electrical noise perturbs the timekeeping parts. However your comparison to incandescent and your point about the momentary nature are both valid I'd say. If they had magic, they'd have used it. So they took something fundamentally inefficient and added engineering to make the best of it. A bad thing, done as well as possible, You could say almost the same things about incandescent. It's not electrically noisy, but temperature sure does perturb the timekeeping, and incandescent definitely wastes power. Especially if you need the filament to last indefinitely instead of replacing it easily.
galangalalgol 4y ago

vasqw 4y ago

I love my GWM5610, the only thing I dislike is how hard to press the buttons are and the bad display angles. But other than that it's a damn brick. And the radio sync is magic.

jansan 4y ago

I had been wearing the F105W for about two decades and then decided that I want an upgrade. I tried to get as much value for my money and ended up buying the LCW-M100TSE-1AER from Casio's Lineage collection for 240€. Features are - Titanium casing and strap - sapphire crystal glass - Wave ceptor (radio signal receiver) - Solar cell - Light (not great, but usable) If Casio combined these features in a classic looking LCD watch that does not cost a fortune, I would not only buy one, but three of them. I know, there is the MRG-B5000D-1, but with a price tag of 3500€, which is more than then times the price of my watch with fewer features (no waveceptor) this is a bit expensive IMO.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

jimmyjazz14 4y ago

I don't really understand your comment about avoiding Seiko (and yes as a Seiko collector I'm a bit triggered). In my experience Seiko makes absolutely great quality watches still with maybe the only issues generally being the occasional misaligned chapter ring though I pretty much only collect Seiko mechanical watches so maybe the situation is different with their quartz watches. Citizen also makes some particularly interesting quartz watches the Chronomaster series (which is a Japanese domestic market exclusive) has one of the most reliable watch movements ever with a rating of +/-5 seconds a YEAR.

dougSF70 4y ago
Seiko 5 automatic movement is on a par with the Rolex automatic movement according to my friend who is an official Rolex repairer.
- jimmyjazz14 4y ago
  They are often quite similar in design though I'm guessing the Rolex uses quite a bit higher quality materials.
- aidenn0 4y ago
  Quality of Seiko 5 is pretty good, but IIRC the Rolex movement is more compact.
- lmz 4y ago
  Well they're both Automatic mobements with a Swiss lever escapement design, but the Rolex is finished better and has better balance adjustment (free-sprung balance). It is also factory adjusted as opposed to the Seiko 5 movement.
mickael-kerjean 4y ago
I'm in the same boat, won't ever touch a seiko and refuse to do so for for 2 main reasons: 1. They have the gut of naming their watch "save the ocean" and doing things with PADI when the country they operate in is involved in commercial whaling, still go on fishing species of tuna that are on the verge of extinction or throw sharks back in water still alive after removing their fins just to make some soup. That's appalling, if North Korea would make a watch called "human right" we'd all laught and move on but, I'm not to support a company that make "dive watch" pretending to care about the ocean and not saying/doing anything toward what's actually happening in the country they operate in. 2. I'm a yema fan boy and seiko used to own yema in the 90s. Under their stewardship, they introduced plastic to hold the movement in place instead of the previous metal piece and did change the case onto a cheap low cost copy of what was available before and removed the original hands by some mercedes hands, copying everything Rolex was doing in a cheap package. That period in Yema's history was terrible, hopefully they ended up selling the brand after a few years but boy how did they make a mess

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

koonsolo 4y ago

I have a casio g-shock MTG with solar and radio sync that I bought more than 10 years ago. Wear it almost every day. Battery indicator is still at full. Once I had to buy a small metal rod (for a few euros) for the metal strap, and still going strong.