Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Let's see your watch collections!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by tremperj View Post
    I also totally ripped off a look seen on Worn & Wound and put my Seiko SNZH53 on a Honey Brown Hirsch Liberty strap.

    Good look! I like that.

    Comment


      Since no one else has done it, I'll break the ice.
      This is my big ugly.
      G-shock GW-6900 has more in common with a tank.
      200m water resist, automatic backlight (always shut this off), solar powered, and atomic clock sync.
      This is my mud run/workout/"need something tougher than my Suunto" watch.

      Comment


        I want a G-Shock for when I'm exercising and stuff but most of them are too big for my 6.5"-6.75" wrists.

        Comment


          Originally posted by Vicious49 View Post
          I want a G-Shock for when I'm exercising and stuff but most of them are too big for my 6.5"-6.75" wrists.
          My wrist ain't much bigger. But I realized that I was buying a G-shock for function over form, and that extends into how it looks on me.
          If I am at a point where I'm concerned with how my watch looks, I need to step up my workout!

          Comment


            Originally posted by tremperj View Post
            My wrist ain't much bigger. But I realized that I was buying a G-shock for function over form, and that extends into how it looks on me.
            If I am at a point where I'm concerned with how my watch looks, I need to step up my workout!
            I was about to ask you guys -- instead of going G-shock or something, why not just go with a Polar and get a heart rate monitor strap? Actually more functional than a g-shock in terms of your intended uses, unless I'm missing something.

            Comment


              Originally posted by hornsup84 View Post
              I was about to ask you guys -- instead of going G-shock or something, why not just go with a Polar and get a heart rate monitor strap? Actually more functional than a g-shock in terms of your intended uses, unless I'm missing something.
              Depends what you want. I don't really care about my heart rate when I am working out. I'm running a distance, doing a certain rep count for time, or something like that. I can feel when my heart rate is up. I think heart rate comes more into play for endurance training, for triathalons and the like. And then you start getting into wanting something that does GPS, etc. And now we have surpassed the price by quite a bit. I bought my G-Shock in PRISTINE condition off of WUS for $50. And I won't ever have to replace batteries (most Polar or other similar products have to be charged) and it sets the time every night to the atomic clock (which really isnt necessary but c'mon, nerd points). My desire was for something that can be shaken like hell, dropped, have a barbell knurling scraped against, sweat all over, get chalk in the crevices, and I don't have to think for a moment about while it counts down/up my time. Also, for as big as G-shocks get, a lot of those heart rate watches are even bigger. Just opinions, of course.

              Comment


                G-Shocks are great when absolute toughness is the driving factor for the purchase. For a workout watch, however, I honestly prefer Timex Ironman for functionality. Their modules are enormously more user-friendly and the displays are significantly less cluttered and more legible. I'd probably wear a Solar 5600 G-Shock or something similar if I were a manual laborer or going into a combat zone, but for timing runs and bike rides, I will pick Timex every time.

                GPS watches can be pretty interesting if you do a lot of hiking and whatnot, but I personally find a HR monitor to be kind of superfluous. I find it easier to pace myself by paying attention to my own body signals, rather than relying on a HR monitor. And the calorie counting function is simply silly. I once wore 2 HR monitors at once to see how accurate they were. The HR monitors themselves were highly accurate (at least to each other) but one of them estimated that I had burned over twice as many calories as the other (900 vs 400 or something).

                I do wish Casio made more moderately sized G-Shocks. The only one that's wearable for me is the 5600 style. I have a Japan domestic market "Mini G" that is a good size but the actual functionality of the module is embarrassingly outdated.
                Ben

                Comment


                  Originally posted by tremperj View Post
                  Depends what you want. I don't really care about my heart rate when I am working out. I'm running a distance, doing a certain rep count for time, or something like that. I can feel when my heart rate is up. I think heart rate comes more into play for endurance training, for triathalons and the like. And then you start getting into wanting something that does GPS, etc. And now we have surpassed the price by quite a bit. I bought my G-Shock in PRISTINE condition off of WUS for $50. And I won't ever have to replace batteries (most Polar or other similar products have to be charged) and it sets the time every night to the atomic clock (which really isnt necessary but c'mon, nerd points). My desire was for something that can be shaken like hell, dropped, have a barbell knurling scraped against, sweat all over, get chalk in the crevices, and I don't have to think for a moment about while it counts down/up my time. Also, for as big as G-shocks get, a lot of those heart rate watches are even bigger. Just opinions, of course.
                  That's fair, I have an older Polar model that does seem to be a lot smaller than some of the current models. Why they have to be enormous, I'll never understand (unless I guess you have bad eyesight). I'm actually coming up on having to replace the battery in mine, which is annoying since I have to send it away (they apparently closed down their licensed dealer shop in NYC)...

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by LesserBlackDog View Post
                    The HR monitors themselves were highly accurate (at least to each other) but one of them estimated that I had burned over twice as many calories as the other (900 vs 400 or something).
                    What do you mean that they were highly accurate "at least to each other"? I agree that kcal counters are a bit shady since so much goes into calculating that, and there's no way a watch can factor in all the variables and be accurate for all people. For example, I have a relatively higher heart rate than most people (even factoring in fitness levels, etc.). I generally use my HR monitor / kcal counter to generally guage my workouts' respective intensity, meaning they have value even if the nominal kcal outputs aren't actually accurate in scale. Limited use tool, but I like following it so I have some metric to see how I'm pushing myself overall.

                    Comment


                      I mean that the heart rate functions on the monitors were accurate to each other - always within 1 bpm of each other when I paid attention. That leads me to trust the accuracy of the HR function on both watches. The burned calorie functions, however, were nowhere near each other, as I noted. Since I find it more useful to know how many calories I've burned than to know my heart rate, that inaccuracy renders most HR monitors rather useless for me. If I am attempting to track my data to enhance performance, I would rather spend the extra $ to get a GPS/HRM that lets me review my exertion relative to particular areas of elevation change, my pace at different points throughout a workout, and so on. Most basic HRMs only really tell you your heart rate in the moment, which I find not to be a very helpful data point in isolation.
                      Ben

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by LesserBlackDog View Post
                        I mean that the heart rate functions on the monitors were accurate to each other - always within 1 bpm of each other when I paid attention. That leads me to trust the accuracy of the HR function on both watches. The burned calorie functions, however, were nowhere near each other, as I noted. Since I find it more useful to know how many calories I've burned than to know my heart rate, that inaccuracy renders most HR monitors rather useless for me. If I am attempting to track my data to enhance performance, I would rather spend the extra $ to get a GPS/HRM that lets me review my exertion relative to particular areas of elevation change, my pace at different points throughout a workout, and so on. Most basic HRMs only really tell you your heart rate in the moment, which I find not to be a very helpful data point in isolation.
                        Makes sense, thanks for explanation.

                        Comment


                          The latest addition to the collection....
                          Thanks to Joe for spotlighting it a while ago.
                          And my wife for a great birthday gift.

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by Johdus View Post
                            The latest addition to the collection....
                            Thanks to Joe for spotlighting it a while ago.
                            And my wife for a great birthday gift.


                            Nice. I would like to own a chrono– just dont want batteries. Eco-drive is a great solution, because I am most certainly not wealthy enough to own a mechanical chrono right now.
                            I just got a nice looking beater for $25 on WUS. Timex Field Watch. Nice size, loudest tick ever, the backlight is nice.

                            Comment


                              The Collection:

                              Rolex Yachtmaster
                              Seiko
                              Louis Vuitton GMT
                              Locman
                              Casio G-Shock

                              Comment


                                Just placed an order for this one. A bit on the expensive side for a quartz but I really liked the look of it. Plus my birthday and 1 year anniversary is coming up and the wife has been looking for a gift to buy for me so maybe I can convince her that this can be my gift.


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X