Analog with triple sensor & or a triple sensor with moon phase?

I want to stick to a mostly analog watch, but am really interested in the triple sensor Rangemans & the double sensor Mudmans.

Are there any analog watches that have the triple sensor?

Are there any triple sensor watches that also have the 8 part moon phases? I see the 2 sensor mudman has just the moon phase (I don't need the tide but really want the moon so it's perfect) but I'd like to get a 3 sensor with moon phase if I go all digital.

Any idea one what casio has coming for 2014 in regards to anything I'm seeking? I'm not in a rush so can wait things out a bit. I'm new to watches really & really new to G-Shocks & not sure when casio releases their new upcoming line for the year?

Sorry, but no Triple Sensor analog G. In fact, the the one and only Triple Sensor G is the Rangeman, and it sure will take quite a while (if ever) for Casio to release another ABCT model. In terms of analogs with sensors you only have the Aviator A1000 with the pretty useless temperature sensor or the A1100 with a very good compass, but that's it. The only other Casio line that may be ABCT with moon phase and analog is the ProTrek/Pathfinder, but I'm not too familiar with those to suggest a model.

BTW, when Casio (and other brands, for that matter) talks about sensors it only considers "Triple Sensor" watches that have ABC capabilities, so the Mudman would be a mono sensor. Weird, I know, because all triple sensor watches that I know of are in reality quadruple sensor .

And welcome aboard!

Casio have released an analog triple sensor under their pro-trek line. Check the protrek releases on the front page.

Be surprised to see a triple sensor G any time soon.

The new releases come out month by month, again we cover them on the front page.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

LUW said:

In terms of analogs with sensors you only have the A1100 with a very good compass, but that's it. The only other Casio line that may be ABCT with moon phase and analog is the ProTrek/Pathfinder, but I'm not too familiar with those to suggest a model.

BTW, when Casio (and other brands, for that matter) talks about sensors it only considers "Triple Sensor" watches that have ABC capabilities, so the Mudman would be a mono sensor. Weird, I know, because all triple sensor watches that I know of are in reality quadruple sensor

.

And welcome aboard!

Click to expand...

That A1100 is really nice, but at a $500+ price tag, too rich for my blood.

It's weird on the triple/mono sensor designation.

Thanks for the welcome!

rutteger said:

Casio have released an analog triple sensor under their pro-trek line. Check the protrek releases on the front page.

Be surprised to see a triple sensor G any time soon.

The new releases come out month by month, again we cover them on the front page.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Why aren't they wanting to expand more triple sensors into the G line? Is it because they are just trying to focus sales on the Rangeman?

Seems the Protreks w/triple sensor are affordable for me, $218 for this one:

http://www.amazon.com/Casio-Protrek-LIMITED-EDITION-PRG510-1/dp/B005FSIUD6

But are the Protreks as durable as G-shocks? The reason I came to G-shocks is because I want the most durable watch I can get.

That will determine what I decide on I think.

G-Shocks are built to be more durable than ProTreks, in the past the ProTreks had triple sensor as a defining feature over the G-Shock. This Rangeman is a historical G just because it is the first ever G triple sensor.

It uses the new version 3 sensors, and if you want to see drastic differences, the same stuff is in the PRW-3000. Much different by size and feel. A lot of Protrek owners a wary of how much smaller the 3000 is, and are happy to see the new PRG270 is "classic" sized similar to other/older ProTreks. The 270 also has the version 3 sensors, but not atomic.

2 things: smaller is not necessarily less tough as per the 5000/5600 G's and many arguments have been made that the difference in toughness between a Protrek and G is way beyond what the arm attached to it is rated to

If you want the toughest triple sensor, get a GW-9400 and be done with it. You can find non - Japanese versions under US$275.

If an analog is the only way, a new version 3 Protrek is surely in the works. The whole line is getting revamped with the new sensors.

Hope this helps. Please ask more questions as wanted. :beer:

sent with aloha

chrisek said:

...many arguments have been made that the difference in toughness between a Protrek and G is way beyond what the arm attached to it is rated to

Click to expand...

Do you know why that less-tough concept about the ProTreks began?

Depth rating. The first ProTreks (they were not even known as Pathfinders back then) had a 100 m water resistance, while Gs always were certified for 200 m. At the time, Casio was already producing plastic cased Gs, so the steel case was not what made Gs tougher then their ProTrek cousins. And in those days Casio wanted two distinctive lines, the indestructible G-Shock and the outdoorsy ProTreks. But with time the lines started to mingle and a few years after they started calling them Pathfinders in the NA market the water depth rating was increased to 200 m, and now we even have a Triple Sensor G.

In practical terms a current day plastic-cased* G is tougher then a ProTrek/Pathfinder just because of the bezel and crystal. On a G the display area is usually smaller and the bezel is higher and more "constricting" over the crystal, therefor there is less chances of shattering the crystal with an impact. The rest, case and straps are basically the same, the only exception being the King with the Alfagel cushion inside the case.

*: There is a misconception that a steel-cased model is tougher then a plastic-cased one, but in terms of watch toughness with the watch on your wrist that is not true.

Great info LUW! I did not know the history of the Protrek/Pathfinders. I definitely noticed crystal size and protection differences between the two.

sent with aloha

chrisek said:

G-Shocks are built to be more durable than ProTreks

If an analog is the only way, a new version 3 Protrek is surely in the works. The whole line is getting revamped with the new sensors.

Hope this helps. Please ask more questions as wanted. :beer:

sent with aloha

Click to expand...

Ok so G-shocks are more durable over Protreks, but are they both beyond tough for what someone is looking for? I'm just wondering if I'd be happy with a Protrek for a SHTF scenario.

And that's great to hear that a new v3 Protrek is in the works, any idea when they would be coming out with them so I can keep my eye out? I would really prefer an analog watch, but don't mind the digital 3 sensor aspect.

Hopefully they are not $500...

I would very much like an Atomic version too, that would be awesome!

LUW said:

Do you know why that less-tough concept about the ProTreks began?

Depth rating. The first ProTreks (they were not even known as Pathfinders back then) had a 100 m water resistance, while Gs always were certified for 200 m. At the time, Casio was already producing plastic cased Gs, so the steel case was not what made Gs tougher then their ProTrek cousins. And in those days Casio wanted two distinctive lines, the indestructible G-Shock and the outdoorsy ProTreks. But with time the lines started to mingle and a few years after they started calling them Pathfinders in the NA market the water depth rating was increased to 200 m, and now we even have a Triple Sensor G.

In practical terms a current day plastic-cased* G is tougher then a ProTrek/Pathfinder just because of the bezel and crystal. On a G the display area is usually smaller and the bezel is higher and more "constricting" over the crystal, therefor there is less chances of shattering the crystal with an impact. The rest, case and straps are basically the same, the only exception being the King with the Alfagel cushion inside the case.

*: There is a misconception that a steel-cased model is tougher then a plastic-cased one, but in terms of watch toughness with the watch on your wrist that is not true.

Click to expand...

So Protreks are now rated to 200m? They sound like they are plenty tough along the G-shocks heels that would satisfy my needs perhaps, especially if I can get an analog with triple sensor. (And maybe moon phase, but I may be over-hoping for that one)

Does anyone have a side by side comparison shot to see the differnce in G & Pro bezels/crystal? You think that's really the only difference in durability is the higher bezel & lower crystal? The anti-bump/vibration internal casing is the same? I'd be more concerned with the internals being as tough as possible vs a bigger bezel & lower crystal.

johnnyscience said:

So Protreks are now rated to 200m? They sound like they are plenty tough along the G-shocks heels that would satisfy my needs perhaps, especially if I can get an analog with triple sensor.

Click to expand...

Yep, just like Gs, 200 m (at least). As I wrote, on your wrist a ProTrek will withstand the same abuse a G could survive.

johnnyscience said:

You think that's really the only difference in durability is the higher bezel & lower crystal? The anti-bump/vibration internal casing is the same? I'd be more concerned with the internals being as tough as possible vs a bigger bezel & lower crystal.

Click to expand...

Once again, on your wrist it's more likely you getting your arm hurt then damaging your G or ProTrek. However, the higher and more constricting bezel on a G could mean you would shatter/scratch a crystal on a ProTrek easier then it would happen on a G. The payoff is that usually a ProTrek has a bigger display area, and therefor it's easier to read. Internally all resin-cased Gs and ProTreks have the same shock-absorbing qualities (with the exception of the King as noted earlier), but externally the (resin) straps on a G are designed to help impact absorption when the watch falls to the ground.

Adding everything up, in a nutshell, a G-Shock is tougher then a ProTrek, but not by much. Toughness, or lack of, in a ProTrek should not be a reason for not buying one.