What's new
By:
Filters

Any ‘Watch’ People Here?

PheonixKingZ said:
But for day to day dropping, in the mud, in the river, showering, etc. G-Shock is superior. Could Rolex’s survive all of that? Yes, they could, but not as well as G-Shocks. Would you take your Rolex outside and crawl around in the mud? Go for a swim in a pool with it? Go crawl in a cave with a 1.5ft ceiling?
Click to expand...
....Rolexs are waterproof....to a minimum of 50meters...

Again, Rolex was designed to be used for hard work, not for designer purposes, though its quality has elevated it to that sort of audience. Mind you, the Submariner was designed for diving.
 
trash.binh91 said:
....Rolexs are waterproof....to a minimum of 50meters...

Again, Rolex was designed to be used for hard work, not for designer purposes, though its quality has elevated it to that sort of audience. Mind you, the Submariner was designed for diving.
Click to expand...
I agree the Submariner is designed to be waterproof.

Did you not read anything I wrote??


kwi said:
I thought you were 13..........
Click to expand...
Me?
 
Wow. I am 15 as well but everyone I meet thinks I am 18ish! The only watch I've ever had was a cheap $15 dollar Walmart watch. It lasted for a good bit but I wouldn't say I ever really abused it that much.
 
PheonixKingZ said:
I agree the Submariner is designed to be waterproof.

Did you not read anything I wrote??



Me?
Click to expand...
Yes, I did. Why you feel the need to question that is beyond me. You seem to change your point a lot.

I responded to you saying that Rolex watches were barely even functional...which was simply not true. When proved wrong you went on to counter with what seems like "but G-Shock are better than Rolex" which could be up for debate and would depend on what a consumer wants.

I'm still sticking to responding your statement that Rolex are not functional, which they are. That's not up for debate. I'm not interested in taking this further.
 
trash.binh91 said:
Yes, I did. Why you feel the need to question that is beyond me. You seem to change your point a lot.

I responded to you saying that Rolex watches were barely even functional...which was simply not true. When proved wrong you went on to counter with what seems like "but G-Shock are better than Rolex" which could be up for debate and would depend on what a consumer wants.

I'm still sticking to responding your statement that Rolex are not functional, which they are. That's not up for debate. I'm not interested in taking this further.
Click to expand...
My bad when I said “barely functional”, that’s not what I meant by that.

And as I’ve said over and over again everyone is entitled to their own opinion. That means I can think what I want to think and you can think what you want to think. If you think that Rolex’s are better than G-Shocks, then all the power to you. I don’t agree with it, but it’s your opinion.


kwi said:
Yes.
Click to expand...
Why?
 
Kyle E. said:
Wow. I am 15 as well but everyone I meet thinks I am 18ish! The only watch I've ever had was a cheap $15 dollar Walmart watch. It lasted for a good bit but I wouldn't say I ever really abused it that much.
Click to expand...
My watch graveyard:
E3417BE7-AA0A-40C1-8785-740D6199F688.jpeg

:lol:
 
PheonixKingZ said:
It is a compliment! Most teanagers around that age would be typing like: “Hey yo bruh, wass gud mann?” :rofl:



No, I have never had a Rolex. I do realize that Rolex’s can last longer than G-Shocks, because of the way they are made.

For example: If both watches were in a fire. The G-Shock would obviously melt much faster than Rolex’s, because Rolex’s usually are made from metal, (platinum, gold, stainless steel) while its opponent is usually made of plastic/silicone.

But for day to day dropping, in the mud, in the river, showering, etc. G-Shock is superior. Could Rolex’s survive all of that? Yes, they could, but not as well as G-Shocks. Would you take your Rolex outside and crawl around in the mud? Go for a swim in a pool with it? Go crawl in a cave with a 1.5ft ceiling?

So all in all, Rolex’s can last longer, if cared for properly only because of its good time keeping and because it’s not digital. But for day to day abuse, G-Shocks will get you through life, without breaking the bank...

Edit: Just wanted to add another thing.

The only real comparison you can make, is the crystal. Rolex’s have sapphire crystal, that’s a well known fact. G-Shocks usually have mineral crystal, which is still better than plastic, but not as good as sapphire.

With a sapphire crystal, it’s super easy to buff out any scratches. (Which, here again, indicates the user actually cares about it looking good)

For me? No. My watch is a tool. It does even look that good. After about 8 months of brutal use, it only has a very small scratch in the top right corner.

Most G-Shocks have a rubber bezel that protects the crystal from getting scratched.

I have crawled through a narrow cave, through mud, water, shower, dropped, stepped on, worn it in cold weather, snow, etc.

I trust this thing.

(https://gizmodo.com/why-a-10-casio-keeps-better-time-than-a-10-000-rolex-5983427)
Click to expand...
I never took mine off when I wore it. Went rafting, water selling, cleaned fish tanks, pig pens, rode horses, etc. One big point... will yours increase in price as time goes by? The Rolex will. Who really cares at the end of the day. It’s a matter of preference. :)
 
PheonixKingZ said:
My bad when I said “barely functional”, that’s not what I meant by that.

And as I’ve said over and over again everyone is entitled to their own opinion. That means I can think what I want to think and you can think what you want to think. If you think that Rolex’s are better than G-Shocks, then all the power to you. I don’t agree with it, but it’s your opinion.
Click to expand...
Ok? Isn't that obvious? I'm not the one trying to tell you your opinion is wrong? What's the point of bringing it up over and over again?? Responding to you doesn't make less of your opinion? People are allowed to challenge other's opinions, which I wasnt. All I was doing was saying that your statement wasnt correct? You're looking way too deep into this.
 
Let’s just stop the watch talk. This has gotten way out of hand. I actually notified the other Mods that I was quitting and leaving. After talking it over with another Mod ( by the way, I really appreciated it), I realized this is rediculous!. I’m not on this forum to argue over watches. I’m here to learn and grow in the aquatic hobby and maybe, at times, help someone else. Peace!
 
Deanasue said:
Let’s just stop the watch talk.
Click to expand...
But this a thread about watches. Do you want us to go completely off-topic on this thread?

Anywhoo, I'm not a fan of watches because I don't like putting things on my wrist. I just use my phone to tell time and I carry that everywhere I go.
 
Last edited:
Back to watches:


Crispii said:
But this a thread about watches. Do you want us to go completely off-topic on this thread?

Anywhoo, I'm not a fan of watches because I don't like putting things on my wrist. I just use my phone to tell time and I carry that everywhere I go.
Click to expand...
Yes, that’s a big thing especially with younger people. They have phones and it’s just habit to look at it. I don’t have a phone, so I rely on my watch. :whistle:

——-

I absolutely love this series: https://products.g-shock.com/asia-mea/en/_detail/MTG-B1000WLP-1A/

The colors are incredible.
 
I do still wear a watch because, as mentioned, they are jewelry. I have a watch and earrings on everyday. It dresses up even a pair of jeans. Now, that goes for us older women. Not speaking for the younger generations. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Most reactions

Useful Links

Back
Top