Sorry to break it to the Rolex fanboys in the comments, but Rolex has just become overhyped and overpriced. You can find watches of equal quality at a fraction of the price - both European and Asian manufacturers.
I have to say that having owned this particular new Rolex Explorer, that nothing has compared in the sub 1000 price point. I’m sure there’s still better value for money, but the physical quality seems to be something bad is harder to do.
One thing about a quality mechanical time piece .. rolex.. patek.. ap not some fly by night stuff You can wear it for a lifetime and it will appreciate in value significantly.. not only are they tools but can be a pretty good investment that you get to enjoy daily and use to do many things You won't get that appreciation on a g-shock or the ability to pass it down for generations I love gshocks all types of watches but you won't have that variable but with a few of the mechanical pieces
I went down the Rolex rabbit hole. I looked at materials, construction, attention to detail, style, accuracy, real world use … G-Shock and many other watches had Rolex beat. You buy a Rolex to say you spent an absurd amount of money. You buy a G-Shock because you value your money, actually want to do everything wearing your watch and live a real life. G-Shock for me.
The Rolex (Explorer) was a tool watch in its day , but today it is simply jewelry that tells time. A G-Shock is a modern tool watch. Solar Powered, Atomic set, by radio quartz, more impact resistant, and many more features at a fraction of the price. As a field watch, the Rolex is simply obsoleted, and inferior. but still may do the job if all you need is the time. This leaves out the jewelry factor. I know longer wear watches to impress anybody, but its a matter of taste and need. Feature per dollar, there is no comparison.
Thank you for your comment. I think you’re 100% right. At this point, Rolex is purely a luxury brand and not trying to compete in the tool watch space. When you’re talking about pure value for money, you’d be hard pressed to find something better than the G-Shock.
Been watching your videos for a while now and was inspired to start a collection. Started with the MAMACOO, its specs for price and clean looks, now am looking for a dress watch to add.
It's a shame how watch prices have rocketed. When I started work in 1980 you could buy a Rolex submariner for £360. A seiko sports watch would be £40 - £70. A speedmaster was £300 and a Tudor snowflake submariner £210. I was taking home about £300 as an 18 yo office junior. I was able to buy a Tudor snowflake submariner soon after starting work. I've heard people say it's due to inflation. I think it's far more than that. Omega speedmasters hadn't changed that drastically in that you can still get models with an acrylic cristal yet they're £6k watches.
It’s a shame. I wish it was way more accessible to get these pieces. I’m sure inflation plays a large role, but to your point, it’s not the only factor.
Nice to see MAMACOO show a watch that can be afforded by almost anyone rather than these pieces costing thousands and thousands which are out of reach for so many.
*Why is it that not a single RUclipsr mentions the useless alarm on the Casio M5610U (all caps: USELESS)?* Why does the illumination turn off when any button is pressed? Why is there only one snoozeable alarm? Why aren’t there settings for WEEKDAY and WEEKEND alarms? Why can the hour chime be automatically silenced from 11:00 PM until the morning alarm? And why hasn’t an effective vibrate feature been added to this watch? *If they included these features, you’d have THE ONLY WATCH YOU NEED!*
That is the funny and annoying thing for me with Casio watches. I have a lot of those features but they are all on different Casio watches!!! I would pay 1000 to have all the Casio features I love in one square
Quello che cerchi se lo vuoi in un unico orologio forse è il caso che consideri uno Smartwatch. Tutte le funzioni insieme probabilmente influenzano la durata della batteria, come ti insegnano gli Smart Watch, per quanto Casio fa orologi specifici per la funzione che ti serve e niente altri fronzoli.
@@mediaplayer2150 Non ho elencato niente di straordinario, solo le funzioni comuni che dovrebbero essere in un orologio elettronico. E non voglio avere uno smartwatch.
@@sergeyusik9934 cosa sono le funzioni comuni? Per me la maggior parte delle cose che hai elevante sono inutili, perché le fa già il mio smartphone con la sua sveglia. Quindi tutto è soggettivo, non troverai mai l’unico orologio che ti serve davvero se segui la tua regola perché ci sarà sempre qualcuno che dirà che a lui serve qualcosa che tu non hai elencato. Per questo ci sono hli smartwatch. E l’impatto che le funzioni hanno sulla batteria sono sensibili, per questo, credo, ogni orologio non “Smart”. ha un numero limitato di funzioni, per la maggior parte di chi porta un orologio anche il dual time è inutile ad esempio. Ma è la mia opinione amico. ma la batteria in un orologio, deve durare almeno un paio di anni .
I own both, they are both great, but the argument people make about “automatic watches are terrible timekeepers” is pathetic. I wear a Rolex because of the engineering and the history.
I totally agree. Although I totally understand that, technically speaking, any quartz watch is more accurate than an automatic, it still doesn’t influence my wearing decisions most days. I want my luxury automatic because of its engineering and beauty.
@@tylerfukuda perfect analogy. You can give me all the facts about better, gas, mileage, impressive technology, etc.. But none of that matters when you get inside that porsche and start it up.
@@tylerfukuda I think the example you gave is perfect but backwards. The g shock is by far a higher performer in every metric and the Rolex looks more appealing. So maybe the more accurate description would be a modern sports car vs a classic show cruiser. That being said I love both and think both have their place. If I could only have 1 id go sports car (g shock) but on weekends I like wearing nicer analog time pieces
I have a strong preference for the Omega Seamaster watch. However, I also appreciate the understated elegance and durability of the titanium square G-Shock watch, which I have owned and enjoyed for the past five years. Additionally, its discreet appearance ensures that it does not draw unnecessary attention, and only true enthusiasts of G-Shock watches would recognize its significance.
I think you’re right about true enthusiast appreciating what the G-Shock has accomplished. Despite being a popular choice for many non watch fanatics, I’m not sure many truly know how it revolutionized horology. Any watch enthusiast cannot be disappointed with what the G-Shock presents.
I like both, in fact I have a two piece collection since 4 months, containing only a Rolex DJ41 and a square G shock. Of course I want other watches but for now I manage to withstand because realistically these are the only watches that a man needs in his life.
Thank you for sharing. I totally agree. That’s a great 2 watch collection that can handle any situation that life throws at you. It’s hard to get out of the cycle of watch collecting and wanting other pieces, but good on you for fighting the urge for now.
That’s probably the best way to look at this. Rather than them being on both ends of the spectrum in terms of cost for tool watches, they are a great fit together. There’s probably not a single situation either of these two watches combined can’t handle.
Why bother with the cost of the G shock when you can get five W86 illuminators for the same price and will pretty much do the same thing (tell time, waterproof and will take a beating, also a bit smaller.
made my way up to a explorer 2 and came back to reality and could never go without the twist the wrist to get a time with light in the dark, like a 5610u could. Happy did not spend the 12k, would rather take a few vacations
Yeah, that’s a lot of money to spend when you’re satisfied already with something simple and affordable like a G-Shock. You can take that G-Shock on those vacations haha.
@@JackOnWrist Yeah the moment was when I already had Spirit Zulu that I got on sale at bloomingdales, and when seeing the Explorer 2 in person, realized its not 4x better but was 4x more $, heck was on par with SRPG27, but the bracelet was solid metal.
My Timex Expedition T49851 (which cost just $35 at the time) is more of a tool watch than all the $100-range G-Shocks combined -that's a fact. It’s spent more time on my wrist than any other watch, including the Casio M5610U, which I regret buying. No need for nails to press the buttons; it has a vibration alarm strong enough to wake the dead, plus weekday/weekend alarms and a hydration reminder. Too bad Timex decided to discontinue it, and old stock is hard to find. Speaking of Rolex-like pieces, they’re more of an achievement or a nice gift for a spouse. However, I can't imagine an everyday tool watch or any watch collection being complete without a day/date complication.
I have a g-shock that is now thirty years old, bought when I was a teenager. Unfortunately it is now beginning to perish, the sides have began to crumble and is no longer wearable.
If you cannot actually buy the Rolex then debating why you would buy one over the other is absolutely futile. I cannot believe these two have ever been the last two on an actual shortlist for anyone in the history of the world ever!
maybe these aren’t the only 2 watches being considered by someone but they are both ends of spectrum in terms of tool watches. It’s interesting to me to investigate both sides.
To each their own I guess. I decide to invest $5000 instead of getting my first Rolex. Then I use small amount of yearly income generated from said investment to buy Casio watch and other more useful gadgets. This way I can get many tools/toys over a lifetime instead of just one jewelry that I hardly wear. (Wearing Rolex increase my chance of getting robbed and killed in my area.) Maybe someday I will get my first Rolex...
I might understand if you chose to compare the Casio Lineage Titanium to the Rolex Explorer. But the G-Shock? It's still a few generations away from being "the only watch you’d ever need" - if it ever gets there.
These days, Rolexes and their ilk are status/fantasy pieces. They are selling the dream of rugged adventure or sophistication and "I've made it" luxury. Exorbitant SUVs from Mercedes, Porsche and Range Rover or top of the line “touring” Harley Davidson motorcycles (“Yesterday’s technology at tomorrow’s prices!”) that are rarely seen outside the expensive neighborhoods where they are garaged are in that kind of category too. Wearing a Submariner diving watch, for example, that only ever sees the corporate office, dinner party or golf course amounts to Cosplay. One may as well dress up like a cowboy, astronaut, or Lord of the Manor. It has about the same authenticity. So that leaves the collector's object fetishism - a magpie's lust for shiny things. But now, because they have become outdated, technological museum pieces and removed from their original, functional purpose, they take on a "wannabe" stigma, even for those that can easily afford them.
I think that despite these 2 watches not being direct competitors, they are representing both ends of the tool watch spectrum. I thought it would be fun to see if there truly is a vast difference in function and value between them.
Listen, I can appreciate a good looking watch. But they all do the same thing. Whether a 10,000 dollar Rolex or a $15 dollar Walmart watch. They tell time and that’s it. I would say 90 percent of watch guys (including myself) will never actually go diving especially past 100 meter with their watches. The only reason to get a high dollar watch is to flex
I see what you’re saying. I totally understand that from a functionality standpoint any cheap watch will do the trick. However, I would slightly disagree in saying that the only reason to buy a luxury piece is to flex. I do think many, including myself, buy luxury watches because the design, history and impressive, engineering appeals to them.
Alright, I really don't get this. I understand that both of them are field watches but you really cannot be comparing 2 watches with a massive discrepancy in their prices. Just because their use cases are similar doesn't mean that you can compare them. You don't buy a Rolex to tell the time. No one in their right mind is buying a Rolex for pure utility and they are aware of that. Heck, I can take it to the extreme (like this video) and say that we don't even really need mechanical watches in 2024 (cause it's true). Everyone who buys a Casio is fully aware that it is way more utilitarian than any Rolex will ever be. But that's the point: YOU DONT BUY A ROLEX TO TELL THE TIME Its like your saying dont buy a Ferrari, instead buy a Mazda Miata (Just because they can both be classified as sports cars).
Thank you for your thoughtful comment. I see your point. What I tried to have fun with in this video is comparing both ends of the tool watch spectrum. I thought it would be interesting to see what the true differences are in terms of functionality and value between these two pieces. I understand your comparison with the Ferrari and Mazda, however, in some aspects comparing two items in the same category does make some sense, despite your analogy.
Nobody will be watching that if you don't put Rolex ! This is the first. Next and last is this then you can use your Casio only in your office and go for a walk. I tested few G-SHOCK and they don't make any two weeks mission. For real hard stuff people need too use something better then this poor gshock.
Aha.....and you thinking like mostly people.....combat is hard condition?? I use for almost 5 year Victorinox filedforce and this still working and look from 1m like new. fireproof, anti-magnetic, anti-shock, resistant to electromagnetic fields, mega legible, luma lasts 7h more, precise plus 2sec for over half a year, resistant sapphire glass with triple AR on the inside, I hit it against various metal things a million times, dust, dirt, in 100m. sweeps these casio GS off the face of the earth. This is the tool watches . Regards.
I just got into watch collecting. I've loved watches since I was young but I never had anyone teach me or bring deeper into the world. MAMACOO brought closer to a community and hobby I always wanted to get into more and that is incredibly meaningful to me !
Nice to see MAMACOO show a watch that can be afforded by almost anyone rather than these pieces costing thousands and thousands which are out of reach for so many.
Any owner of a G-Shock, or most quartz watches for that matter, can ask of a Rolex owner, 'What time do you THINK it is ?'
Very true haha
LOL! 😂
Sorry to break it to the Rolex fanboys in the comments, but Rolex has just become overhyped and overpriced. You can find watches of equal quality at a fraction of the price - both European and Asian manufacturers.
I have to say that having owned this particular new Rolex Explorer, that nothing has compared in the sub 1000 price point. I’m sure there’s still better value for money, but the physical quality seems to be something bad is harder to do.
One thing about a quality mechanical time piece .. rolex.. patek.. ap not some fly by night stuff
You can wear it for a lifetime and it will appreciate in value significantly.. not only are they tools but can be a pretty good investment that you get to enjoy daily and use to do many things
You won't get that appreciation on a g-shock or the ability to pass it down for generations
I love gshocks all types of watches but you won't have that variable but with a few of the mechanical pieces
I went down the Rolex rabbit hole. I looked at materials, construction, attention to detail, style, accuracy, real world use … G-Shock and many other watches had Rolex beat. You buy a Rolex to say you spent an absurd amount of money. You buy a G-Shock because you value your money, actually want to do everything wearing your watch and live a real life. G-Shock for me.
It’s not even close (and I love the Explorer)
The Rolex (Explorer) was a tool watch in its day , but today it is simply jewelry that tells time. A G-Shock is a modern tool watch. Solar Powered, Atomic set, by radio quartz, more impact resistant, and many more features at a fraction of the price. As a field watch, the Rolex is simply obsoleted, and inferior. but still may do the job if all you need is the time. This leaves out the jewelry factor. I know longer wear watches to impress anybody, but its a matter of taste and need. Feature per dollar, there is no comparison.
Thank you for your comment. I think you’re 100% right. At this point, Rolex is purely a luxury brand and not trying to compete in the tool watch space. When you’re talking about pure value for money, you’d be hard pressed to find something better than the G-Shock.
Been watching your videos for a while now and was inspired to start a collection. Started with the MAMACOO, its specs for price and clean looks, now am looking for a dress watch to add.
It's a shame how watch prices have rocketed. When I started work in 1980 you could buy a Rolex submariner for £360. A seiko sports watch would be £40 - £70. A speedmaster was £300 and a Tudor snowflake submariner £210. I was taking home about £300 as an 18 yo office junior. I was able to buy a Tudor snowflake submariner soon after starting work. I've heard people say it's due to inflation. I think it's far more than that. Omega speedmasters hadn't changed that drastically in that you can still get models with an acrylic cristal yet they're £6k watches.
It’s a shame. I wish it was way more accessible to get these pieces. I’m sure inflation plays a large role, but to your point, it’s not the only factor.
It plays a small role. Branding has played a much larger role in raising the prices of the wrist pieces@@JackOnWrist
Nice to see MAMACOO show a watch that can be afforded by almost anyone rather than these pieces costing thousands and thousands which are out of reach for so many.
I’ve 60+ Casios including Gs, Enticers, Edifices, Protrek etc.. I wear a different watch everyday and I’m proud of my possession !
That’s so awesome. Of all the Casio’s you’ve owned do you have a favorite? Maybe that’s a loaded question haha
@@JackOnWrist No sir ! I’ve several favourites and I can’t just name one !
Love MAMACOO watch， Such a great looking watch to match with the precisionist movement.
*Why is it that not a single RUclipsr mentions the useless alarm on the Casio M5610U (all caps: USELESS)?*
Why does the illumination turn off when any button is pressed?
Why is there only one snoozeable alarm?
Why aren’t there settings for WEEKDAY and WEEKEND alarms?
Why can the hour chime be automatically silenced from 11:00 PM until the morning alarm?
And why hasn’t an effective vibrate feature been added to this watch?
*If they included these features, you’d have THE ONLY WATCH YOU NEED!*
That’s great analysis. Those are definitely some issues with 5610. I didn’t realize all those issues.
That is the funny and annoying thing for me with Casio watches. I have a lot of those features but they are all on different Casio watches!!! I would pay 1000 to have all the Casio features I love in one square
Quello che cerchi se lo vuoi in un unico orologio forse è il caso che consideri uno Smartwatch. Tutte le funzioni insieme probabilmente influenzano la durata della batteria, come ti insegnano gli Smart Watch, per quanto Casio fa orologi specifici per la funzione che ti serve e niente altri fronzoli.
@@mediaplayer2150 Non ho elencato niente di straordinario, solo le funzioni comuni che dovrebbero essere in un orologio elettronico. E non voglio avere uno smartwatch.
@@sergeyusik9934 cosa sono le funzioni comuni? Per me la maggior parte delle cose che hai elevante sono inutili, perché le fa già il mio smartphone con la sua sveglia. Quindi tutto è soggettivo, non troverai mai l’unico orologio che ti serve davvero se segui la tua regola perché ci sarà sempre qualcuno che dirà che a lui serve qualcosa che tu non hai elencato. Per questo ci sono hli smartwatch. E l’impatto che le funzioni hanno sulla batteria sono sensibili, per questo, credo, ogni orologio non “Smart”. ha un numero limitato di funzioni, per la maggior parte di chi porta un orologio anche il dual time è inutile ad esempio. Ma è la mia opinione amico. ma la batteria in un orologio, deve durare almeno un paio di anni .
I own both, they are both great, but the argument people make about “automatic watches are terrible timekeepers” is pathetic. I wear a Rolex because of the engineering and the history.
I totally agree. Although I totally understand that, technically speaking, any quartz watch is more accurate than an automatic, it still doesn’t influence my wearing decisions most days. I want my luxury automatic because of its engineering and beauty.
Right? Like sure a Toyota Corolla will get you to from point A->B just like a Porsche would… but cmon people 9/10 you’re choosin the 911
@@tylerfukuda perfect analogy. You can give me all the facts about better, gas, mileage, impressive technology, etc.. But none of that matters when you get inside that porsche and start it up.
@@tylerfukuda I think the example you gave is perfect but backwards. The g shock is by far a higher performer in every metric and the Rolex looks more appealing. So maybe the more accurate description would be a modern sports car vs a classic show cruiser. That being said I love both and think both have their place. If I could only have 1 id go sports car (g shock) but on weekends I like wearing nicer analog time pieces
@ That’s the real answer. Own both that way you can enjoy them at the same time :)
I have a strong preference for the Omega Seamaster watch. However, I also appreciate the understated elegance and durability of the titanium square G-Shock watch, which I have owned and enjoyed for the past five years. Additionally, its discreet appearance ensures that it does not draw unnecessary attention, and only true enthusiasts of G-Shock watches would recognize its significance.
I think you’re right about true enthusiast appreciating what the G-Shock has accomplished. Despite being a popular choice for many non watch fanatics, I’m not sure many truly know how it revolutionized horology. Any watch enthusiast cannot be disappointed with what the G-Shock presents.
I like both, in fact I have a two piece collection since 4 months, containing only a Rolex DJ41 and a square G shock. Of course I want other watches but for now I manage to withstand because realistically these are the only watches that a man needs in his life.
Thank you for sharing. I totally agree. That’s a great 2 watch collection that can handle any situation that life throws at you. It’s hard to get out of the cycle of watch collecting and wanting other pieces, but good on you for fighting the urge for now.
"these are the only watches that a man needs in his life" I don't.
@@jotr.9786 I meant not exactly these two watches, but a nicer watch and a beater.
@@hansmayer7587 agree but both can be nice lol
My 124270 Explorer & G Shock GW5000u are the ultimate everyday duo
That’s probably the best way to look at this. Rather than them being on both ends of the spectrum in terms of cost for tool watches, they are a great fit together. There’s probably not a single situation either of these two watches combined can’t handle.
Why bother with the cost of the G shock when you can get five W86 illuminators for the same price and will pretty much do the same thing (tell time, waterproof and will take a beating, also a bit smaller.
Very true. That would get a little repetitive but even more amazing value.
made my way up to a explorer 2 and came back to reality and could never go without the twist the wrist to get a time with light in the dark, like a 5610u could. Happy did not spend the 12k, would rather take a few vacations
Yeah, that’s a lot of money to spend when you’re satisfied already with something simple and affordable like a G-Shock. You can take that G-Shock on those vacations haha.
@@JackOnWrist Yeah the moment was when I already had Spirit Zulu that I got on sale at bloomingdales, and when seeing the Explorer 2 in person, realized its not 4x better but was 4x more $, heck was on par with SRPG27, but the bracelet was solid metal.
My Timex Expedition T49851 (which cost just $35 at the time) is more of a tool watch than all the $100-range G-Shocks combined -that's a fact. It’s spent more time on my wrist than any other watch, including the Casio M5610U, which I regret buying. No need for nails to press the buttons; it has a vibration alarm strong enough to wake the dead, plus weekday/weekend alarms and a hydration reminder. Too bad Timex decided to discontinue it, and old stock is hard to find. Speaking of Rolex-like pieces, they’re more of an achievement or a nice gift for a spouse. However, I can't imagine an everyday tool watch or any watch collection being complete without a day/date complication.
I have a g-shock that is now thirty years old, bought when I was a teenager. Unfortunately it is now beginning to perish, the sides have began to crumble and is no longer wearable.
Wow, 30 years is incredible. That’s so cool that you’ve gotten that much time out of it. Thank you for sharing.
You can buy new rubber cover for it and stuff would be cool since it’s an older one
@@Biowolf626 great point. Those modifications always look pretty sick.
If you cannot actually buy the Rolex then debating why you would buy one over the other is absolutely futile.
I cannot believe these two have ever been the last two on an actual shortlist for anyone in the history of the world ever!
maybe these aren’t the only 2 watches being considered by someone but they are both ends of spectrum in terms of tool watches. It’s interesting to me to investigate both sides.
To each their own I guess.
I decide to invest $5000 instead of getting my first Rolex. Then I use small amount of yearly income generated from said investment to buy Casio watch and other more useful gadgets.
This way I can get many tools/toys over a lifetime instead of just one jewelry that I hardly wear. (Wearing Rolex increase my chance of getting robbed and killed in my area.)
Maybe someday I will get my first Rolex...
I might understand if you chose to compare the Casio Lineage Titanium to the Rolex Explorer. But the G-Shock?
It's still a few generations away from being "the only watch you’d ever need" - if it ever gets there.
These days, Rolexes and their ilk are status/fantasy pieces. They are selling the dream of rugged adventure or sophistication and "I've made it" luxury. Exorbitant SUVs from Mercedes, Porsche and Range Rover or top of the line “touring” Harley Davidson motorcycles (“Yesterday’s technology at tomorrow’s prices!”) that are rarely seen outside the expensive neighborhoods where they are garaged are in that kind of category too.
Wearing a Submariner diving watch, for example, that only ever sees the corporate office, dinner party or golf course amounts to Cosplay. One may as well dress up like a cowboy, astronaut, or Lord of the Manor. It has about the same authenticity.
So that leaves the collector's object fetishism - a magpie's lust for shiny things. But now, because they have become outdated, technological museum pieces and removed from their original, functional purpose, they take on a "wannabe" stigma, even for those that can easily afford them.
Correction, buy a GMWB5000D-1 over a Rolex Explorer Reference 224270. Rolex makes you a mark.
That’s a great model. One of my favorites.
Or buy a Seiko automatic watch.
Why compare apples and oranges?
I think that despite these 2 watches not being direct competitors, they are representing both ends of the tool watch spectrum. I thought it would be fun to see if there truly is a vast difference in function and value between them.
Listen, I can appreciate a good looking watch. But they all do the same thing. Whether a 10,000 dollar Rolex or a $15 dollar Walmart watch. They tell time and that’s it. I would say 90 percent of watch guys (including myself) will never actually go diving especially past 100 meter with their watches. The only reason to get a high dollar watch is to flex
I see what you’re saying. I totally understand that from a functionality standpoint any cheap watch will do the trick. However, I would slightly disagree in saying that the only reason to buy a luxury piece is to flex. I do think many, including myself, buy luxury watches because the design, history and impressive, engineering appeals to them.
Thank god, I was just about to buy a rolex!
hahaha
Gshock and Casio Duro all the way 😃
Alright, I really don't get this. I understand that both of them are field watches but you really cannot be comparing 2 watches with a massive discrepancy in their prices. Just because their use cases are similar doesn't mean that you can compare them.
You don't buy a Rolex to tell the time. No one in their right mind is buying a Rolex for pure utility and they are aware of that. Heck, I can take it to the extreme (like this video) and say that we don't even really need mechanical watches in 2024 (cause it's true). Everyone who buys a Casio is fully aware that it is way more utilitarian than any Rolex will ever be. But that's the point: YOU DONT BUY A ROLEX TO TELL THE TIME
Its like your saying dont buy a Ferrari, instead buy a Mazda Miata (Just because they can both be classified as sports cars).
Thank you for your thoughtful comment. I see your point. What I tried to have fun with in this video is comparing both ends of the tool watch spectrum.
I thought it would be interesting to see what the true differences are in terms of functionality and value between these two pieces.
I understand your comparison with the Ferrari and Mazda, however, in some aspects comparing two items in the same category does make some sense, despite your analogy.
Nobody will be watching that if you don't put Rolex ! This is the first. Next and last is this then you can use your Casio only in your office and go for a walk. I tested few G-SHOCK and they don't make any two weeks mission. For real hard stuff people need too use something better then this poor gshock.
I’m surprised to hear you say that. I’m told that she shocked at the pinnacle of tool watches. I know that some people even use them in active combat.
Aha.....and you thinking like mostly people.....combat is hard condition?? I use for almost 5 year Victorinox filedforce and this still working and look from 1m like new. fireproof, anti-magnetic, anti-shock, resistant to electromagnetic fields, mega legible, luma lasts 7h more, precise plus 2sec for over half a year, resistant sapphire glass with triple AR on the inside, I hit it against various metal things a million times, dust, dirt, in 100m. sweeps these casio GS off the face of the earth. This is the tool watches . Regards.
New friend here sending may full suppor MAMACOO 's watch，Worth
Ridiculous premise. Total apples to oranges comparison.
Why can’t fruit be compared?
Casio = Child
Rolex = Adult
Casio + Rolex = Cool Adult
A/ Buy both
B/ Do not buy a Rolex that's smaller than a small G-Shock
C/ Yes its worth it
In a nuclear war the Casio will stop working 😂
Idk man the Casios are nuts. Might survive nuclear fallout.
@ electronics will not survive the emp! Also the battery will wear down eventually.
@@JackOnWrist thats why they have the colors of roaches, to blend in!
@@Dr_LK and I am sure you will be able to send your automatic for servicing, lol
Believe me, it will be lesser of your problems😂
I just got into watch collecting. I've loved watches since I was young but I never had anyone teach me or bring deeper into the world. MAMACOO brought closer to a community and hobby I always wanted to get into more and that is incredibly meaningful to me !
Nice to see MAMACOO show a watch that can be afforded by almost anyone rather than these pieces costing thousands and thousands which are out of reach for so many.