CasioRangeman GW-9400

When I was a kid and G-shocks were new, I wanted one from the time I first saw one. After I got my first one, there was never a time when I didn’t have one on my wrist all through my school years, my construction years after school, then onto boot camp and nine years in the army. After the military I went on to law enforcement and the G-shock stayed with me. Unbelievably tough, the only excuse I ever had for buying a new one was just because I wanted a new model. They never failed.As I got into my late 40’s early fifties, I discovered auto movements and different styles of watches and as I developed an affinity for them and started wearing them all the time right up until the present. Thing is they weren’t nearly as rugged and found myself breaking quite a few. I’m now 61 and again found myself missing the ruggedness, looks, and features of the G-shock for everyday use. I’ll still wear an auto on occasion when I want to dress up, but I’m back for good I think.The GW-9400 is a beast. Thanks to the NM sun, it never needs winding. And thanks to the atomic time clock in Colorado I never have to set it either. It’s got a bunch of cool features like a compass, an altimeter, a barometer, etc, and they do actually work pretty well. But the greatest thing about it is its ruggedness. I’m pretty tough on my gear and I’ve broken several lesser watches in the past while camping, riding my motorcycle, or just putting around doing what I do, but in my entire life, I’ve never managed to break a G-shock, which ultimately is what really brought me back to them.Good looking, great product I can’t recommend enough. And at even its current price, it is an incredible value. If you’re on the fence, don’t even think about it. You’ll quickly find it’s a no brainer.

The Casio Rangeman watch is a tricky product for me to review. Don't get me wrong: It's highly functional and robust, well-conceived, and most of what it does it does quite well. What makes this tricky is that the Rangeman poses a philosophical dilemma, for somebody like me who collects watches: Do I really need anything more than this? What is the appropriate criterion for judging a watch like this? I'm writing this review in part to try to answer those questions.So first off, I bought this watch with several specific use-cases in mind. I wanted a light-weight, shock-resistant watch for running with, and I also wanted it to be easy to read, and to have the ability to function as a stopwatch. I also wanted a "field watch" for hiking, kayaking, and other outdoor activities away from civilization -- hence no smart watch or fit-bit. I liked the idea of solar power, so as not to need to change the battery out for 10 or 15 years, at least. And finally, because I do have some other mechanical watches, I also wanted an "atomic watch," something that would always be synced and accurate and that I could use as a reference to set other time-pieces. So those are the reasons why I picked out the Rangeman to try.This was not my first experience with a Casio G-Shock, by the way. And my previous G-Shock was not a success -- I got a GX-56 "King," with the primary aim of using it to time myself during a mud-run obstacle course. Unfortunately, I bought one with a "reverse" LCD display -- i.e., where the numbers appear white on a black background, instead of the other way around. That turned out to make that watch difficult to read, even in bright sunlight. And I learned the hard way that if I can't easily read the face of a digital watch, then it's useless to me. Which added another demand to the use-case for my new Rangeman: it had to be very easy to read the time, regardless of the ambient lighting or the angle of my wrist.So here's the good news: It turns out that the Rangeman is quite good for all of my use-cases. It's easy to read, light-weight and good for running, good as a field watch, with excellent atomic time-keeping. If anything, I find myself using this watch for more situations than I expected to. On a recent business trip across country, for example, I kept the Rangeman with me, because it's world-time function made it easy to switch time zones, while still keeping track of time at home. Plus the basic home screen display, which shows the time, day, date and month (based on a perpetual calendar through the year 2100) is incredibly functional and useful. So yes: by comparison with most mechanical watches, the Rangeman is almost ridiculously functional, even just in terms of the basic display that you get without pushing any buttons at all. Did I mention that (in the U.S.) the Rangeman will automatically keep track of daylight savings time, and make the adjustment without you even having to think about it?So this led me to the existential question, do I really need any other watch, now that I have this one? After thinking about it for several weeks, I've concluded that the answer still is yes, at least for me. And the reason why goes to specialization: namely, a watch designed to do one thing can be tailored to that purpose, whereas a watch designed to do many things necessarily involves some compromise. And sometimes, I really do want the specialized watch. So for example, I have an inexpensive mechanical dive watch (similar price point to the Rangeman). My diver is a better watch for swimming than is the Rangeman. Even though the latter is supposed to be water resistant to 200m, I simply don't feel confident in this to the same degree that I do with my mechanical watch. (Look at the reviews on Amazon -- 19 out of 20 people love the Rangeman, but the remaining 1 out of 20 gets a lemon, often to do with faulty water resistance.) Likewise, my mechanical dive watch is actually better for sleeping with -- it has glow-in-the-dark lume on the hands, which means you can easily see the time with a glance even in a pitch-black room, or under the covers. The Rangeman can also light up in the dark, but you either have to push a button for this, or else set the watch so that it automatically lights up every time you move your wrist when in the dark -- and neither of those options is as good for sleeping with as is a traditional mechanical dive watch.Getting back to my recent trip across country: I sat next to another passenger who was wearing an expensive watch on the plane, I believe it was a Tag Heuer Carrera -- a racing-inspired sports watch on a leather-band, the kind of thing you might wear out for an evening with on the town with friends, when visiting Monte Carlo. By comparison, my Rangeman looked almost like a toy. Don't get me wrong -- I very much like the bulkiness and the tactical look of the Rangeman. But it's certainly not a watch that slides easily under a dress shirt cuff, or that fits in well at the office. Which is just another way of saying, as versatile as the Rangeman is, the design is optimized for some uses and settings, but not others. Camping? Yes. Covert ops? Yes. Going to your best friend's wedding? Probably not.In sum, I still give the Rangeman 5 stars. It is very well designed for what it is, and it does many things well. I've had it for a month, and I am enjoying it a lot. Even though it won't replace other watches for me, I certainly wouldn't give it up, now that I've experienced it. So there!

I was really concerned about this watch being too bulky. I have smaller wrists (7.25") and thought it might be too big. It is big but wears incredibly well. I have a Luminox Navy Seal 3063 that I have had for over 4 years as my outdoors/beater/etc. watch, which is a pretty minimal design and wears very comfortably. Despite the Rangeman being a bit bulkier, it's just as comfortable on the wrist.I went with the black case/strap and 'positive' display after reading some concerns with the 'negative' display on the green model. I can't speak to how readable the negative display is, but I do find the positive display of the black model is very easy to read, even in the sun - I had it with me for a week in Orlando after purchasing, and even in the Florida sun had no issues. Additionally, after having it a few weeks, I'm kind of glad I went with the black version, as it doesn't scream "military/tactical" like the green one may - however, that's just my preference.I have a handful of automatic watches, along with the pictured Luminox, which is my only quartz watch. I wanted to add another quartz watch, and thought digital would be nice. I'm very happy with the digital display, despite being somewhat of a purist on the analog displays up until this watch.The additional functions/features... they seemed overwhelming at first, however, there are some really helpful youtube videos out there, and the manual is pretty simple. The best part is how intuitive all the functions are. I was seriously considering throwing the manual in my daily carry bag, but after having it now for a few weeks, the interface is all pretty simple. I've already used some of the features that I didn't really think I would need, but may someday be cool. Count down timer, hourly indicator, stop watch, sunrise/sunset.The ABC functions are also pretty cool, however, there are some limitations. So far, the altitude is much more a relative tool. You need to set it when the altitude is known, and read from there. So for example, going on a hike, you can dial it in, then check you ascent/descent. It doesn't seem too accurate as an absolute measure - which the manual states. However, I have set it using a Kestrel and it holds up pretty well. The barometric pressure is a nice indicator to track weather I suppose. Temperature is obviously way off while on your wrist (I was reading in the low 80's while the outside temp was mid 40's) - you need to take it off for probably 15-20 minutes to get a more accurate reading. The compass is pretty accurate, and allows for switching between true north and magnetic north - however, you do need to give it at least 10-15 seconds to read, maybe closer to a minute if you are actually using it to guide your hike or something like that. When you first enter the compass mode, it's usually off a bit, but then dials itself in.One potential negative on this watch is that the display can get dirty pretty easily. This of course will depend on what you are doing while wearing it, but even something like washing your hands can seem to leave water marks on the display. This is of course easily remedied by wiping down - I've already been pretty hard on this watch and there are no signs of scratches or wear. This likely isn't too big of a deal, as it's a sporty/outdoors/rugged kind of watch anyways, you shouldn't be wearing it with a suit anyways.The band is really comfortable and feels really durable. I'm really hoping it holds up long term, as the Luminox band felt great for the first year before cracking to the point of needing to be replaced. Here's another minor criticism, the buckle and keeper are a high gloss stainless, I would have preferred a brushed finish on a rugged watch, but it's not the end of the world. The keeper has some little bumps that fit into the notches on the band, which is great for helping it stay in place - so if you have smaller wrists like me, with 2"+ of band sticking out, you can position the keeper near the edge of the band and it actually stays there.Overall, this is an awesome watch. I wish I would have bought it years ago. It's so good, I actually feel a bit bad for my Luminox, as I haven't worn it since receiving the Rangeman... and don't see myself picking the Luminox over the Rangeman too often.