# G-Shock Rangeman GW-9400-1 Parts Broken Off



## Marcho (Feb 23, 2014)

Hello Watchuseek forum, I recently got the G-Shock Rangeman (exactly 11 days ago) and haven't used it in any extreme activities, but today after bending the wristband a little bit apart i noticed that the part (where the wristband is screwed onto the watch) snapped clean off on both sides. Has this happened to anyone else, I havent found anyone complaining about the watch online. I mean it has been a good watch but how can it be called "tough" if this can occur. By the look of it this has ruined the whole watch, is there a way it can be fixed or should i send it back to Casio/the seller? I never had any problem with their watches and the Rangeman was the perfect watch for me in consideration of functions, if it would have been as "tough" as claimed. Any advice? Any one had the same experience? I will post pictures if it helps. Thanks a lot, regards Marcho


----------



## Crater (Sep 11, 2011)

Do post some photos, it would be very unlikely for strap to come off just like that.


----------



## Marcho (Feb 23, 2014)

Its the actual part that holds the strap, I'll post a picture after this.


----------



## Marcho (Feb 23, 2014)

Hope you can see it, ill make a macro picture too.


----------



## yankeexpress (Apr 7, 2013)

Holy smokes! Send it to Casio. They should replace that as defective.


----------



## alexs12 (Aug 29, 2012)

I am very impressed and not just a little incredulous you were able to accomplish this without abusing the watch any. If this were an older model, we could have blamed it on resin rot somewhat, but now I am out of ideas.


----------



## GSHOCKFAN69 (Mar 22, 2009)

I have never seen anything quite like that, especially on a new G-Shock. Odd to say the least.


----------



## Marcho (Feb 23, 2014)

If you have the Rangeman look at it, it definately has a huge weakpoint there. And i mean i got the watch brand new, never hit it with any thing or anything like that. The wrist band is attached being screwed and these screws are screwed in a plastic part that is attached in a U shape, the bottom of the U which is the part that actually holds together the part that has the wristband screwed in and the actual watch. This little "bridge" is only about 3mm big. Thinking logically this makes no sense, why use this U shape, its obviously creating a weakness. I just used the watch for general things, nothing like working or anything like that that could have damaged it in this way. I guess it was just this obvious weakness and the fact that plastic can be brittle and just break off like that.


----------



## starscream (Jan 16, 2011)

DAMN!! man that sucks, hope you are able to get a replacement without any issues.


----------



## Mitch100 (Jul 3, 2007)

Well that is unfortunate.

Looks like you need a new case. I doubt that Casio will fix it under warranty as damage to the case is normally excluded.

For that to happen I think the strap will have had to be deliberately forced backwards beyond the strength of the plastic case. Don't forget that G Shocks only have a plastic case in the end and are a lot weaker than SS would be in the same situation.

I don't see how that can happen in any normal situation on or off the wrist. If you deliberately try to test the strength of the case then there is the danger you will exceed its capabilities as in this situation.





Mitch


----------



## kung-fusion (Dec 18, 2010)

GSHOCKFAN69 said:


> I have never seen anything quite like that, especially on a new G-Shock. Odd to say the least.


This is the second time in a week that someone had this happen (the other model was a 9300 mudman that was chewed on by a dog and the lug broke off).

And I hate to say it again, but this would have never happened with a steel cased or titanium cased watch. Regardless, G-shocks are generally tough enough that this sort of this rarely happens even under extreme abuse. So for it to happen randomly, the watch is clearly defective and should be send in for a warranty replacement. The Rangeman case center is an expensive part and you should not have to pay for it.

To the OP, did you buy the watch brand new, or secondhand?


----------



## Marcho (Feb 23, 2014)

I didn't force it back extremely, and like i said i noticed it, it didnt happen at that point. It must have happened yesterday, knowing that this issue wasnt there before. And the only thing I did yesterday was working out doing pushups pullups.. I mean I also own a Mudman and that thing is rock solid, nothing like that could happen to it, I used it while chainsawing and stuff like that, it froze up once at minus 15 C but worked afterwards. I just got the Rangeman as that one didnt work anymore due to battery (I know I could have got it replaced but wanted a new one) and the Rangeman was perfect. Oh and I bought it in Australia and still have warranty (14 days for any damage or fault) for a few days which protects me from such damage as Casio describes the watch as "designed and engineered to stand up to the most grueling conditions imaginable" and the watch has no signs of any wear or anything and I didn't try to check it for strength or anything like that.


----------



## Marcho (Feb 23, 2014)

To *kung-fusion*, the watch was brand new and youre right, this would have never happened with steel or titanium or even if there wasnt this U shape construction.


----------



## Kronos (Jan 2, 2008)

Return the watch as defective immediately and insist on a replacement. If the seller won't honor the warranty, go to Casio.


----------



## Marcho (Feb 23, 2014)

I tried to upload a picture that I took with a macro but for some reason I cant upload it and wont be bothered with that right now, but looking at the parts i can see it just snapped off clean, i might upload them later though. Looking at my old Mudman, there is acual hinges the hold the straps in place.


----------



## cbkihong (Oct 23, 2006)

It seems like this is a rather serious matter if it reflects a vulnerability in the design of Rangeman (or at least some of the Rangeman versions) and hopefully it won't get as nasty as the G keepers problem in the 90s.

The watch in the pic is an international version. I only have a Japan domestic version with carbon fibre, and am wondering whether it has the same vulnerability.

Compared a few case back pics from "J" and non-"J" versions and they look different, but maybe that is just plain cosmetics and could very well have the same design under the flap. Looks like need to take extra care with it ...


----------



## njb242 (Nov 23, 2013)

Marcho said:


> the only thing I did yesterday was working out doing pushups pullups..


I could see push-ups putting a lot of stress on a watch as large as a rangeman. Not saying that it's an abusive situation, just one that's less than ideal and has the potential to expose some of the watches weaknesses as noted.


----------



## kung-fusion (Dec 18, 2010)

cbkihong said:


> It seems like this is a rather serious matter if it reflects a vulnerability in the design of Rangeman (or at least some of the Rangeman versions) and hopefully it won't get as nasty as the G keepers problem in the 90s.
> 
> The watch in the pic is an international version. I only have a Japan domestic version with carbon fibre, and am wondering whether it has the same vulnerability.
> 
> Compared a few case back pics from "J" and non-"J" versions and they look different, but maybe that is just plain cosmetics and could very well have the same design under the flap. Looks like need to take extra care with it ...


The case center is probably the same on all versions of the rangeman. It would not make sense for Casio to change it on different versions. Most likely this is just a case of a single defective unit. If it happens to someone else, then there might be a reason to wonder about the design


----------



## Ottovonn (Dec 9, 2011)

njb242 said:


> I could see push-ups putting a lot of stress on a watch as large as a rangeman. Not saying that it's an abusive situation, just one that's less than ideal and has the potential to expose some of the watches weaknesses as noted.


How can push ups stress the watch? I do them often while wearing a G-shock, more recently, the Rangeman.


----------



## cbkihong (Oct 23, 2006)

kung-fusion said:


> The case center is probably the same on all versions of the rangeman. It would not make sense for Casio to change it on different versions. Most likely this is just a case of a single defective unit. If it happens to someone else, then there might be a reason to wonder about the design


Sure, I would hope this is indeed isolated.


----------



## Marcho (Feb 23, 2014)

Sorry for the bad quality, I had to put the pixels down a lot the quality was too high... But there is that U shape that I was talking about. And just remeasuring it precisely the bottom of the U that holds the watch together with the screw part is 2mm thick, while the part the screw is placed in is over 4mm, so double.. It would be interesting to know if the J version has this U design too..


----------



## rcorreale (Jan 25, 2008)

I do push ups every day and have been wearing the Ranger almost exclusively the last few weeks. It doesn't put any undue pressure on the case/strap.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## kung-fusion (Dec 18, 2010)

RE: the whole push ups thing... I wear the rangeman to the gym a lot, and when doing a certain exercise (incline chest press using a plate loaded machine) the back of my hand presses hard enough on the side of the Rangeman to activate the altimeter button. It happens every time. This sort of thing has never happened with any other G-shock I have worn, and I suspect it might be due to the fact that the Rangeman is very large and that button sticks out a lot.

Now, this is not the same issue the OP had, but it might be related. If the watch was being twisted by having the hand bent backward enough, that might be what caused the problem


----------



## njb242 (Nov 23, 2013)

kung-fusion said:


> RE: the whole push ups thing... I wear the rangeman to the gym a lot, and when doing a certain exercise (incline chest press using a plate loaded machine) the back of my hand presses hard enough on the side of the Rangeman to activate the altimeter button. It happens every time. This sort of thing has never happened with any other G-shock I have worn, and I suspect it might be due to the fact that the Rangeman is very large and that button sticks out a lot.
> 
> Now, this is not the same issue the OP had, but it might be related. If the watch was being twisted by having the hand bent backward enough, that might be what caused the problem


This is what I was referring to. If the rangeman slides all the way down my wrist as I'm setting up for push-ups, as I come down it will get wedged between the top of my hand and forearm. This will push the watch "out" (away from the wrist), and can put a lot of pressure on the lugs I imagine.


----------



## Ottovonn (Dec 9, 2011)

If this isn't an isolated issue, then the Rangeman has a serious design flaw. I'll be more careful with the Rangeman from now on, just to be on the safe side.


----------



## kung-fusion (Dec 18, 2010)

njb242 said:


> This is what I was referring to. If the rangeman slides all the way down my wrist as I'm setting up for push-ups, as I come down it will get wedged between the top of my hand and forearm. This will push the watch "out" (away from the wrist), and can put a lot of pressure on the lugs I imagine.


Yes, I think that is what it is. But Casio's lugs are generally pretty hard to break, so I would imagine yours had a small fracture or weak point at the time of manufacture, and your push ups caused the problem to get worse until it finally broke.


----------



## Marcho (Feb 23, 2014)

I had it happen too that I pressed the Altimeter/Compass/Barometer button in a similar action, not doing pushups though but just whil going to bed and having my arm kind of bend. But this shouldnt weaken the watch that much. Like I said, ill just send it in and hopefully get a replacement. Otherwise, anyone know a watch like the Rangeman with similar functions but maybe more hardy?


----------



## Snoweagle (Jul 3, 2012)

Could the JDM's CF strap prevent this from happening?


----------



## Sedi (May 21, 2007)

kung-fusion said:


> when doing a certain exercise (incline chest press using a plate loaded machine) the back of my hand presses hard enough on the side of the Rangeman to activate the altimeter button.


Unfortunately that's the reason I stopped wearing my Rangeman for work-outs.

cheers, Sedi


----------



## Sedi (May 21, 2007)

Snoweagle said:


> Could the JDM's CF strap prevent this from happening?


I doubt it - the strap attachment is the same and it's not the strap that broke. Still I find it hard to believe this happened just from normal wear (maybe if there was some damage before to the lug like kung-fusion suggested). When I got my Rangeman I wore it for over two months straight and had no issues. Took it off for workouts however - exactly because of the protruding button-guard.

cheers, Sedi


----------



## Shocker (Aug 4, 2011)

It would depend how tight you're wearing the watch. Wearing it tight fitting and doing push ups would create a lot of stress on the plastic housing. That's one thing I do like about spring bars: they can flex a little with stress. Sure you might have to replace them occasionally.. But it's much easier to replace a spring bar than the plastic housing. And much cheaper, as well. I am concerned this is a design flaw. Perhaps a stress test is in order. I do not think a CF strap would change the integrity of the housing. 

Why should you need to baby your rugged, outdoorsman, master of G? It doesn't make sense.


----------



## kung-fusion (Dec 18, 2010)

Shocker said:


> It would depend how tight you're wearing the watch. Wearing it tight fitting and doing push ups would create a lot of stress on the plastic housing. That's one thing I do like about spring bars: they can flex a little with stress. Sure you might have to replace them occasionally.. But it's much easier to replace a spring bar than the plastic housing. And much cheaper, as well. I am concerned this is a design flaw. Perhaps a stress test is in order. I do not think a CF strap would change the integrity of the housing.
> 
> Why should you need to baby your rugged, outdoorsman, master of G? It doesn't make sense.


Well, I don't think we can conclude it is a design flaw until someone else snaps theirs doing something normal. But as I have concluded after having all different kinds of G-shocks, nothing beats a metal case. I also see the advantage of springbars in that they are easy to replace and won't kill the case of the watch when they break. The idea of a springbar breaking (hasn't happened to me yet) is something that I think gets overblown. Yes, you could lose your watch if it happens unexpectedly in water or some other hazardous area. But if you use a NATO strap, you won't lose the watch unless both springbars fail at the same time (which is not going to happen). So if you want the toughest G-shock of all, a steel or titanium cased watch on NATO adaptors is probably the best you can do.


----------



## Shocker (Aug 4, 2011)

kung-fusion said:


> Well, I don't think we can conclude it is a design flaw until someone else snaps theirs doing something normal. But as I have concluded after having all different kinds of G-shocks, nothing beats a metal case. I also see the advantage of springbars in that they are easy to break and won't kill the case of the watch when they do. The idea of a springbar breaking (hasn't happened to me yet) is something that I think gets overblown. Yes, you could lose your watch if it happens unexpectedly in water or some other hazardous area. But if you use a NATO strap, you won't lose the watch unless both springbars fail at the same time (which is not going to happen). So if you want the toughest G-shock of all, a steel or titanium cased watch on NATO adaptors is probably the best you can do.


I didn't mean to jump to conclusions, it's just a concern of mine. I see the problems they're having. It seems like the plastic housing allowed the lugs to "flex" enough to where the housing snapped. I'm curious if one solid lug would solve this? It would certainly be worth Casio's time to look into this. If anyone is familiar with Reactor watches, they use this solid lug system and claim them to be 600-800% stronger than traditional systems such as what Casio uses. As for spring bars and steel / Ti casing.. I'm wearing my G-2000 now and thinking to myself.. this design rocks!!


----------



## Marcho (Feb 23, 2014)

It is definately a design flaw, and a major one that you can spot so easy.. If you own a Rangeman just screw off the strap and look at the part where the screw goes into and how it is designed.. Just leaves to wonder if other G-Shocks have the same design..


----------



## Snoweagle (Jul 3, 2012)

Sedi said:


> I doubt it - the strap attachment is the same and it's not the strap that broke. Still I find it hard to believe this happened just from normal wear (maybe if there was some damage before to the lug like kung-fusion suggested). When I got my Rangeman I wore it for over two months straight and had no issues. Took it off for workouts however - exactly because of the protruding button-guard.
> 
> cheers, Sedi


I've been wearing my Rangeman regularly too and so far so good. None of my Gs have this issue and certainly I hope it wouldn't happen as well. Looks kind of hard to cause that breakage unless you really stressed that part to maximum. Hope it's an isolated case though.


----------



## fatiredflyer (Nov 3, 2013)

Snoweagle said:


> Looks kind of hard to cause that breakage unless you really stressed that part to maximum...


All I can say, if a human wrist bending back can destroy a G-Shock, then there's something rotten in Shibuya...


----------



## Ottovonn (Dec 9, 2011)

Out of curiosity, I popped off the strap to inspect the lugs. They appear to be made out of a rigid plastic material. I doubt the bending of one's wrist would be enough to break them. I wonder what kind of force would be able to stress them to the point of breaking.


----------



## Sedi (May 21, 2007)

Thanks for the pic - now I also know what the OP meant with "U-shaped" - this really seems to be a weak point.

cheers, Sedi


----------



## Ottovonn (Dec 9, 2011)

^ Now that you mention it maybe the U shaped lug design is a potential structural weakness. Less mass to absorb stress . . . Argh, I'm not a science guy. Here's hoping to smarter people examining this issue.

If I recall correctly, part of the strap is inserted into that "U" slot.


----------



## Watchphile (Feb 21, 2012)

It would seem to me that the narrow/recessed piece between the lug and the rest of the case center might be a weak link and if the case is twisted during exercise it might lead to weakening/breaking of the lugs.


----------



## fwupow (Sep 20, 2010)

I was afraid of this. As soon as I saw that CASIO was not using legit Screwbars which go all the way across, I mean it's fairly obvious just looking at the design that if the strap is pulled hard enough, it will slip out and, while doing so, one or both screws will act as levers and snap one or both lugs off.

In my opinion, it's poor design. They should've used real screwbars. Perhaps CASIOs engineering is based on the premise that the strap should break away under X amount of force to prevent injury to the wearer but having it break away in a manner that renders the watch irreparably destroyed unless you replace the entire watch case is not good for the G-Shock reputation.


----------



## STEELINOX (Mar 20, 2006)

Ottovonn said:


> View attachment 1395411
> 
> 
> Out of curiosity, I popped off the strap to inspect the lugs. They appear to be made out of a rigid plastic material. I doubt the bending of one's wrist would be enough to break them. I wonder what kind of force would be able to stress them to the point of breaking.


The "u" shape lug that sheared away is perpendicular to the torsion axis the lug pin which is only catching the lug witha few threads - is IMO the Achilles heal of this strap set up...

So, "sit ups" and other activities that stress these pin screws from stressed strap positions will likely result in this - on occasion, as I suspect this more has to do with the qc process of these resin mid casings that may have slipped passed and were injected at wrong material spec/temp cure...

CASIO will likely replace it at no charge to the customer, verifying that this is a defect. But as others have stated, the design is flawed...

Randy

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## fwupow (Sep 20, 2010)

The new GD-X6900s use the same design and CASIO touts these as Military Tough ---> http://www.gshock.com/resource/html/GDX6900/GDX6900.html

Mil Std 810 is a general standard that tries to cover anything made for the US Military. It's NOT a wristwatch specific standard and none of the tests performed by NTS in Tempe, AZ were related to strap retention.

This has always been a weakpoint with 'Tough Resin' case G-Shocks but the ones that used spring-bars faired much better because the spring-bar would bend and rip out usually causing only minimal damage the case lugs, so you could just pop in a new spring bar and be on your way.

CASIO is gonna have to improve this design, but there may already be quite a few new models in the pipeline that feature it.


----------



## Mitch100 (Jul 3, 2007)

I don't think this screw bar arrangement is as safe for the case as a spring bar.

The arrangement can act like a fulcrum and lever with Law of the Lever operative. The fulcrum point being quite close to the case means that force exerted on the strap much further away can be magnified many times at the case. With a spring bar I would expect that to bend and slip out of the lug holes well before the case gave way. With these screw types basically prevented from doing that, all the pressure is on the case and the force exerted was obviously too much for it in this instance.

I still don't think Casio will cover this under warranty as case damage is excluded in their warranty terms.





Mitch


----------



## fwupow (Sep 20, 2010)

Yes, I pointed out the same thing in an earlier post but in different words. Once the strap pulls out of the slot, the two half-wide screws will act as levers on the case lugs.

I was just looking at my GD-X6900 and it appears that CASIO may have realized they had a problem because the caseback on my GD-X6900 has unusual wee extensions that reach out over the slot and act to retain the strap so that it can't pull out of the slot. Unfortunately the Rangeman casebacks do not cover the slot.

If you wear the watch tight and do anything that forces your hand back to a right angle, this will certainly put a high amount of force on the strap attachment mainly due to the way that the sensor button and button guard stick out so much. I think a number of factors come into play. In addition to how tight you wear the watch, there are also differences in the shape of a person's forearm - thin, thick, long, short etc.

Cream puffs like me who don't do pushups or much of any hard labor will never break a watch case. Most people will never break their Rangeman case-lugs but that doesn't mean that there isn't a problem.

As far as how strong the strap attachment is, it very likely exceeds the US military requirement in *MIL-PRF-46374G* but unfortunately the design of the watch combined with bending back of the hand puts far more force than you would think on the strap attachment. A nice thick full-length screwbar would evenly distribute the strain to both case lugs and prevent the lever effect of the half-width double screw arrangement.


----------



## Nemo (Nov 22, 2007)

Hello,

on the JDM version the "U shape" can easily be seen by transparence through the carbon fiber strap.
Now to know if it's a real weak link and lack of engineering, it should be good to remove the resin bezel and see the whole "grey plastic " casing of the Rangeman.

I have never "babied" mine since I got it half of a year ago and I do pushups every day wearing it (I do wear it more on my arm than my wrist, long arms being 1m95 6'5" tall). So far I got some scratches on the metal keeper and even if I have noticed sometime pulling some stress on it, mine looks like new.
I do not wear another watch since I got the GW9400.
So far so good. ;-)

Now if someone could provide some connecting screws to replace the half ones, I'm not against investing in it. 
Cheers
Nemo


----------



## Ottovonn (Dec 9, 2011)

Thanks for the insightful comments everyone. It does seem likely that this is a potential issue for those who wear their Rangemans tightly. I wear it so that it's just right and a little above the wrist bone. The crown guard usually do not touch the back of my hand when I flex my wrist.


----------



## fwupow (Sep 20, 2010)

Esslinger is the best online source of watch parts that I know of, but I'm not find any screw-bars that would be long enough to fit the Rangeman.

To get an idea of what a screw-bar looks like:
Watch Band Parts Panerai Style Screw Bars

It looks like the Rangeman would need a 29-mm screw-bar but even if you found the correct length, drilling/boring out of the strap and lugs might be needed to fit the diameter.


----------



## Snoweagle (Jul 3, 2012)

fatiredflyer said:


> All I can say, if a human wrist bending back can destroy a G-Shock, then there's something rotten in Shibuya...


I agree there! G-Shocks are made to be tough and very tough in fact. Unless it's a design problem or initially that part is already fractured, it'll never break under regular wear.


----------



## John_Harrison (Sep 9, 2009)

Ottovonn said:


> View attachment 1395411
> 
> 
> Out of curiosity, I popped off the strap to inspect the lugs. They appear to be made out of a rigid plastic material. I doubt the bending of one's wrist would be enough to break them. I wonder what kind of force would be able to stress them to the point of breaking.


BTW also the GX(W)-56 (aka the King) uses the same type of lugs, as can be seen on this pic (borrowed from another thread):









Actually, when I disassembled my GX-56 sometime ago, I noticed that one of the screws was actually slightly bend (probably from forces exerted on the lugs when I wore the watch rather loose). The GX(W)-56 lugs are thicker than the ones found on the GW-9400, and I wonder how much force one would have to apply the break the lugs? (I do not want to test that on my GX though :-d). Still it is interesting that the screw was bend on the GX, not the lug.

JH


----------



## STEELINOX (Mar 20, 2006)

John_Harrison said:


> BTW also the GX(W)-56 (aka the King) uses the same type of lugs, as can be seen on this pic (borrowed from another thread):
> 
> View attachment 1396575
> 
> ...


Yes, that's interesting that this configuration lug has managed on other models = so it does hv some service History already.

That's why I suspect the Rangeman in the OP's example maybe be caused by a defective resin process...

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Watchphile (Feb 21, 2012)

I wonder what the advantage would be to use this 'lug horn' design vs traditional spring bar design vs band screws/posts that actually connect? Why make the half length band screws at all?


----------



## supawabb (Aug 27, 2007)

This sorta blew me away. After all the abuse I have put my original DW6900 and GW6900 through, they've never batted an eye at anything. Sorry you had this happen.


----------



## John_Harrison (Sep 9, 2009)

STEELINOX said:


> Yes, that's interesting that this configuration lug has managed on other models = so it does hv some service History already.
> 
> That's why I suspect the Rangeman in the OP's example maybe be caused by a defective resin process...
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Yes, my bet would also be on some problem during the manufacturing of the case of that particular GW-9400 (actually I have to check on mine in a year or so...).


----------



## Mitch100 (Jul 3, 2007)

John_Harrison said:


> BTW also the GX(W)-56 (aka the King) uses the same type of lugs, as can be seen on this pic (borrowed from another thread):
> 
> Actually, when I disassembled my GX-56 sometime ago, I noticed that one of the screws was actually slightly bend (probably from forces exerted on the lugs when I wore the watch rather loose). The GX(W)-56 lugs are thicker than the ones found on the GW-9400, and I wonder how much force one would have to apply the break the lugs? (I do not want to test that on my GX though :-d). Still it is interesting that the screw was bend on the GX, not the lug.
> 
> JH


Well it is the spring bar or screw bar that takes the strain initially. With a spring bar it will bend until it pulls out of the lug holes. With the screw bar system as the bar bends it is putting an ever greater strain on the lugs themselves and it cannot slip out.

The lugs are certain to break before the screw bar imo.

This is a design issue and it is not good for a watch that you are supposed to be able to take into extreme conditions.

Mitch


----------



## John_Harrison (Sep 9, 2009)

Watchphile said:


> I wonder what the advantage would be to use this 'lug horn' design vs traditional spring bar design vs band screws/posts that actually connect? Why make the half length band screws at all?


The lug design with two screws is usually much more reliable than just a single spring bar: (1) There are two screws attaching the strap side, so chances are that if one fails, the other one will still hold the watch on your wrist (at least provisionally). In the one springbar design the watch will most likely come off your wrist (2 and even more important) The two screw design allows for much larger pin diameter (recall that the standard springbar relies on the tapered ends -- which goes into the hole on case side -- to withstand all the stresses). (3) The lugs on the resin case also has some elastic properties, so assuming that they are not too underdimensioned they should be able to diffuse some of the stresses on the watch.


----------



## Subafan (Sep 21, 2013)

This is NOT a design problem. This Rangeman was clearly brutalized. The band was probably bent backwards in a way it wasn´t designed for. ( what for, BTW?) I do not mean you have to baby your G, but if you really want to brake it, sure you will succeed. Please stay focused. If we all bend backwards all our G´s bands, each one will break. If you want to destroy it, go ahead, it is your money. But don´t blame G-Shock. Just my opinio n. Regards. Luis (G-shock user since 1984).


----------



## Mitch100 (Jul 3, 2007)

Subafan said:


> This is NOT a design problem. This Rangeman was clearly brutalized. The band was probably bent backwards in a way it wasn´t designed for. ( what for, BTW?) I do not mean you have to baby your G, but if you really want to brake it, sure you will succeed. Please stay focused. If we all bend backwards all our G´s bands, each one will break. If you want to destroy it, go ahead, it is your money. But don´t blame G-Shock. Just my opinio n. Regards. Luis (G-shock user since 1984).


Not so! With a spring bar, forcing the strap backwards will cause the spring bar to bend and slip out of the lug holes well before the case gives way.

Mitch


----------



## John_Harrison (Sep 9, 2009)

Mitch100 said:


> Well it is the spring bar or screw bar that takes the strain initially. With a spring bar it will bend until it pulls out of the lug holes. With the screw bar system as the bar bends it is putting an ever greater strain on the lugs themselves and it cannot slip out.
> 
> The lugs are certain to break before the screw bar imo.
> 
> ...


I agree that the design is questionable under very heavy loads, in particular since there is the danger of damaging the watch itself (as in the case of the GW-9400 which started this thread). I think one reason for Casio to come up with this design is also the sale of proprietary straps ;-).

On top, the trend to very large watches (like the GX) in recent years increased the loads on the case (for they are more like to come into contact with your hand, in particular if worn quite loose). Probably one should switch to the asymmetrical Frogman design on all large cased watches to reduce the loads.

BTW of all the lug designs the one found on the modern MRGs is probably the most secure (one titanium pin attached in the middle of the case, i.e. this design it will definitely be the pin which fails first ... I guess, but I think I will never test this on my 8100B ) -- but there are of course many other pins in the bracelets on the MRGs which are a potential source for disaster.


----------



## Watchphile (Feb 21, 2012)

John_Harrison said:


> The lug design with two screws is usually much more reliable than just a single spring bar: (1) There are two screws attaching the strap side, so chances are that if one fails, the other one will still hold the watch on your wrist (at least provisionally). In the one springbar design the watch will most likely come off your wrist (2 and even more important) The two screw design allows for much larger pin diameter (recall that the standard springbar relies on the tapered ends -- which goes into the hole on case side -- to withstand all the stresses). (3) The lugs on the resin case also has some elastic properties, so assuming that they are not too underdimensioned they should be able to diffuse some of the stresses on the watch.


A larger pin diameter will result in more leverage (stress) against the lugs when the watch is stressed and so my preference would be for a real screwbar under those circumstances.


----------



## hiker (Nov 18, 2012)

I hope this is just an unusual isolated case.with so mnny ragemans in circulation I think we will know within a year if it is design flaw or a one off case.but seeing casio,s history of durability it will be highly unfortunate if this reall is a general design flaw.t hope its not the case though.


----------



## carrot (Feb 13, 2006)

This is really disappointing and I feel bad for the OP. The undercut will surely reduce the strength of the lugs I think of that there is no doubt. Seriously thinking of flipping my Rangeman now. Only slight thought I have is perhaps a bit of weakness is left here in case of an accident such as on a motorcycle and a lever were to get between the strap and the wrist during an 'off'. You'd rather break the watch than risk losing the hand.


----------



## Sedi (May 21, 2007)

What would be interesting to know is how much resin is left *below *the slot for the strap. I don't think the slot goes all the way through. This design has been used already on the Riseman I think and there were no complaints about that model so far. And even the Gulfman already had the "slotted lugs" design:
Casio: G-Shock G-9125A-1 Gulfman photos, videos and specifications G9125A-1 | Watch Archive
I'm still unsure this can happen from normal wear however.
If this were such a big problem under normal wearing conditions I think we would have heard it before with all those other models using the same design.

cheers, Sedi


----------



## Kawei (May 3, 2012)

Hi Marcho,

Can we please get a picture of the other 2 lugs that are intact? I'd like to see if there is a stress on those two. It seems like from the pushup pullups, you might have given it such a heavy stress on the lower two lugs. You can see from the picture that you provided that it was rip out pretty badly. There are many factors seen here. Did you do your work out with a sudden jolt or nice and slow? Was the watch strapped on your wrist tight and close to your wrist? If so, with the combination of wrist movement(such as the hand makes contact with the edge of the watch) and heavy sudden moves, it would have given it such a force to ratio that with repeated movement and stress, the two lugs stretch, cracked and gave in to breakage. On the other hand, the bezel of the Rangeman is very thick in design to hold the screws on both end very solidly. 

Cheers,
-Kawei-


----------



## kung-fusion (Dec 18, 2010)

carrot said:


> This is really disappointing and I feel bad for the OP. The undercut will surely reduce the strength of the lugs I think of that there is no doubt. Seriously thinking of flipping my Rangeman now. Only slight thought I have is perhaps a bit of weakness is left here in case of an accident such as on a motorcycle and a lever were to get between the strap and the wrist during an 'off'. You'd rather break the watch than risk losing the hand.


Seriously? One person has a watch break and you are thinking of selling yours? Bit of an overreaction, I think. Now, if it happens to two or three people, I think we have a concern, but this might just be a defective watch


----------



## STEELINOX (Mar 20, 2006)

A thought has occurred to me...

Is it possible for the OP to take another image of the mid casing where the lugs - I suspect, snapped away?

It is my contention that the lugs sheared away in a clean break fashion, and if it did indeed sheer away in this manner, then I can presume that the cure process of the resin is the culprit for the anomalous breakage...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Marcho (Feb 23, 2014)

> This is NOT a design problem. This Rangeman was clearly brutalized. The band was probably bent backwards in a way it wasn´t designed for. ( what for, BTW?) I do not mean you have to baby your G, but if you really want to brake it, sure you will succeed.


 Yes, if I really would like to break my watch or any of my G-shocks I could, no question. The only thing is I do not know how the Rangeman broke, as I said I actually SAW THE DAMAGE BY BENDING BACK THE WRISTBAND IN A CIVIL MATTER if you can describe it like that. I afterwards took it apart and found what I tried to describe as a "clean break" that has been described by another User as


> the lugs sheared away in a clean break fashion, and if it did indeed sheer away in this manner, then I can presume that the cure process of the resin is the culprit for the anomalous breakage...


 And indeed, it seems like I even can see some small air bubbles in both of the lugs that broke away, also they broke away in the same matter with no tear, just clean, which I would guess would be a weakness in the material, but doesnt mean its the case everywhere. But I mean honestly, the Rangeman is a great watch, I looked everywhere for anybody who had the same problem and found nothing so I wouldnt go as far as to selling the watch. Just seems like it was mine. Anyway, ill take a few pictures before I send it off to the seller, who will send it to G-Shock who should replace or repair it, I live in Australia and bought the watch here so none of the Casio warranty rights count and they have to follow Australian consumer laws which should cover the damage.


----------



## le buzz (Jun 23, 2009)

You should be able to do push-ups or bench press with a gshock on with no damage. The day I have to take my gshock off to do a push-up is the day I stop wearing gshocks. So far it appears it's an isolated case so my guess is the resin was damaged/compromised during manufacture.


----------



## Marcho (Feb 23, 2014)

> You should be able to do push-ups or bench press with a gshock on with no damage. The day I have to take my gshock off to do a push-up is the day I stop wearing gshocks. So far it appears it's an isolated case so my guess is the resin was damaged/compromised during manufacture.


 Thats exactly my opinion, I mean thats why people buy G-Shock, because they normally are tough


----------



## spidercrab (Jan 6, 2014)

Watchphile said:


> A larger pin diameter will result in more leverage (stress) against the lugs when the watch is stressed and so my preference would be for a real screwbar under those circumstances.


Agreed. The relatively large diameter bar will further weaken the lug. One more potential issue with this design is that if the screw bars are too tight or too loose then that will also stress the design. Suunto use steel inserts in their cases so that the screws thread into a steel insert instead of directly into the plastic, which is a far better system. This design need some sort of steel reinforcing to work IMO.

The other thing about the Rangeman is that with it being such a large watch it needs an even stronger lug system.

This is something that would never happen on a steel cased G-Shock and should never happen on a correctly designed modern G-Shock. It simply not happen on a G-Shock that now matter what you do when you are wearing it for this to happen. Having to take your watch off when excising is not what G-SHocks should be about.


----------



## carrot (Feb 13, 2006)

kung-fusion said:


> Seriously? One person has a watch break and you are thinking of selling yours? Bit of an overreaction, I think. Now, if it happens to two or three people, I think we have a concern, but this might just be a defective watch


Kung, yes I may well do so. I hadn't been aware of the weakness in the design but now I am it makes me uncomfortable. I only keep watches I like and if I no longer like it then it has to go.


----------



## Ottovonn (Dec 9, 2011)

If I recall correctly, the King shares a similar screw system. It's even wider than the Rangeman, yet I believe there have been no reported incidents of broken lugs. Are the lugs on the King comparable to the Rangeman?


----------



## Watchphile (Feb 21, 2012)

Ottovonn said:


> If I recall correctly, the King shares a similar screw system. It's even wider than the Rangeman, yet I believe there have been no reported incidents of broken lugs. Are the lugs on the King comparable to the Rangeman?


The King is reported to have bigger lugs as per post #50 of this thread..
https://www.watchuseek.com/f17/g-shock-rangeman-gw-9400-1-parts-broken-off-988963-5.html


----------



## hiker (Nov 18, 2012)

if a 200 lbs person is doing push ups say for example.imagine the sheer force on watch,s lugs in certain angles of wrist if its caught up ...so I think if for me this watch remains working intact in jogging,climbing,swimming,mud ,extreme temperatures than it wont disappoint me ...now after this post I wont keep this watch on in strenuous exercises,and in such exercises watch sometimes does feel like a nuisance. atleast for me...I am not saying that g shocks are not supposed to handle these but just saying that with such complete package as rangeman I can live with some shortcomings at this price range(I got mine cheaper than a usual core!) as long as they don't cross a limit.and I really hope it was an isolated incident


----------



## G-fob (Jun 14, 2011)

* and here comes the resell values of frogman and 5600 *


----------



## STEELINOX (Mar 20, 2006)

Marcho said:


> Yes, if I really would like to break my watch or any of my G-shocks I could, no question. The only thing is I do not know how the Rangeman broke, as I said I actually SAW THE DAMAGE BY BENDING BACK THE WRISTBAND IN A CIVIL MATTER if you can describe it like that. I afterwards took it apart and found what I tried to describe as a "clean break" that has been described by another User as And indeed, it seems like I even can see some small air bubbles in both of the lugs that broke away, also they broke away in the same matter with no tear, just clean, which I would guess would be a weakness in the material, but doesnt mean its the case everywhere. But I mean honestly, the Rangeman is a great watch, I looked everywhere for anybody who had the same problem and found nothing so I wouldnt go as far as to selling the watch. Just seems like it was mine. Anyway, ill take a few pictures before I send it off to the seller, who will send it to G-Shock who should replace or repair it, I live in Australia and bought the watch here so none of the Casio warranty rights count and they have to follow Australian consumer laws which should cover the damage.


If this is the case, it means a good slug of production may hv these defective casings, prolly should give us your watches serial number, to reference this to...

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Godan (Nov 4, 2013)

The OP seems credible, complete, thoughtful and accurate. I believe him and his evidence. The question now is how Casio handles it - will it be a "fine print" response, or will they do the right thing. I had a related problem with another product a few months ago. It was a company that I and many others trusted for what we thought were good reasons. In the event, they defaulted to a "fine print" response. I sincerely hope thing work out better in this case.


----------



## madjh (Apr 20, 2013)

I offer 50$ for the rangerman if this makes people more confortable :-d (ironic mode on, but ;-) )

Seriusly, the rangerman has a complicated design in the lug area. A tradicional G shock lug will perhaps solve this problem. Perhaps it is a problem with the resin, a defective unit as some of you have suggested.


----------



## Snoweagle (Jul 3, 2012)

Casio has been making G-Shocks for the past 31 years and I doubt it's a design flaw.


----------



## Burnrub (Dec 11, 2010)

Trust but Verify. 8 Pages into this thread and we still don't know if it's a design flaw or if the OP received a defective watch. Surely there are a few G-Shock fanboys out there who are both daring and rich enough to bend their straps back "a little" as well. Then we will know if this is an isolated incident or something more serious. Post-apocalypse pictures would be nice as well.


----------



## Robotaz (Jan 18, 2012)

Burnrub said:


> Trust but Verify. 8 Pages into this thread and we still don't know if it's a design flaw or if the OP received a defective watch. Surely there are a few G-Shock fanboys out there who are both daring and rich enough to bend their straps back "a little" as well. Then we will know if this is an isolated incident or something more serious. Post-apocalypse pictures would be nice as well.


I guarantee you if you bend it back, it will break. That's why I'm not worried about mine breaking.


----------



## spidercrab (Jan 6, 2014)

Robotaz said:


> I guarantee you if you bend it back, it will break. That's why I'm not worried about mine breaking.


I don't think you should be able to break off 1 lug and certainly not 2 lugs by doing anything to a watch labelled as tough.

Also I doubt that in the history of steel cased watches such as the original G-Shock models, have both lugs broken off. All watches should be designed so that the springbar breaks first and then the strap. The case should just never break.

There is something very wrong with this particular watch that must be a case moulding problem that was not picked up by Casio's Q&A or there is a design fault.


----------



## hiker (Nov 18, 2012)

one other question that comes in mind is that if same sheer force is applied to other g shocks ,protreks or suunto etc than how will they respond?will they break as well.if yes than I am not that troubled...anyway lets see over the time .time will tell..also does riseman not share similar lugs to rangeman? if yes than we must not be worried that much, as risemen never broke.


----------



## Sedi (May 21, 2007)

spidercrab said:


> Also I doubt that in the history of steel cased watches such as the original G-Shock models, have both lugs broken off.


What's your point here? I don't know if you realize this but there were far fewer steel-cased G-Shocks than people seem to think - apart from the classic squares and a few versions with round cases (DW-5700) most other models were released with resin cases right from the start (DW-6100, DW-6900, DW-6600, etc, etc) - without those cases that were cheaper to make and easier to be formed into more "exotic" shapes we probably wouldn't even have watches like the Rangeman and other models that don't have a standard case shape. And it's not like Casio stopped making metal cases at all - at the moment I bought my Rangeman I could have gotten a GW-5000 for even less money than the Rangeman cost me. So I guess - if you want all the bells and whistles you have to settle for resin (there never ever was a fully metal cased G-Shock with altimeter/barometer anyway) - basically it's still the same models now than in the past days that have metal cases - a few squares and the Frogman (not counting the MRG-line here).
Considering the fact that I think a DW-8200 was too heavy even with the titanium case I wouldn't wear a GF-8250 or GF-1000 anyway and I also probably wouldn't wear a Rangeman if it had the same size it has now but a metal case. That doesn't mean I don't think the lug construction could be improved but I definitely wouldn't want Casio to go back to steel cases for all models - they'd lose much of their wearing comfort - a steel case is ok for a small square IMO but not for the larger models. I like the fact that I can wear a "monster" like the GX-56 and barely even notice it on my wrist.

cheers, Sedi


----------



## Sedi (May 21, 2007)

Oh, and a few more thoughts - I don't really think it's fair to compare the Rangeman with the simple steelcased squares from the past - how many ABC-watches with metal cases are there today? I cannot think of many and the prices are in a different league from the GW-9400. If people want a simple screwback square they can still get one - if they want a fully featured ABC G-Shock with a steel case - too bad 'cause there never was one. Not even one with AB-features.

cheers, Sedi


----------



## Shocker (Aug 4, 2011)

I'd say the Frogman watches are exotic and solid metal cased


----------



## Sedi (May 21, 2007)

Shocker said:


> I'd say the Frogman watches are exotic and solid metal cased


Too heavy, too uncomfy and basic features.

cheers, Sedi


----------



## spidercrab (Jan 6, 2014)

Sedi said:


> What's your point here?


My point is that I am shocked that 2 lugs would break off a case and I would be pretty devastated if that happened to me on such an expensive watch.

The original G-Shock resin case is a very good design that has proved itself. I'm not a big fan of it but it does function well and there are none to few stories of cases splitting or 2 lugs falling off to my knowledge. The lugs are thick with only a 16mm springbar between them and there is no U shaped cutout or large diameter hole in the side of each lug to reduce strength. Had that proven design been used in the 9xxx series then IMO it would be a stronger construction and I don't think would lead to both lugs breaking off.

I wasn't suggesting that steel be used but rather that a case design be used that is stronger. I think that this strap design has been used so that the strap is kept tight against the watch for a better looking fit than the conventional springbar fit gives.

G-Shocks used to be tough strong watches that you didn't have to remove when you exercised, etc..

Casio advertises the watch as:
"RANGEMAN Designed to challenge the ultimate limits, ----. It's built for use under the most punishing conditions. SHOCK RESISTANT + TRIPLE SENSOR"


----------



## Sedi (May 21, 2007)

spidercrab said:


> My point is that I am shocked that 2 lugs would break off a case and I would be pretty devastated if that happened to me on such an expensive watch.


I think I already mentioned that the same lug design is in use since the G-9100 Gulfman - it has also been used on the Riseman, Mudman and GX-56 - and this is the 1st time we ever heard about this here on the forum - so unless proven wrong I still think this was a flaw in the resin case and would not happen under normal wearing conditions with a flawless case. A few months back there was a member complaining about the W-S220's lugs breaking - this model has a standard lug design and I have put mine through a lot as it's my work watch - so far it held up just fine and it turned out the member who complained about the lugs had dipped it in sunscreen which will ruin the resin case and make it brittle.

cheers, Sedi


----------



## Shocker (Aug 4, 2011)

Watchphile said:


> View attachment 1395470
> 
> 
> It would seem to me that the narrow/recessed piece between the lug and the rest of the case center might be a weak link and if the case is twisted during exercise it might lead to weakening/breaking of the lugs.


I don't own a Rangeman to compare, but here's a pic of my Gulfman. It appears to have a similar setup, although possibly a chunkier flange on the Range.


----------



## Subafan (Sep 21, 2013)

Please gentlemen, let´s put this madness in a logic way. Probably the OP received a broken watch, but ONLY ONE thing is absolutely TRUE : The Rangeman didn´t brake himself. Someone broke it. We need to realize that these fantastic watches are Shock Resist, but not yet Idiot Resist. Cheers.


----------



## mg1 (Apr 3, 2008)

Much ado about nothing. Seriously, one catastrophic failure does not equal a design flaw. I imagine Casio has produced at _least_ one thousand Rangeman watches since their introduction and if this was a real problem with the design, we would see this posted all over the internet. It's not. As many have already posted, the design is somewhat shared among other models and how many failures have we seen? I hope they will replace the guy's watch under the warranty. Just keeping it real.


----------



## Kawei (May 3, 2012)

Still no picture about requested picture of the other two lugs intact from the op... I rest my case that this is an isolated problem. 
It would have been interesting to see the stress on the other two lugs that are intact still.

Cheers,
-Kawei-


----------



## duke4c (Feb 12, 2006)

I consider concerns about design valid. I think that casio is spending to much time improving the case and no time at all improving the lugs.

That beeing said I think that a general lack of reports of broken lugs (other than isolated incidents that probably have more to do with bad rasin than anything else)
mean that we really have nothing to worry about.

I know I'm not worried about it.

Cheers


----------



## hiker (Nov 18, 2012)

mg1 said:


> Much ado about nothing. Seriously, one catastrophic failure does not equal a design flaw. I imagine Casio has produced at _least_ one thousand Rangeman watches since their introduction and if this was a real problem with the design, we would see this posted all over the internet. It's not. As many have already posted, the design is somewhat shared among other models and how many failures have we seen? I hope they will replace the guy's watch under the warranty. Just keeping it real.


actually I guess much more than 1000 rangemen may have been produced.i have never seen any casio ABC selling like this .lets hope its an isolated case.as I bought two rangemen for me and one for bro on casios reputation alone.other do the same.reputation for a brand Is everything


----------



## hiker (Nov 18, 2012)

Shocker said:


> I don't own a Rangeman to compare, but here's a pic of my Gulfman. It appears to have a similar setup, although possibly a chunkier flange on the Range.


hmmm.so this lug design has been used a lot.it really is comforting to know this. really.


----------



## Marcho (Feb 23, 2014)

Well, before I sent the watch off to the seller I took quite a few pictures and checked. The second pair of lugs shows no wear. As I said already it kind of looks like there are bubbles in one of the broken of lugs, I would say this is an isolated issue as no one else has reported anything like this yet. But nevertheless I will post the pictures. I should get it replaced, Australian Consumer Law overpowers all of Casios small print, such as the all the things they don't cover under warranty. Question thats left is what do they actually cover?? I mean reading it, if you have ever worn your watch and it has traces of wear they don't have to give you any warranty.


----------



## STEELINOX (Mar 20, 2006)

Marcho said:


> Well, before I sent the watch off to the seller I took quite a few pictures and checked. The second pair of lugs shows no wear. As I said already it kind of looks like there are bubbles in one of the broken of lugs, I would say this is an isolated issue as no one else has reported anything like this yet. But nevertheless I will post the pictures. I should get it replaced, Australian Consumer Law overpowers all of Casios small print, such as the all the things they don't cover under warranty. Question thats left is what do they actually cover?? I mean reading it, if you have ever worn your watch and it has traces of wear they don't have to give you any warranty.


It will be replaced at no charge - that I am certain...

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Cobia (Nov 24, 2013)

Having just received my rangeman, i have to say that the flanges that hold the lugs look very very thin, it must be mighty strong resin, after reading this thread im worried about doing pushups or anything that stresses it out at all, a bit disappointing for a watch thats meant to be one of the toughest on the planet.

But i'll put it down to a one off seeings you g-shock experts seem to think it is, and there has been only one turn up with these problems, lets hope no others turn up with the same problem, but to be honest it looks like a poor design to me, but im no watch expert, surely these things would have been put through some heavy testing at casio.


----------



## Marcho (Feb 23, 2014)

So after several weeks of waiting I received a new watch last week. Not from Casio or their accredited Australian warranty/repair company but of the company that I originally bought my watch of as Casio's company did not reply to them (or at least that's what they told me). I for sure won't baby the watch and will see if anything else happens. One thing I already noticed is that the sunrise/sundown mode is a few minutes off for reasons beyond my knowledge, the old watch was spot on. Otherwise its a great watch. I would recommend it as an ABC watch.


----------



## Ole.k (May 29, 2014)

The exact same thing happened to me today. I tripped while playing ball and I guess the strap got streched when my hands touched the ground.. Does anyone know if it's possible to order the inner case online?


----------



## Ottovonn (Dec 9, 2011)

Ole.k said:


> The exact same thing happened to me today. I tripped while playing ball and I guess the strap got streched when my hands touched the ground.. Does anyone know if it's possible to order the inner case online?


Pictures of the damage?

I'm not sure if you can buy the case, but you can try looking up the model at Pacparts.com, which sells spare parts for G-shocks.


----------



## Ole.k (May 29, 2014)

Here's a couple of pictures of the damage. Looks remarkably similar to OP's problem.

















Edit: Thanks for the tip about where to get parts, looks like they have the one I need!


----------



## Cobia (Nov 24, 2013)

Looks like this is a clear problem in manufacture, and when you look at the area surrounding the links it looks like its a poor design.


----------



## Cobia (Nov 24, 2013)

Casio should be replacing these no questions asked.


----------



## Ottovonn (Dec 9, 2011)

Ole.k said:


> Here's a couple of pictures of the damage. Looks remarkably similar to OP's problem.
> 
> View attachment 1509818
> 
> ...


Thanks for providing pictures. We need to document every case and present evidence to Casio if need be. I was convinced months ago when this was posted that this is problem wasn't an isolated incident, a possibly rare one. But if the case "lugs" are snapping off during rough play -- which the watches were designed for -- then these watches need to be redesigned. I think yours is the second known incident so far.

I am glad that you were able to find the part you needed. Pacparts is great. I buy from there all the time for spare parts.


----------



## Crater (Sep 11, 2011)

Ottovonn said:


> I was convinced months ago when this was posted that this is a potential problem, a possibly rare one, but if the case "lugs" are snapping off during rough play -- which the watches were designed for -- then these watches need to be redesigned. I think yours is the second known incident so far.


We have seen 2 accidents, how many has happened that we don't know about? Probably quite a few I presume...

I wonder if that same problem would occur if they put regular spring bars, instead of those screws in, to hold the strap? Maybe strap would snap off, but at least it wouldn't damage the case.


----------



## Ottovonn (Dec 9, 2011)

Crater said:


> We have seen 2 accidents, how many has happened that we don't know about? Probably quite a few I presume...
> 
> I wonder if that same problem would occur if they put regular spring bars, instead of those screws in, to hold the strap? Maybe strap would snap off, but at least it wouldn't damage the case.


If I recall correctly, others speculated that a solid spring bar would absorb the shock, relieving tension from the fragile lug design. There are no known issues with other models that share a similar screw design, though.


----------



## Ole.k (May 29, 2014)

I must say it's a bit dissapointing when my first g-shock only lasts 10 days of use. I'll try calling the casio representative in my country and see if anything can be done. The part is $170 plus shipping and taxes, thats almost the same as a paid for the watch in the first place.


----------



## kung-fusion (Dec 18, 2010)

Starting to look like a design flaw. glad I sold mine


----------



## Ottovonn (Dec 9, 2011)

kung-fusion said:


> Starting to look like a design flaw. glad I sold mine


I sold mine partly because of this "flaw." Cool looking watch, but I do exercises daily that may stress the watch. I'm now happier with the Mudman g-9300.


----------



## Ottovonn (Dec 9, 2011)

Ole.k said:


> I must say it's a bit dissapointing when my first g-shock only lasts 10 days of use. I'll try calling the casio representative in my country and see if anything can be done. The part is $170 plus shipping and taxes, thats almost the same as a paid for the watch in the first place.


Try and see if it's covered under warranty. I think all g-shocks come with an international warranty.


----------



## alexs12 (Aug 29, 2012)

I too am leaning more and more towards this being a design flaw. The same lug design is not problematic on watches that are narrower, as in when there is no crown or big button at 3 o'clock to stick out too far. I wonder if CASIO anticipated the issue here and that is why they developed the new strap design on the Gulfmaster (an even wider watch than the Rangeman).


----------



## Ole.k (May 29, 2014)

I agree on the design flaw, it's easy to think of solutions to this problem. Spring bars, more mass in the "lugs", one instead of two bolts etc. Can't really see how it got through testing as these watches usually can take a real beating. I believe my hand suffered about the same force as a push up, which seemed to be the cause to OP's problem.


----------



## SMP_DON (Jul 24, 2012)

No one wants a watch to fail especially a pricier model. That said 2 watches out of thousands I wouldn't panic. I'm sure Casio did lots testing on the Rangeman. If it turns out that there is an issue I'm sure Casio will make good on the repair. I don't plan on selling mine, I will just keep wearing it. Hopefully these are isolated incidents.

DON


Sent by Teletype via Tapatalk


----------



## Apiwat (May 15, 2014)

casio usually show-off their tough test on their G-shocks but haven't seen any stretching test yet. It's useless if the watch can withstand tough terrains but the watch falls off in the middle of the road.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Mitch100 (Jul 3, 2007)

As I said earlier, this is a design fault.

Watch bands have to fail at some point, if you are not going to have your arm ripped off if they get caught.

With a spring bar, as the force is applied, it transfers that force to the lugs but lugs on most 'G's are sturdy and inflexible and do not move under that force. The force is therefore retained within the spring bar/lug/arm arrangement something will eventually give as the force is increased, the bar, the lug or your arm!

With a spring bar it will bend under that force until either the lug/arm gives way or it bends enough to release it from the lug (the normal happening, and a good thing to!!).

With these screwed bars, the bars can never release from the lugs. So it is what breaks first, the bar, the lug or the arm. As we can see on the Rangeman it is the lug that goes first, exacerbated by the fact it is already cutaway, reducing its strength.

As I say, a design flaw!




Mitch


----------



## SMP_DON (Jul 24, 2012)

Was thinking about how these 2 Rangeman both had the case break at the same place this morning.
Last night I took off one side of strap and also checked the other strap and noticed that the screws were not tightened all the
way into the strap, they had at least one half turn left before it was all the way in. Since these screws are installed at the factory
like this for a reason I’m guessing they need have some play in them. If these 2 watches had those screws over tightened this
may have caused the cracks in the case and this lead to the failure. I’m thinking this is a lot more feasible since I’m not buying the
flaw theory. Just my 2 cents I’m no expert but this scenario is a possibility. Anyone else got any theories.



DON


----------



## STEELINOX (Mar 20, 2006)

It would seem that the threaded section of these lugs is where these "breaks" are occurring - could be that when these mid cases are poured that the threaded section is also poured at the same time - making for a weak design.

It might be that the fix to this is cutting the threaded area after the pour...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Joakim Agren (Feb 12, 2006)

I do not think we can call this a design flaw just yet! Only 2 known cases in 9 months is not enough. This is not the first G with a screw mounted strap rather than spring bars. I know when it comes to bezel screws it is important to not screw them on too tight because that increases the risk of the lugs cracking over time. In general when mixing plastic with metal it is important not to use too much torx. So this might be a case where the strap screws have been applied using too much torx resulting in too much tension and thereby cracking of the lucks upon impact.


----------



## SMP_DON (Jul 24, 2012)

Joakim Agren said:


> I do not think we can call this a design flaw just yet! Only 2 known cases in 9 months is not enough. This is not the first G with a screw mounted strap rather than spring bars. I know when it comes to bezel screws it is important to not screw them on too tight because that increases the risk of the lugs cracking over time. In general when mixing plastic with metal it is important not to use too much torx. So this might be a case where the strap screws have been applied using too much torx resulting in too much tension and thereby cracking of the lucks upon impact.


Thats pretty much what I said Joakim. Im thinking that those screws were over tightened so they may have caused the lugs to crack and then break off.

DON


----------



## ADAN (Feb 13, 2006)

SMP_DON said:


> Thats pretty much what I said Joakim. Im thinking that those screws were over tightened so they may have caused the lugs to crack and then break off.
> 
> DON


+1 Miquel Silvestre have this watch with 30000km in motorbike...no problems...crash included...


----------



## G-fob (Jun 14, 2011)

Crater said:


> We have seen 2 accidents, how many has happened that we don't know about? Probably quite a few I presume...
> 
> I wonder if that same problem would occur if they put regular spring bars, instead of those screws in, to hold the strap? Maybe strap would snap off, but at least it wouldn't damage the case.


 with spring bars, over time, its tips would widen/broke the holes if/when being stressed too much -> damaged case, and the spring bars would have problems staying inside the holes

I think this is more like quality of the case, made by cheap materials, didn't happen with riseman or mudman or any of those OLD Master of G's AFAIK


----------



## kung-fusion (Dec 18, 2010)

G-fob said:


> with spring bars, over time, its tips would widen/broke the holes if/when being stressed too much -> damaged case, and the spring bars would have problems staying inside the holes
> 
> I think this is more like quality of the case, made by cheap materials, didn't happen with riseman or mudman or any of those OLD Master of G's AFAIK


Or maybe just a particularly bad batch of case resin


----------



## Watchphile (Feb 21, 2012)

Rather than calling it a design flaw, let's just say that there is room for improvement. :-d

I remain loyal to Casio but in this case the big case coupled with the sensor button and its guard, the screw bars, relatively thin lug flange area will likely increase the leverage/stress in the lug area when the watch case is twisted under certain usage conditions, leading to its eventual demise. The onset of the eventual resin rot can only make matters worse.

To me, G-Shock is all about over-engineering and unfortunately the Rangeman is a little short in this department.

I acknowledge that the known failure rate is still small, but that does not mean that the design should not be reinforced. 

Just my personal opinion of course.


----------



## pspgamer (Mar 18, 2010)

Makin banyak korbanya

Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk


----------



## pspgamer (Mar 18, 2010)

Ups sorry , wrong replied, just ignore

Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk


----------



## MandoBear (Apr 7, 2010)

Hmm - reading this thread makes me glad I ordered the PRW-30004DR - which I received from Hong Kong today! :-!


----------



## riffraff (Sep 1, 2012)

ADAN said:


> +1 Miquel Silvestre have this watch with 30000km in motorbike...no problems...crash included...


Very cool vids. :-! |>


----------



## MandoBear (Apr 7, 2010)

Just noticed, my Riseman uses the same way of attaching the strap - with the recess in the lugs that the band locks into. My bet would be this failure is due to a defect in manufacture of the resin case, or in the assembly process. If this method of attachment was inherently flawed I think we'd have heard much more about it long before now, and Casio would have almost certainly revised their design.


----------



## hiker (Nov 18, 2012)

well.two cases of this don't prove anything.but lets see over the time what happens...also most of us don't use their watches to their limits anyway ,so I think it will be ok.
I have seen the toughest casio protrek (prw 1100 or prg 80) having breakage of glass or seepage of water inside it in more than one cases around me.in both cases watch was perhaps used over its limits...even if you abuse a 1000 dollar watch it will break some time i guess.
also the spring bar is no "cure" for this problem.have seen screw bars also get damaged over time .
while doing push ups or heavy exercise the amount of torsion force applied to watch strap can be very very high....and rangeman being larger than most g shocks would compound this problem i guess....
anyway i am not worried...also many g shocks have same or similar lug structure.so fault may not be in design but
1...either faulty resin
2..too tight screws as mentioned above
3...too much force applied to the watch.sometimes we even dont know how much force we applied while falling on an object.
would the toughest of g shock survive if you hang by its strap ?no ofcourse not.than how you expect that lugs will survive any amount of force applied to it ?.g shocks are not indestructible.they are just tougher than other watches,that,s all


----------



## Snoweagle (Jul 3, 2012)

It's a sad thing to know that after so long waiting for a complete G-Shock to have a flaw which is so simple and thus 'blemishing' it. 

Hope mine will be ok for a long time to come since I do not stress out the lugs much as I always wear my Gs loose.


----------



## Crater (Sep 11, 2011)

Seems like situation in car industry these days, saving money, cutting corners and we get this. The diffrence is there are no recalls here, unfortunately.

Seems like bad resin case, bad material. 


Sent from my LG-E610 using Tapatalk


----------



## Nemo (Nov 22, 2007)

Been drunk I have tested mine very hard. Push-ups and voluntary twisting the band. 
No issue. It's the Japanese version with carbon fiber band. 
Just my own experience. 
Still trust that watch and glad of its reliability.
At least when im not sober. ;-)


----------



## Mitch100 (Jul 3, 2007)

Nemo said:


> Been drunk I have tested mine very hard. Push-ups and voluntary twisting the band.
> No issue. It's the Japanese version with carbon fiber band.
> Just my own experience.
> Still trust that watch and glad of its reliability.
> At least when im not sober. ;-)


That's the ticket!

We should have more drunk testing.

A lot of us have been there and will be again and so it is just like the real world!

Mitch


----------



## STEELINOX (Mar 20, 2006)

I'll start !
#getdrunkandbuggerupyourGSHOCK!










Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Marrin (Feb 8, 2011)

I have been reading the topic and I have to admit it has been a very interesting read.

I have my opinion but not regarding the breakage, but overall design of the lugs/bars/strap.

If you wanted to make the strap/lug/watch connection undestructable, you could, but that is not a good idea.
In case your arm gets stuck onto something you might lose your arm, so watches are designed with the "weakest link" system.
You chose what the weakest link is going to be, and that part is the first to "give" when something bad happens.

On ALMOST ALL watches, that weakest link is the springbar, and there is a reason why it is the springbar. It is the cheapest part, easily replaceable.
That is called good engineering!!

When you make a design that uses extra strong straps, oversized screw bars and then make weak resin lugs, that is called bad engineering.
Why?

Because when s..... hits the fan, you made the weakest point the MOST EXPENSIVE one, and the hardest to replace.

So, even if it very unlikely to happen during normal wear or even tough wear, the fact that the weakest point are the lugs, make me not like this watch, or any other that uses the same system (even if there are no reported cases of breakage) and i find it badly engineered (hats down to all the technology used in the watch, that i respect and admire greatly).
However, i would still buy these watches and use them, since I still think it is not that likely I would experience something that would make it break.

I believe Casio simply forgot to think about everything, since they concentrated on all the other aspects and features of this watch!!

I have had something similar happen to my with my car.
A 2010 Mazda 6 (euro spec). A beautifully engineered car that was deliberately made lightweight (weighing less than a Civic of the same era) and a car where they thought through some details that still amaze me. All that engineering has made it a wonderful car to drive (especially through corners) and it has made it economical, and it has made me buy it in the first place.
BUT, i have had my drivers seat mounts brake TWICE!!!
So they thought of all these little things in their "gram strategy" but then F.... up something as simple as a driver seat mount!!!
Oh and I am 75kg, so dont think i am big or anything!!


----------



## NYWatchFan (Aug 30, 2010)

I am going to take the risk and buy one, then use it as intended.


----------



## ZASKAR36 (Sep 25, 2009)

NYWatchFan said:


> I am going to take the risk and buy one, then use it as intended.


C'mon now. That's just crazy talk.


----------



## matt_gold (May 23, 2015)

Hey folks...I realize this thread has been dormant for a long time, but I was wondering if anyone had any closing opinions or conclusions. It looks like the thread just sort of dies without any resolutions.
I've been wearing a SPF40T Sea-Pathfinder for around 3 years now, and I was thinking of upgrading. It's in great working order, but the compass is VERY slow (I often use the compass) and it's not a solar powered watch. Nor does it have an altimeter, not that an altimeter is terribly important to me. I am also frustrated that the light button is so discreet it's actually a pain to find in the dark sometimes, especially if the watch is on a night stand, therefore it's hard to feel out which way is "up" on the watch.
The more I read about the Rangeman, the more I want one. It seems to have everything I'm looking for, and super-tough to boot.

This thread is really the only negative feedback I've read about the watch. I understand from reading that the issue is that the lugs holding the strap on can break sometimes.

Are there any final opinions on whether these were isolated incidents, and do you guys think I'm good to perhaps buy this watch, under the assumption that it's a tough watch that can be readily abused without breaking?


----------



## Knives and Lint (Jun 15, 2014)

matt_gold said:


> The more I read about the Rangeman, the more I want one. It seems to have everything I'm looking for, and super-tough to boot.
> 
> This thread is really the only negative feedback I've read about the watch. I understand from reading that the issue is that the lugs holding the strap on can break sometimes.
> 
> Are there any final opinions on whether these were isolated incidents, and do you guys think I'm good to perhaps buy this watch, under the assumption that it's a tough watch that can be readily abused without breaking?


I think you are good 2 go. The Rangeman is a great watch, and a favorite of many of us around here. And I think it can definitely take abuse. I generally don't work out with a watch on, but I have never babied mine and have never had any problems. I re-skimmed this thread and I think the greatest likelihood of it breaking would be if you were to take hard fall and catch yourself directly on your hands at the perfect angle with a bent wrist. But I think with general use and abuse you would be fine. Just my opinion though. But I say go for it, I don't think you'll be disappointed.

And Guys....DO YOUR PUSH-UPS ON YOUR KNUCKLES!! not with bent wrists...c'mon man


----------



## sidecross (Jan 1, 2011)

Ottovonn said:


> View attachment 1395411
> 
> 
> Out of curiosity, I popped off the strap to inspect the lugs. They appear to be made out of a rigid plastic material. I doubt the bending of one's wrist would be enough to break them. I wonder what kind of force would be able to stress them to the point of breaking.


I would be more concerned if the watch and band could support body weight if caught on an obstacle. I have four Rangeman watches and have not experienced any problems.

I would think that the lug screws might have been over tightened in manufacturing causing the problem.


----------



## STEELINOX (Mar 20, 2006)

Why in the world would you want a 'watch' to support your own weight?






Electronic post generated by human via apple interface...


----------



## matt_gold (May 23, 2015)

Actually, I read his sidecross' post as he/she is wondering why anyone would want the watchband to support my body weight, as (I assume) this is a good way to rip off my hand, or dislocate my wrist, at best, thus the cause of his/her 'concern'. You're right too, fact is you want a watch to have an emergency breaking point to avoid that problem, like a crumple zone in a car.

Well, as soon as we land a certain contract at work, I'm getting a rangeman. Thinking of this deal:
http://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B00GFYYKLA/ref=ox_sc_act_title_2?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=A394PY5QFU9U1F

I'm in Canada BTW, hence the overpriced Rangeman on amazon.ca. This is the cheapest deal I could find.
BTW, I assume that their black is black. It looks a bit "blacker" in some pics, I assume this is just variances in photo quality.


----------



## bmmh05 (May 8, 2015)

Knives and Lint said:


> I think you are good 2 go. The Rangeman is a great watch, and a favorite of many of us around here. And I think it can definitely take abuse. I generally don't work out with a watch on, but I have never babied mine and have never had any problems. I re-skimmed this thread and I think the greatest likelihood of it breaking would be if you were to take hard fall and catch yourself directly on your hands at the perfect angle with a bent wrist. But I think with general use and abuse you would be fine. Just my opinion though. But I say go for it, I don't think you'll be disappointed.
> 
> And Guys....DO YOUR PUSH-UPS ON YOUR KNUCKLES!! not with bent wrists...c'mon man


Amen. First of all pushups on the knuckles is a lot easier for me and better for my wrist pain. Second of all, is it too much to ask to loosen the watch during workouts?

I'm so confused by many complaints. Are you guys wearing these so tight that the circulation gets cut off?

We expect too much these day's.


----------



## SilentSoaring (Aug 5, 2014)

*Another Broken Rangeman*

When I bought my Casio Rangeman one year ago, I was looking for a dependable watch. a watch which I could use for my job as an electrician,
and also during the ocassional hike or travel abroad. since it is the perftect G-shock wacth. it has all the functions that are needed, and none of the functions that are not needed. 
at the beginning I read this post, and thought about paying A LOT of money for a G-Shock, that may.. fail. but eventually went for it and
bought one. I am not a "high speed, low drag" guy. just an ordinary guy living the simple life.

after one year and a month (just one month after expiration of the warranty) I have discovered that one of the lugs (the bottom left one) have broken off completely
at its weak spot. the strap was holding on its place, because the screw goes thru the outer rubber cover of the watch. a fact which made it unnoticeable until I took of the strap for a wash.
I didn't do anything unusuall that could put a strain on the watch during this year.







you see, the lugs of the Rangeman have some empty space at the base of the construction, in order to accomodate the original rubber strap base.
I wear my Rangeman with a metal adapter by keoni and a black nato strap. that leaves a little bit of space between the lug and the strap.







I did some research and decided to use 3M products to fix the watch. choosing DP8010 and DP8405 acrylic epoxies which are plastics oriented.







at first I have tried the 8405, with a nozzle mixer







but I didn't work well and few days after fixing the lug became free again.
I have used the 8010 then, with manual mixing this time, which worked much better. maybe because this particular epoxy is intended
for plastics with low energy surfaces. in addition I have filled with epoxy the spaces of the other lugs.
it is holding fine for now. I feel the epoxy will hold much better than the watch itself.

Final Thoughts:

This could be the perfect watch. it is perfect in it's function design, just not in its structural design.
to make it the perfect watch, I would suggest a complete titanium body with soilid titanium made lugs. 
that could take more force without failing. something similar to the construction of the Frogman. 
I would be ready to pay 100$ for such a watch. it would make a really a perfect watch then.


----------



## Crater (Sep 11, 2011)

*Re: Another Broken Rangeman*

SilentSoaring, you are right, there is absolutely no excuse for Casio to make a watch with such flaw. And even if it would be just $30, it's the same. With so many reports about this failure, it would make sense for Casio to make an update on the case. Inserting metal bars, like in GD-400 model, would solve the issue.

On the other hand, the bezel on your Rangeman is the most beat up and used I've ever seen  Never seens Rangeman being ''used'' so much, you are really putting it to a test. Sad to see it's not reliable as it could be...


----------



## gzpermadi (Sep 8, 2015)

*Re: Another Broken Rangeman*

Yikes, now will have to sell my Ranger and replace it with Mudmaster


----------



## Spirit of the Watch (Jun 29, 2015)

*Re: Another Broken Rangeman*



gzpermadi said:


> Yikes, now will have to sell my Ranger and replace it with Mudmaster


On thing on the MudMaster that bothers me is the lack of the Sunrise/Sunset feature.


----------



## Joakim Agren (Feb 12, 2006)

*Re: Another Broken Rangeman*

In wast majority of cases this issue is due to over tightened screws causing to much constant strain on the lugs. Which will eventually result in a crack! Most of the reports of this issue is from when the Rangeman was new on the market. Most likely it was caused by to much torque being applied at the factory. Once this was corrected we have seen a significant drop in the occurrence of this issue. So I do not think this is a big issue any more!


----------



## WES51 (Mar 30, 2016)

*Re: Another Broken Rangeman*

I wonder if the case of this knock off watch would work:



It is listed on Amazon as "Aposon Mens Military Digital Outdoor Electronic Water Resistant LED Sport Watch with S-Shock Multifunctional - Army Green"

https://www.amazon.com/Aposon-Military-Electronic-Resistant-Multifunctional/dp/B01CM9FVA0

Check out the first reviewer's pictures. It looks like the watch may have a separate case and bezel. Actually it would make sense for the counterfeiters having copied 1:1 the entire Rangeman design structure instead of coming up with their own design.

What do you guys think?


----------



## Guest (Jun 19, 2016)

*Re: Another Broken Rangeman*



WES51 said:


> I wonder if the case of this knock off watch would work:
> 
> What do you guys think?


I highly doubt it would work! These fakers are merely making the exterior of the watch to look similar to real Casio products. It could be completely different dimensions not only, but also very well could be a single body construction, i.e. the resin and "case" are not separable like in G-Shocks. The internal module obviously would be different, there's no sensors, no solar, no atomic, nothing! Highly doubt the case cavity would allow a real Rangeman's module to fit and function correct.

It's actually insulting, that you think a fake watch's case can be better than a real G-Shock's case, when they spent probably not even 1/10 of the quality control like in Casio. Surprise that Mod's haven't remove your product link, since you're kind of advertising for a fake watch.


----------



## fcasoli (Aug 1, 2015)

Surely the exterior and interior structure is different, in shape and materials


----------



## Time4Playnow (Jun 27, 2011)

*Re: Another Broken Rangeman*



WES51 said:


> I wonder if the case of this knock off watch would work:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think you are better off just getting a standard Rangeman and forgetting about this thread. If you look at the most recent complaint (member SilentSoaring) you can see that he was not using the std. strap that came with the Rangeman. The setup he was using with adapters and NATO strap probably put undue pressure on the lugs. This was not the first instance that happened where there was a lug problem but the strap was not the stock strap.

In another example, the watch was exposed to extreme forces. (the guy who crashed on his ATV) You cannot expect any watch, even a g-shock, to survive such an event completely intact. You also do not know if people may have caused their own trouble by over tightening the lug screws. (or, as the OP said, by "bending the wristband a little bit apart" - what does that even mean? Was he trying to see if he could break it??)

While it may be true that the design of the lugs could have been better, it appears that 99% of the people who have Rangeman watches on this forum have not had any trouble. So IMO, just get a Rangeman and enjoy it. ;-)


----------



## Everdying (May 4, 2012)

*Re: Another Broken Rangeman*



WES51 said:


> I wonder if the case of this knock off watch would work:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


that looks pretty close...from the front.
but seeing the reviewer's pics of the back, the area around the crown guard looks a little different...and the bezel case lugs look a little thinner which is why it needs that inner black case to fill it up.
so in short, i guess the bezel case by itself will not fit a gshock perfectly...and with the inner black case together would definitely not fit also due to a different caseback.


----------



## brvheart (Jan 30, 2008)

I have put my Rangeman through the ringer. I've never toned it down, I've never babied it, I've never worried. I've never loosened it, I've never thought - I had better not do that, my Rangeman might break...push-ups, pull-ups, heck I've even grappled with it on as well as bite work with dogs - no issues.


----------



## theromulus (Mar 27, 2014)

Was thinking about getting one of these so was looking through some old threads. After reading this it looks like some isolated occurrences and in most cases they were pushing the watches past their limit, bending the lugs backwards, tight nato strap etc. I think I will go ahead with my purchase. If this was affecting more people I would think this thread would have way more people complaining about broken lugs.


----------



## brvheart (Jan 30, 2008)

theromulus said:


> Was thinking about getting one of these so was looking through some old threads. After reading this it looks like some isolated occurrences and in most cases they were pushing the watches past their limit, bending the lugs backwards, tight nato strap etc. I think I will go ahead with my purchase. If this was affecting more people I would think this thread would have way more people complaining about broken lugs.


Many many MANY happy Rangeman owners around. I am one of them. I don't think you will be disappointed. Jump right in the water is fine!


----------



## Orbsa (Aug 17, 2016)

You think you buy a great watch that will last you a lifetime.
And then this happens.
I called Casio and they said that it is not covered under the warranty....
Sounds like its a manufacturer defect.
To be honest, I was using 3d-printed plastic nato adapters that fit very well, but theres no reason it should have been stressed this hard, all I do all day is sit at a desk.


----------



## brvheart (Jan 30, 2008)

Orbsa said:


> You think you buy a great watch that will last you a lifetime.
> And then this happens.
> I called Casio and they said that it is not covered under the warranty....
> Sounds like its a manufacturer defect.
> ...


So wait - you use 3rd party adapters and a non factory strap and angry that they didn't cover it? That's like saying I put new rims on and it popped the tires so you should replace it...

And just sitting at the desk your watch exploded? I don't buy it. Sorry.


----------



## Onewatchhh (Mar 25, 2010)

I've looked into the design of the ranger strap and I can see why they break with NATO adaptors...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Time4Playnow (Jun 27, 2011)

BenF said:


> I've looked into the design of the ranger strap and I can see why they break with NATO adaptors...
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Of the small number of instances where this has happened, more than 1 of the users was using a NATO strap on the Rangeman. When you think about how a NATO strap works, they generally have to be pulled fairly tight in order to give a decent fit for the watch. I can easily see where that could put undue stress on the lug area of the watch.

Rangeman owners beware - use NATO adaptors/straps on the watch at your own risk. If you want to use a NATO strap and adaptors, put one on a PRW-3500. (which needs no adaptors)


----------



## Onewatchhh (Mar 25, 2010)

^ this.

The only correct design of adaptor to use is one that is designed to follow the case shape in the lug aperture.
This is why the ranger strap ends are designed as they are - it's a symbiotic engineering relationship. 
Someone somewhere needs to make some specifics... 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Watch_Geekmaster (Oct 4, 2014)

I know this Rangeman lug issue has gotten a little sensitive lately. I would like to take a neutral stance on this issue. I hope that we can continue with this discussion in a civil manner and in the basis of science and engineering.

Here's a summary of all the incidents being reported in this forum so far.


#DateMemberSituationBreakage DetailsPicture TakenSN #Link to Post1Feb 23, 2014MarchoNot sure when the breakage actually occurred, member found the breakage only when inspecting it in a later day. Likely broken during routine exercise / workout.Both lugs on 6 o'clock side broke clean off.YesPartial: ...2A3300https://www.watchuseek.com/f17/g-shock-rangeman-gw-9400-1-parts-broken-off-988963.html#post74268182May 29, 2014Ole.kMember tripped while playing ball and stretched strap when his hands touched the ground.Both lugs on 6 o'clock side broke clean off.YesPartial: ...25D56Dhttps://www.watchuseek.com/f17/g-sh...1-parts-broken-off-988963-11.html#post78815393Oct 24, 2015SilentSoaringNot sure when the breakage actually occurred, member found the breakage only when inspecting it in a later day. Member was using metal NATO adapters.One of the lugs on 6 o'clock side broke clean off.YesSN not in picturehttps://www.watchuseek.com/f17/g-sh...-parts-broken-off-988963-15.html#post215810104Aug 23, 2016OrbsaMember did not described what caused the breakage. Member was using 3d-printed plastic NATO adapters.Both lugs on 6 o'clock side broke clean off.YesSN not in picturehttps://www.watchuseek.com/f17/g-sh...-parts-broken-off-988963-16.html#post325718265Jan 2, 2016maxcat74Not sure when the breakage actually occurred, member found the breakage only when inspecting it in a later day.Both lugs on 6 o'clock side broke clean off.YesPartial: ...A317Dhttps://www.watchuseek.com/f17/broken-lugs-gw-9400-1-a-2733658.html#post241361946May 3, 2016BushcatMember fell off his quad (ATV) and broke off all 4 lugs of the watch. He bent his wrist back hard and he had the band fairly tight (second from the last holes).All 4 lugs broke clean off.YesSN not in picturehttps://www.watchuseek.com/f17/broken-lugs-gw-9400-1-a-2733658-7.html#post28874362

The latest official count in the forum totals 900 some ownerships of the Rangeman GW9400 models. Even if you exclude all the multiple Rangeman collectors, there are still 560 some "lone rangers". So 6 incidents is statistically a small number, especially 1 of them was a severe accident (to the watch) and should be excluded.

From the ones I'm able to read the partial SN from the pictures, it's clear they are from different batches. It is interesting that most of them broke off lugs on the 6 o'clock side (inner wrist / thumb side wrist), and not the 12 o'clock side (outer wrist / pinky side wrist). Not sure why that is.


----------



## WES51 (Mar 30, 2016)

Watch_Geekmaster said:


> I know this Rangeman lug issue has gotten a little sensitive lately. I would like to take a neutral stance on this issue. I hope that we can continue with this discussion in a civil manner and in the basis of science and engineering.


I feel the same way.

If people can't voice their critical opinions for fear of being marginalized, then what credibility has any of the other information on this forum?

Having said that, when I spoke up about my personal reservations and unfulfilled expectations about the issue, I was trying to do so in a way that respects all happy and satisfied Rangeman owners. It is important to me and I keep it that way.

However I also have to note, that looking at the Rangeman's lug desing from an engineering standpoint, the current lug design is substantially weakened by the strap cutout, particularly if compared to what it could have been without that cutout. There is no point in discussing this what so ever, anybody who has even just a hint of engineering spirit will recognize that at first sight.

So how do we move on?

While some people might see that design as a lost opportunity in stregth, others might come to the conclusion that the design is strong enough as it is. Whether the Rangeman's lug design is adequate of not, depends on the users intended application, which is a personal matter!


----------



## Watch_Geekmaster (Oct 4, 2014)

To add, while 5 incidents (excluding #6 in the table above) is a small statistic to the sheer number of Rangeman ownership, due to the similar manner of the lug breakage, they are clearly NOT isolated incidents or just coincidences. We also can not ignore the simple physics of the lever effect of the non-connecting lug screws, as point out by numerous members in the beginning of this thread and illustrated by me in another thread (illustration shown here again below).









In my humble educated opinion, I think the cause of Rangeman lug breakage was likely due to the combination of the following factors:


Lever effect of the non-connecting lug screws
Over-tightened lug screws would weaken the lugs prematurely
Bigger "u-shape" cut out under each lug (as compare to other G-Shocks with similar lug design)
Wider distance between the lugs on each side (as compare to other G-Shocks with similar lug design)
Lugs are more exposed on the edge of the wrist and more susceptible to angular momentum from the strap, due the larger/wider case design.
Users tend to wear the watch in a tighter manner, partially due to the larger/wider case design.
Use of NATO adapters would increase the stress on the lugs


----------



## Uberyk (Nov 30, 2010)

Watch_Geekmaster said:


> To add, while 5 incidents (excluding #6 in the table above) is a small statistic to the sheer number of Rangeman ownership, due to the similar manner of the lug breakage, they are clearly NOT isolated incidents or just coincidences. We also can not ignore the simple physics of the lever effect of the non-connecting lug screws, as point out by numerous members in the beginning of this thread and illustrated by me in another thread (illustration shown here again below).
> 
> View attachment 9271474
> 
> ...


I've had mine on a notched NATO (no adapters) for a few days now. Guess I should have a look to see if that's added any stress or deformed the screw bars in any way.
Maybe I'll stop by a tattoo/piercing place to see if they'll sell a needle or two to use as a connector for the screwbars.


----------



## Time4Playnow (Jun 27, 2011)

Watch_Geekmaster said:


> I know this Rangeman lug issue has gotten a little sensitive lately. I would like to take a neutral stance on this issue. I hope that we can continue with this discussion in a civil manner and in the basis of science and engineering.
> 
> Here's a summary of all the incidents being reported in this forum so far.
> 
> ...


Never mind. I went back and read the first post in this thread, and it is possible that the user did not do anything out of the ordinary in terms of "bending the wristband a little bit apart." I would delete this post, but can't now, so just ignore.

Now, I am going to do my best to quit reading any additional threads or posts about this issue. It has no more interest to me... ;-)


----------



## hoss (Nov 1, 2014)

Has Casio "improved" the chemical composition of the resin case for the Rangeman to strengthen the lugs? I've been reading up about all the lug failures that has been happening to this model and I'm wondering whether or not Casio has made any "improvements" in making the resin case more durable to prevent lug breakage? Does anybody have any "ins" with Casio regarding this?


----------



## watchw (Sep 29, 2012)

I just bought a Rangeman too, and also worried. 
It feels like the connection between the strap and case is too stiff if that nakes any sense. 
It lacks flexibility which leads me to believe it will have more chances of breaking. 
I Bought the G Shock because it's tough and durable, and I'm a little bummed out now.


----------



## hoss (Nov 1, 2014)

watchw said:


> I just bought a Rangeman too, and also worried.
> It feels like the connection between the strap and case is too stiff if that nakes any sense.
> It lacks flexibility which leads me to believe it will have more chances of breaking.
> I Bought the G Shock because it's tough and durable, and I'm a little bummed out now.


Don't be bummed out. I just got my Rangeman too and am wearing it a lot. The watch feels light and it's comfortable on my wrist. I believe that the lug design that the Rangeman has is also present in other older G-Shocks like the older Gulfman. Maybe Casio has fixed the issue by using stronger resin material on the Rangeman's resin case and lugs.


----------



## Time4Playnow (Jun 27, 2011)

watchw said:


> I just bought a Rangeman too, and also worried.
> It feels like the connection between the strap and case is too stiff if that nakes any sense.
> It lacks flexibility which leads me to believe it will have more chances of breaking.
> I Bought the G Shock because it's tough and durable, and I'm a little bummed out now.


With all due respect, why worry? There are members on this forum who have worn the Rangeman a LOT, and subjected it to a lot of abuse, with no ill effects to the watch. (one example, Yankeexpress, who has a dozen or so Rangemen, and wears them while at work on a SHIP, banging it/them into all kinds of things most likely. Yet, he has never had a lug problem.)

Not sure what you mean by saying the "connection between the strap and the case is too stiff." Uhhhhh, I think pretty much all Gs are like that. Does not appear to be any kind of design flaw to me.

BUT if you are going to worry about it, perhaps better to send it back and get a different model.



hoss said:


> Don't be bummed out. I just got my Rangeman too and am wearing it a lot. The watch feels light and it's comfortable on my wrist. I believe that the lug design that the Rangeman has is also present in other older G-Shocks like the older Gulfman. *Maybe Casio has fixed the issue by using stronger resin material on the Rangeman's resin case and lugs*.


Probably wishful thinking. Why would Casio do this for an issue that is statistically insignificant?? 5 possibly legit issues on this forum out of 900+ Rangeman watches is not even worth discussing.

Now, if you want to talk about G problems, we could talk about the Gv2 (Gulfmaster v2) and the many problems that model has had - problems that have been FAR FAR more prevalent than those of the Rangeman! And yet, we are not aware that Casio has done ANYTHING about that problem. There are still reports of people buying that watch and having problems.


----------



## hoss (Nov 1, 2014)

You bring up a really legitimate argument here about the Gulfmaster V2. My question is WHY hasn't Casio mentioned anything about all the problems that the Gulfmaster V2 has? Why doesn't Casio bring this issue into light and to fix the problem?
As for the Rangemaster, I would think that if only 12 people have had the problem with the broken lugs since 2013 when the Rangeman came into the market, that these are isolated incidents. Casio has probably already sold thousands of Rangeman G-Shocks. Most of the people who have experienced the broken lugs have changed the band on their Rangeman with ZULU and NATO bands or have worn the watch too tight on their wrist and exerted lots of pressure on the watch by bending their wrists in extreme positions while lifting weights or playing sports.


----------



## Scratchesaddcharacter (Nov 13, 2016)

Wonder whether the size of your wrist has any bearing on the lug problem, for instance my Rangeman fits perfectly and doesn't look oversized on my wrist. Bending my wrist backwards doesn't press against the sensors button. Maybe on smaller or shorter wrists the strap is pulled in on itself more when fastened.

i have seen some Rangeman on the wrist photos on here and they look like they are being worn by a child and look really oversized. Mine looks smaller than my old ProTrek on my wrist.


----------



## Robotaz (Jan 18, 2012)

Scratchesaddcharacter said:


> Wonder whether the size of your wrist has any bearing on the lug problem, for instance my Rangeman fits perfectly and doesn't look oversized on my wrist. Bending my wrist backwards doesn't press against the sensors button. Maybe on smaller or shorter wrists the strap is pulled in on itself more when fastened.
> 
> i have seen some Rangeman on the wrist photos on here and they look like they are being worn by a child and look really oversized. Mine looks smaller than my old ProTrek on my wrist.


A little necro action...

I have a 7.5+" wrist and if the watch slides down on my hand at all, with the wrong wrist flex, it definitely looks like it could pop.

Range man is not a SHTF watch for me specifically because the lugs could break off.


----------



## hoss (Nov 1, 2014)

Robotaz said:


> A little necro action...
> 
> I have a 7.5+" wrist and if the watch slides down on my hand at all, with the wrong wrist flex, it definitely looks like it could pop.
> 
> Range man is not a SHTF watch for me specifically because the lugs could break off.


It's not going to pop off. You're dreaming.


----------



## jcombs1 (Jun 4, 2016)

Based on the pretty solid evidence listed in the thread, I think the odds are slim but never say never. I have mine on a Jays and Kay's adaptor and it appears that this may exacerbate the problem of breaking but I don't worry too much about it. Although I wasn't aware of the problem when I added the adaptors and since learning of this I am a little more careful with the watch. 

It's not a $1000 watch but $170ish to replace it is real money, it's not like replacing a $25 Timex, so I'm a little more careful but not terribly worried. Like Robotaz, I think about it more but don't obsess over it. It's just a watch after all and they make them everyday.


----------



## jcombs1 (Jun 4, 2016)

hoss said:


> It's not going to pop off. You're dreaming.


Ask the 6-7 people who's watch busted if they are dreaming.

I'd be curious if those who have broken the lugs off their Rangeman replaced it with another Rangeman, I'm not sure I would. I really like the watch but not sure I would want another if it happened to mine, depends on the scenario and how it happened I guess.

Pretty low odds of it happening but it would suck to be the next one on the list....


----------



## Robotaz (Jan 18, 2012)

jcombs1 said:


> Ask the 6-7 people who's watch busted if they are dreaming.
> 
> I'd be curious if those who have broken the lugs off their Rangeman replaced it with another Rangeman, I'm not sure I would. I really like the watch but not sure I would want another if it happened to mine, depends on the scenario and how it happened I guess.
> 
> Pretty low odds of it happening but it would suck to be the next one on the list....


I can flex my wrist and see that it would definitely break if I kept flexing harder. I don't even reply to the fanboys who can't stomach the notion, but it most definitely is a bad design and can break.


----------



## Time4Playnow (Jun 27, 2011)

Robotaz said:


> *I can flex my wrist and see that it would definitely break if I kept flexing harder.* I don't even reply to the fanboys who can't stomach the notion, but it most definitely is a bad design and can break.


If that's true, then you are wearing it too tight.


----------



## Robotaz (Jan 18, 2012)

Time4Playnow said:


> If that's true, then you are wearing it too tight.


LOL. Thanks for that insight. All of these hundreds of watches I've owned and I still have no clue what I'm talking about. Thankfully, I have you.


----------



## Time4Playnow (Jun 27, 2011)

Robotaz said:


> LOL. Thanks for that insight. All of these hundreds of watches I've owned and I still have no clue what I'm talking about. Thankfully, I have you.


Yes, apparently so! ;-)

What I know is that I've owned many Rangeman watches, still own some, and there is NO WAY a "wrist flex" is going to break one of them unless: a) you are wearing it very tight or b) you have wrists similar to those of Lou Ferrigno. Perhaps "b" is true, I don't know...


----------



## Danfried (Aug 27, 2016)

Even though the "traditional" rule of thumb is that a strap or bracelet should be loose enough that you can slip one finger under it, I've seen plenty of wrist shots of watch nerds who wear theirs so tight that the flesh is literally bulging out around it. Baffling.

Anyway, if it was really so easy to break a lug on a Rangeman just by flexing your wrist, we wouldn't have just 6 failures out of a thousand, we'd have literally hundreds of people who did it unintentionally from falling down, doing sports, etc.


----------



## Robotaz (Jan 18, 2012)

Time4Playnow said:


> Yes, apparently so! ;-)
> 
> What I know is that I've owned many Rangeman watches, still own some, and there is NO WAY a "wrist flex" is going to break one of them unless: a) you are wearing it very tight or b) you have wrists similar to those of Lou Ferrigno. Perhaps "b" is true, I don't know...


It's wearing the watch too loose that's the problem. Slides down where the wrist expands to the hand, flex, break. I can watch mine stretching way too hard from basic flexing unless I tighten it.


----------



## hoss (Nov 1, 2014)

Time4Playnow said:


> Yes, apparently so! ;-)
> 
> What I know is that I've owned many Rangeman watches, still own some, and there is NO WAY a "wrist flex" is going to break one of them unless: a) you are wearing it very tight or b) you have wrists similar to those of Lou Ferrigno. Perhaps "b" is true, I don't know...


I agree. I wear mine 24/7 and I've never had a problem with it.


----------



## billford (Nov 11, 2017)

Got this from a utube video.

Maybe this is what causes the lugs to break. Looks like the watch is worn too far down the wrist. Seems the lugs would be stressed if he flexes his hand, like doing pushups like the OP did.


----------



## hoss (Nov 1, 2014)

I haven't had any problems "yet" with the lugs breaking off or cracking on my GW9400 Rangeman. It is what it is. Casio should've designed the lugs to not have that stupid indentation between the inside of each lug and the watch case. That's where the weak point is located which causes all the stress between the inside of each lug that makes the lug to break and snap off. Casio could've fixed this problem a very long time ago. Anyways, I've been wearing my 3 Rangeman G-Shocks since the spring time and so far, I haven't had any problems with any of them yet. I intend to wear these watches until they get all worn out and deteriorate and die. I don't abuse them, but I also don't baby them either. Mine are worn 24/7 and have gone thru lots of water, showers, oceans, seas, swimming pools, flying, driving, screwing, work and sleep time. My Rangeman G-Shocks rarely come off my wrist. They are workhorses and studs.


----------



## Dunkeljoanito (Feb 27, 2015)

I don’t like the oem strap so since day 1 I use a strap adapter with a nato straps and that works fine and it is way more comfortable 


Hickory, dickory, dock.
The mouse ran up the clock.


----------



## billford (Nov 11, 2017)

Doesn't the DG400 have a better strap design compared to the Rangeman?

It has long screw pins and a sleeve that look like it goes through a metal part of the watch case.

Looks a lot stronger compared to what the Rangeman has.


----------



## grinch_actual (Sep 22, 2017)

As a massive fan of the Rangeman, this post will certainly come off as biased. But this thread stinks, there is something deeply suspect that all 6 people that experienced this issue were not usual members to this forum. This implies(too me) a lack of knowledge/experience with G-Shock, on the posters part. If I'am right, 4 out of 6 were "modified" with NATOs. ANYTHING modified is at the mercy of the persons experience(or lack thereof). One situation I can see these lugs failing is if the watch was caught on solid object(work bench, etc), and the wearers weight or excreted force is pushed on the watch. The lugs are the weak point compared to the strap/watch. The fact is, in this type of situation the wearer would WANT the watch to fail least the watch transfers that force to the wearers arm. If someone reads this thread and it turns 'em off to the Rangeman or G-Shocks in general, that is their prerogative. But it is at their loss. 

I have 3 Rangeman with JAYSANDKAYS with ZULU straps. HEAVY use and zero problems. And that is why I have three.


----------



## MaverickMCS (Sep 26, 2013)

billford said:


> View attachment 12691785
> Doesn't the DG400 have a better strap design compared to the Rangeman? It has long screw pins and a sleeve that look like it goes through a metal part of the watch case. Looks a lot stronger compared to what the Rangeman has.


 Some members suggested a few pages back that using screws like these would have made the Range a lot sturdier...


----------



## Crewdawakening (Jan 7, 2018)

Ok so I am new here and just want to say ahead of time I have several Gshocks and quite a few nice watches. However this Rangeman is A huge disappointment . Hear me out. Bought this as a watch to wear to work and a daily driver while on the boat. I work as an engineer in an engine room. this tab problem on the gshock is more common than you think. Since paying the 105$ to send it in to Casio twice and speakeing with their customer service extensively this is definitely and issue. I have now broken the tabs for a third time. With that said. I do not post on forums just lurk in the background but this issue needs to be addressed. I do not have any fancy band just wear it how it came out the box.


----------



## Time4Playnow (Jun 27, 2011)

Crewdawakening said:


> Ok so I am new here and just want to say ahead of time I have several Gshocks and quite a few nice watches. However this Rangeman is A huge disappointment . Hear me out. Bought this as a watch to wear to work and a daily driver while on the boat. I work as an engineer in an engine room. this tab problem on the gshock is more common than you think. Since paying the 105$ to send it in to Casio twice and speakeing with their customer service extensively this is definitely and issue. I have now broken the tabs for a third time. With that said. I do not post on forums just lurk in the background but this issue needs to be addressed. I do not have any fancy band just wear it how it came out the box.


DETAILS are needed. How, exactly, did you break the lugs on your Rangeman, THREE times? What kind of temps and water (salt water?) is the watch subjected to?


----------



## Crewdawakening (Jan 7, 2018)

Ok so I work on the water but in the engine room so no real salt water to speak of. And yes I have paid Casio twice to fix it, now I just unscrew the screws and gently place it back together and rescrew it until something slightly catches it and it falls off again. From an engineering standpoint this is an obvious flaw. I know someone is going to say I am too rough on it. I do experience slightly warm temps as my work environment can reach upwards of 120degrees. This last time it broke was taking off a backpack(the strap caught it) and low and behold it was sitting on the ground. I am not sure if that was the time of failur or just when it let go. Also a side note is the glass face on this watch is pretty junky as well seeing as degreaser etched the surface of all three watches. I can understand this out of a 20$ timed but seriously a gshock?I have a master of g something or another that has been flawless and wonderful. I only got this watch because it was advertised as fairly maintenance free accurate and had an easy to access timer which I use often. Other than that my reactor watches have held up much better but they are all simple analogs. I guess what I am getting at is that it is kinda offensive for people to say six failures out of x many must be that those six people are too rough. Well g shock is supposed to be intended for those that may actually get dirty have calluses and consider sweating a daily activity. And as such should hold up to a decent amount of beating. Now with over four hundred dollars in this watch it is still broken and it chaps my hind parts.


----------



## Time4Playnow (Jun 27, 2011)

Crewdawakening said:


> Ok so I work on the water but in the engine room so no real salt water to speak of. And yes I have paid Casio twice to fix it, now I just unscrew the screws and gently place it back together and rescrew it until something slightly catches it and it falls off again. From an engineering standpoint this is an obvious flaw. I know someone is going to say I am too rough on it. I do experience slightly warm temps as my work environment can reach upwards of 120degrees. This last time it broke was taking off a backpack(the strap caught it) and low and behold it was sitting on the ground. I am not sure if that was the time of failur or just when it let go. Also a side note is the glass face on this watch is pretty junky as well seeing as degreaser etched the surface of all three watches. I can understand this out of a 20$ timed but seriously a gshock?I have a master of g something or another that has been flawless and wonderful. I only got this watch because it was advertised as fairly maintenance free accurate and had an easy to access timer which I use often. Other than that my reactor watches have held up much better but they are all simple analogs. I guess what I am getting at is that it is kinda offensive for people to say six failures out of x many must be that those six people are too rough. Well g shock is supposed to be intended for those that may actually get dirty have calluses and consider sweating a daily activity. And as such should hold up to a decent amount of beating. Now with over four hundred dollars in this watch it is still broken and it chaps my hind parts.


G-shocks have shock resistance, yes, including the Rangeman. However it is not guaranteed to withstand strong pulling by the strap or catching on something to where it is ripped off of your arm. Clearly a tearing or ripping force on the strap will cause a problem. There's another member here who works on a ship, he has given the Rangeman a lot of hard use on the ship and it's held up just fine.

Suggest you get a watch with the strap attached by springbars, so that if the strap is pulled hard, the springbar would break first. Try a Victorinox INOX. Or, there are other Casios that use spring bars.


----------



## WES51 (Mar 30, 2016)

Sorry, but any apologies for the Rangemans NOW PROVEN OBVIOUS LUG WEAKNESS from this point on are not only no longer cool, they are an outright INSULT to the original G-Shock spirit.

Kikuo Ibe was not an apologist as he seeked to create the ultimate watch design. It would be a real shame if his legacy would be watered down by leghtly creative essay apologies exactly by his most loyal followers.

Don't get me wrong. I'm still a fan and I think of the Rangeman as it is an awesome watch !!!

But I'm tired of seing the same apologetic discussions over and over again.

Apologists argue that the Rangemans lug desing is adequately strong as practical use experience shows, while people who expect more, RIGHTFULLY insists that they want it to be so strong, that not just practical use, but even an outright abusive use can't break it.

So let me call out all the apoligists and ask: what in the world is wrong with someone wanting a G-Shock watch with a WORTHY, MATCHING gorilla stong strap design?

What is all this resisting and apologies about?

Why can't a reasonable person ask for a SUPPOSEDLY tough watch that to be immune of braking a case under hard use?

Especially since such lug design already exist in other Casios, e.g. see ProTrek line (so don't even start with other creative apologies like that a braking point in the Rangans lugs was purposely introduced as a safety feature to save the users arm, because if so, then where is such "safety" feature in the ProTreks).

Last but not least, I even tested a fake $10 SKMEI Rangeman as I successfully lifted a 40 punds of water in 5 gallon water bucket with it's buckled straps. To put things in perspecitve, that is close to the same 200 Newton force that Frogmans straps are tested under ISO 6425.








I hereby challenge any apologists to post any matching pictures of their Rangeman under such test OR admit that even a cheap fake SKMEIs lug design is strogner than that of the Rangeman.


----------



## Time4Playnow (Jun 27, 2011)

WES51 said:


> Sorry, but any apologies for the Rangemans NOW PROVEN OBVIOUS LUG WEAKNESS from this point on are not only no longer cool, they are an outright INSULT to the original G-Shock spirit.
> 
> Kikuo Ibe was not an apologist as he seeked to create the ultimate watch design. It would be a real shame if his legacy would be watered down by leghtly creative essay apologies exactly by his most loyal followers.
> 
> ...


Wow. Just wow. So now, I guess we all owe a debt of gratitude to WES51. Because now he, and he alone, has officially declared with certainty that the Rangeman has a PROVEN OBVIOUS LUG WEAKNESS. Never mind the fact that we don't really know just how this last gent's watch allegedly broke. (the first, second, or 3rd time)

So what was it - the 6th, or the 7th total case of Rangeman lug breakage that was the final straw to declare that yes, NOW we know there's a proven problem? (better not tell yankeexpress, he might have to sell all of his dozen or so Rangemen that he's used on ships without any problems)

This is one of the most amusing posts I've read in awhile. Water down Kikuo Ibe's legacy?? Where do you come up with this stuff?? :-d

Let me clue you into reality just a bit. The "Triple 10" concept said NOTHING about creating a watch with a "gorilla strong" strap. If that's what you want, perhaps you should go with a steel bracelet. Or a SKMEI. I can guarantee you that if I tried to apply a strong pulling force to each of my Gs with a resin strap, I could break nearly all of them. (and a SKMEI, too) Is that a weakness? No. The watch is not designed to resist a force that would almost never be applied to the watch under normal use. In all of my years of wearing watches, I cannot recall a single instance in which the watch snagged on something to the point where it was going to be ripped off of my arm. That's just not natural OR common.

Casio NEVER said that g-shocks could not be damaged or destroyed. They are SHOCK RESISTANT. Not resistant to any and all forces that might be applied to the watch.

Clearly, since WES51 has declared once and for all that the Rangeman has a proven, obvious lug weakness, the mods can close this thread. No further discussion necessary.

Me, I'll probably sell my 3 current Rangers and buy SKMEIs. :roll::roll::roll:


----------



## Steelerswit (Oct 4, 2016)

First, wow! I'm usually the one getting infractions and deleted posts for being to controversial or aggressive.

Second, Volvo and Subaru are supposedly the safest cars on the market, designed with almost every conceivable safety feature. Yet, despite the "they survived" commercials, people do die in them in accidents. Stuff happens. 

Call me an apologist, or anything else, I've been called every name in the book in multiple languages, but I still will not say there is a design flaw. Could it be better? For some the answer is yes, other will say it fine. But in this age of internet rant fest (facebook,Twitter,imagur etc) there would be more voices screaming "I'm suing". If little trivial things create a viral rage, a $200-300 watch fiasco would clog every feed and status.

I'm off to pause Armitron watches now~

Sent from Capt. Kirk's Communicator


----------



## grinch_actual (Sep 22, 2017)

Here is a back to back photos of the Rangeman and Mudman. Not much of a difference. No Mudman complaints though.

If someone doesn't trust the Rangeman, don't buy it. But coming here to complain about it won't solve anything. I don't have GShock on speed dial. And I sure as $#!% dont have to take their word for it.

Plus I trust my Rangemans more then some random poster who I don't know. If someone has a problem with GShock, that's fine, but that does not mean I have to agree with it.


----------



## Steelerswit (Oct 4, 2016)

grinch_actual said:


> Here is a back to back photos of the Rangeman and Mudman. Not much of a difference. No Mudman complaints though.
> 
> If someone doesn't trust the Rangeman, don't buy it. But coming here to complain about it won't solve anything. I don't have GShock on speed dial. And I sure as $#!% dont have to take their word for it.
> 
> ...


Yeah, but you wear your watch backwards...maybe that's the secret?

Sent from Capt. Kirk's Communicator


----------



## WES51 (Mar 30, 2016)

At issue here is that other than the repeated anecdotal stories, we have is no quantifiable comparison for the Rangemans lugstrength. At least not YET. Hence my challenge!

If anyone is so confident about his/her Ragemans lug stregth, then please DARE posting some pictures in a similar test setting as I tested the SKMEI watch. If the Rangeman is as strong as claimed, no harm should be done. Right?

What is this watch capable of other than the same old recited legendary anecdotal myths of _working on a ship_ and similar?

Show me a Rangeman holding HALF as much as the cheapo full lugged SKMEI. So instead of 40 pounds, show it holding 20 pounds of water or show it holding 10 pounds. Show me ANYTHING. Do you DARE?

The problem here is that all those who are relentlessly defending the Rangemans lug design, know at their heart and rightfully worried that their Rangemans lugs would likely not even survive the easiest version of such test. They will rather change the subject away from any quantitative testing and keep the discussion in the empirical evidence area.

*My question to those fans is WHY?

And I beg your pardon, WHAT do you think is MY OBJECTIVE here?*

Did I ever come across to anyone here as some sort of nagging person on F17? Or did I somehow change overnight into a nagging person? Can you really not imagine that there is something POSITIVE that I or anyone else that brings up this contested subject would like to see coming out of this?

Or would you honestly love to see future Casio releases with the Rangeman's current lug design?

*My point is where there is no outcry and no challenge there is no progress.*

Apologists have not accomplished anything in the world. It is your call.


----------



## Eric.S (Oct 2, 2017)

Is my understanding wrong all along or is the original claim of G's shock resistance only applies to the core movement. That is, if it's still ticking, it passes the test. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Deepsea_dweller (Mar 1, 2013)

WES51 said:


> At issue here is that other than the repeated anecdotal stories, we have is no quantifiable comparison for the Rangemans lugstrength. At least not YET. Hence my challenge!
> 
> If anyone is so confident about his/her Ragemans lug stregth, then please DARE posting some pictures in a similar test setting as I tested the SKMEI watch. If the Rangeman is as strong as claimed, no harm should be done. Right?
> 
> ...


Really wondering why you don't get yourself a Ranger and find it all out ( first hand ) ... it won't cost you a fortune!


----------



## WES51 (Mar 30, 2016)

Deepsea_dweller said:


> Really wondering why you don't get yourself a Ranger and find it all out ( first hand ) ... it won't cost you a fortune!


Well, for one thing because I'm challenging and not defending the Rangemans lug design.

And my challenge calls on those who until now were defending the Rangemans lug design with endless essays of hersay, to start defending it with numbers. I already showed what a full lugged watch is able to handle. It is now their turn to dare to submit their anecdotally strong Rangemans to the same test, then possibly brake their lugs and then report back if they still feel the same way about the Rangemans lug designs strength.

I myself have enough engineering understanding to recognize a weakness when I see it. So why should I pay my own money to see a Rangeman lug failing, when I already know it will.

Make no mistake about it, there is no way this design will hold 20 pounds as in my previously mentioned setup, indeed I would be very surprised if it would hold 10 pounds.

Additionally ANYBODY in engineering will confirm any time, that the type of "left out slot" like the one on Rangeman is a not only a brake prone area, it is actually a type of design element that an engineer would purposely use to introduce a breaking point. But even that angle was already discussed and pointed out in other threads.


----------



## grinch_actual (Sep 22, 2017)

Sorry a little blurry but I was lifting up and down whilst taking pictures. 10 reps.


----------



## WES51 (Mar 30, 2016)

grinch_actual said:


> Sorry a little blurry but I was lifting up and down whilst taking pictures. 10 reps.
> View attachment 12792383
> View attachment 12792385
> View attachment 12792387
> ...


You have guts Sir!

Although this is 20 pounds, I concede the challenge. There is nothing to argue with 20 pounds lifted.

I will maintain though that the "hollowed out design" is inherently weakening the design vs. its full potential otherwise.

I trust you have not done (or would have otherwise disclosed) any enhancement modification of the original design such as connecting the strap retaining pins behind that NATO adapter.


----------



## grinch_actual (Sep 22, 2017)

WES51 said:


> You have guts Sir!
> 
> Although this is 20 pounds, I concede the challenge. There is nothing to argue with 20 pounds lifted.
> 
> ...


Negative on any mods(other then the adapters and strap). I wish the photos were clearer. I will add that the weight was sliding back and forth from one end to the other as I was lifting. I do not know how much added pressure/stress was added by that movement. But it does simulate at least some "shock" and added stresses.


----------



## WES51 (Mar 30, 2016)

grinch_actual said:


> Negative on any mods(other then the adapters and strap). I wish the photos were clearer. I will add that the weight was sliding back and forth from one end to the other as I was lifting. I do not know how much added pressure/stress was added by that movement. But it does simulate at least some "shock" and added stresses.


I agree, I catched the occasional uneven weight distribution on your pictures right away. So that shall count as extra weight. Further kudos to your Rangeman for enduring this brute test despite the NATO adapter, which is otherwise generally considered weakening the design to begin with.

I'm truly happy that I was proven wrong.


----------



## grinch_actual (Sep 22, 2017)

Brighter after action photo of the Rangeman. No visible damage.


----------



## Steelerswit (Oct 4, 2016)

20lbs plus torque on a NATO. So, where do we go now? Saying its just one test? Or go around in circles ad nauseam?

Sent from Capt. Kirk's Communicator


----------



## grinch_actual (Sep 22, 2017)

Steelerswit said:


> 20lbs plus torque on a NATO. So, where do we go now? Saying its just one test? Or go around in circles ad nauseam?
> 
> Sent from Capt. Kirk's Communicator


I couldn't care less if there are still naysayers. That's on them. If their watch breaks, they are accountable. Everything has a breaking point. So if someone exceeds that, don't start whining about a bad design/defective product.


----------



## Steelerswit (Oct 4, 2016)

Mudman, same strap / lug design. 5 gal water, 2 finger lift.










Sent from Capt. Kirk's Communicator


----------



## WES51 (Mar 30, 2016)

Steelerswit said:


> Mudman, same strap / lug design. 5 gal water, 2 finger lift.


Very impressive!
I concede even more. Master.


----------



## GaryK30 (Dec 14, 2014)

Steelerswit said:


> Mudman
> 
> Sent from Capt. Kirk's Communicator


Looks like a Gulfman.


----------



## GWATCH75 (Feb 7, 2017)

This is a great thread regarding the weak point of the rangeman 9400. new rangeman owners should be aware.


----------



## Georgewg (Dec 31, 2018)

Have anymore lugs on GW9400 Rangeman G-Shocks broken off like this? It seems that the flange on the lugs is too thin causing them to snap off when stress is applied to them. Casio needs to redesign the lugs on the GW9400 Rangeman to make them 4mm thick instead of the 2mm thickness.

The great John Holmes wears a digital watch and Ron Jeremy wears Crocs.


----------



## coltpeacemaker041 (Jul 21, 2012)

All these years later not a single problem from anyone else! No doubt an overreaction to a problem that was never there.


----------



## Mr.Jones82 (Jul 15, 2018)

coltpeacemaker041 said:


> All these years later not a single problem from anyone else! No doubt an overreaction to a problem that was never there.


Right? Hahaha Yet Lug-gate still gets trotted out every month or so. I have put my olive green Rangeman through quite a lot (tossed it 10 feet across the room to my brother to only have it smack the wooden floor, not to mention dozens of hikes scrambling over rocks, etc.) and not a single issue. People tend to confuse anomalies with normality. All it takes is one person with a bullhorn, i.e. the internet.


----------



## Georgewg (Dec 31, 2018)

You do know that the lugs are prone to snapping off when a lot of pressure is applied to them, don't you? It's a proven fact. the engineering design of the space underneath the lugs weakens them which causes them to break off.


----------



## wrsmith (Mar 7, 2014)

coltpeacemaker041 said:


> All these years later not a single problem from anyone else! No doubt an overreaction to a problem that was never there.


I have seen multiple reports (and pics) of broken GW9400 lugs on reddit in the last couple of years. Dozens if you include "me too" posts in the comments.


----------



## coltpeacemaker041 (Jul 21, 2012)

Georgewg said:


> You do know that the lugs are prone to snapping off when a lot of pressure is applied to them, don't you? It's a proven fact. the engineering design of the space underneath the lugs weakens them which causes them to break off.


As a soldier in the Australian army, I can tell you my 9400 has been under more punishment than the average civi would put the watch under, and I've never had a problem including five others in my unit that also reports good things about it. I'm not doubting you had a problem but I find it hard to believe they are inherently weak.


----------



## coltpeacemaker041 (Jul 21, 2012)

Georgewg said:


> You do know that the lugs are prone to snapping off when a lot of pressure is applied to them, don't you? It's a proven fact. the engineering design of the space underneath the lugs weakens them which causes them to break off.


Yeah I bet I could break it to if bent back to a ridiculous position


----------



## Deepsea_dweller (Mar 1, 2013)

Wait 4 TT aka @Tetsu Tekubi to chime in on this topic ... 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Georgewg (Dec 31, 2018)

Deepsea_dweller said:


> Wait 4 TT aka @Tetsu Tekubi to chime in on this topic ...
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


What for?


----------



## Georgewg (Dec 31, 2018)

wrsmith said:


> I have seen multiple reports (and pics) of broken GW9400 lugs on reddit in the last couple of years. Dozens if you include "me too" posts in the comments.


I believe you buddy. Most people in here don't want to believe this because they probably don't know about these incidents.


----------



## wrsmith (Mar 7, 2014)

Georgewg said:


> I believe you buddy. Most people in here don't want to believe this because they probably don't know about these incidents.


By the way, it is not my intention to overstate the issue. I merely correct the claim that there have been no more broken lugs all these years later, "not a single problem". This is not the case.


----------



## Georgewg (Dec 31, 2018)

I agree with you on that.


----------



## grinch_actual (Sep 22, 2017)

My 3 Rangeman are still working. Should I throw them away just to be on the safe side?


----------



## Malay Dixit (Oct 14, 2020)

coltpeacemaker041 said:


> As a soldier in the Australian army, I can tell you my 9400 has been under more punishment than the average civi would put the watch under, and I've never had a problem including five others in my unit that also reports good things about it. I'm not doubting you had a problem but I find it hard to believe they are inherently weak.


I agree with him on this for sure..


----------



## Time4Playnow (Jun 27, 2011)

grinch_actual said:


> My 3 Rangeman are still working. Should I throw them away just to be on the safe side?


Naaaah. That would be a waste of good watches. Instead, just put them on display, under glass, but be sure to never wear them. That way you'll be certain to never break the ultra-fragile lugs that have imploded for umpteen millions of users.


----------



## Malay Dixit (Oct 14, 2020)

WES51 said:


> Well, for one thing because I'm challenging and not defending the Rangemans lug design.
> 
> And my challenge calls on those who until now were defending the Rangemans lug design with endless essays of hersay, to start defending it with numbers. I already showed what a full lugged watch is able to handle. It is now their turn to dare to submit their anecdotally strong Rangemans to the same test, then possibly brake their lugs and then report back if they still feel the same way about the Rangemans lug designs strength.
> 
> ...


What an actual waste of time.. who actually in practical use does it.. me in military puts a watch to the most rigorous of uses that includes all harsh environments and extreme test.. never have I faced any of this on any watch.. not even on a timex leave alone Gshocks. This watch is been with me for a minimal time for about 3/4 months.. I have not seen any type of issue with lugs or any other parts.. Buddy I think the watch is to be worn not used as weights extensions.. don't take me wrong..



grinch_actual said:


> Sorry a little blurry but I was lifting up and down whilst taking pictures. 10 reps.
> View attachment 12792383
> View attachment 12792385
> View attachment 12792387
> ...


in the face.. although you have more guts than I can say.. but honestly who does this with his watch in real life.. most of the cases that I have read on snapping of cases were intentional.. although my knowledge is little less on this.. but I think it holds up fine..


----------



## WES51 (Mar 30, 2016)

Malay Dixit said:


> @WES51 brother I don't know what vent up emotions you have for this but I believe you can get over this


I'm not sure if you do realize, that you have dug up and were responding to a few years old post of mine, that I have posted as a challenge, which in the meantime I have already conceded (see my post #206 of Jan 9, 2018). All thanks to @grinch_actual, who has actually delivered (!)

Otherwise, I think this is what people are referring to when they mention 'digging up a hatchet'.


----------



## coltpeacemaker041 (Jul 21, 2012)

Y


grinch_actual said:


> My 3 Rangeman are still working. Should I throw them away just to be on the safe side?


Yes at once! I will safely dispose off them for you just send them asap! lol


----------



## nonconformulaic (Nov 10, 2015)

You all will have probably already seen it, but I just posted a poll that _might_ get us close to real insights AND help unite the f17 community on this very contentious issue... Thanks in advance to any f17 members who read the WHOLE thread and contribute to the poll.

"The Great Rangeman Lug War" Poll

Stay healthy f17!


----------



## wrsmith (Mar 7, 2014)

The issue is quite straightforward.

The lugs are weak and more prone to break than those of the average G-Shock
Most owners will not experience broken lugs
That's it. Simple.


----------



## coltpeacemaker041 (Jul 21, 2012)

wrsmith said:


> The issue is quite straightforward.
> 
> The lugs are weak and more prone to break than those of the average G-Shock
> Most owners will not experience broken lugs
> That's it. Simple.


We will have to agree to disagree!


----------



## Malay Dixit (Oct 14, 2020)

WES51 said:


> I'm not sure if you do realize, that you have dug up and were responding to a few years old post of mine, that I have posted as a challenge, which in the meantime I have already conceded (see my post #206 of Jan 9, 2018). All thanks to @grinch_actual, who has actually delivered (!)
> 
> Otherwise, I think this is what people are referring to when they mention 'digging up a hatchet'.


Well my bad..!! I didn't see through the zombie thread cropping up in posts..!!
Have a happy G- day


----------



## RoverWatch (Apr 6, 2021)

Wow, this thread was a very long yet very interesting read, being an OCD freak that recently purchased a rangeman for it's vastly superior function to any other watch I know (IMHO) and hardcore design: Speaking of which...



grinch_actual said:


> Sorry a little blurry but I was lifting up and down whilst taking pictures. 10 reps.
> View attachment 12792383
> View attachment 12792385
> View attachment 12792387
> ...


YOu, Sir, are one of the most Hardcore, Bad-ass individuals I've come across on the internet! + you're 90% of the reason my Rangeman will continue to live on my wrist. Tytyty.

The rangeman is the only watch in the world with all the features I am after; Would be a shame not to be able to depend on it. 
That being said, as another individual mentioned it plain and simple; the watch lug simply has a possibility of less strength than the average G Shock,. but won't affect the majority that use the watch as intended.

Having studied physics and mechanics, I could definitely see how this issue could have been relieved somewhat in a few ways, but others have made mention of some these in other threads and posts, such as:
1. thicker attachment from 2mm to 4mm
2. steel/titanium lugs.

although these cannot be changed, one thing that can, which I think someone had mentioned in this thread- hence, resulting in a more even distribution of force on the lugs, hence less 'moment' force that leads to less likelihood of these breaks: One-piece screws.

I have drawn a simple diagram that would explain the distribution of forces comparing the 2 screw designs (I saw a similar diagram by someone within this thread, but I promise I drew this beforehand and very concidentally, it is in line with your diagram! xD (This is my first ever thread post apologies I am unsure how to quote 2 posts))








Apparently, another post mentions GW 7900 wings and PRW2500 screws work as a mod, and I can see this unconsciously helping this issue too:
Rangeman solutions on smaller wrists | WatchUSeek Watch Forums

and also someone making a custom attachment in the middle of the screws:
Rangeman Lug Reinforcement | WatchUSeek Watch Forums

If anyone has any simpler ways of doing these mods- do enlighten, haha.

These are all things I considered until I saw that 20 pound weight hanging on a damn rangeman xD. And the fact that so many people have abused it in far greater fashion than I ever will... So.
I decided, letting go of my OCD for once, I'll use the watch until this issue does or does not arise, after which I'll buy a carbon fibre strap that I'll permanently super glue to the case, if it ever comes to it- because this watch is definitely worth every ounce of the hassle. 

Thanks for this awesome thread guys, and good luck to all you Rangers out there!


----------



## Georgewg (Dec 31, 2018)

May the holy waters of the Ganges River bless you.


----------

