# Timex Ironman vs G shock



## The Wayfarer

This is a Timex ironman shock resistant 30-lap.








This is a Casio G-shock DW6900SN-7CR
How do the two watches compare? They are both 200m water proof. Which one is tougher? Which would you say is better? I am more impressed with the screen on the ironman.


----------



## gloster

The Wayfarer said:


> How do the two watches compare? They are both 200m water proof. Which one is tougher? Which would you say is better? I am more impressed with the screen on the ironman.


I have seen both in person. The Casio's case seems a nicer resin to me than the Timex. I suspect they are equally tough. The functionality of the Timex is better. For example, the Timex automatically returns to the time display on the next "MODE" push after using any other function. The Timex CDT can be set to the second versus to the minute on the Casio. For me, the Timex display is more legible.


----------



## gloster

Another difference is the pushers. The Casio design reduces the chance of accidentally pushing a button by brushing against something. On the other hand, the Timex pushers are easier to push using your whole fingertip. Personally, I prefer the protected buttons on the Casio. I have well over a hundred watches and yet I wear my G-Shock GW5600-J almost half the time.


----------



## cal..45

Can't tell which one is tougher, since I only have the Timex. But even if the G is the tougher watch, it can't hold up against the Timex in opinion. The Ironmans functions are great and very intuitive, it does all what a modern digital watch should. The display absolutely doesn't waste any estate (as opposed to the G) and is very legible. The illumination is negative which means only the digits light up what I find much preferable over an entire backlight. The strap is soft and very comfortable to wear and the strap retainer is ingenious. The watch is actually not small but it is not ridiculous large either and the size fits very well. The crystal is made of acrylic glass and should be more vulnerable to scratches, although In haven't scratched mine yet. On the other hand is acrylic more shatterproof, so it is really a mattter of taste. Overall I'm very pleased with the Timex Ironman Shock and consider it one of my jewels in my digital watches collection, especially for the price and great value. 


cheers


----------



## Toothbras

I don't own either of these models, but I do have 2 G's and a handful of Ironman models. Both seem pretty tough, I have yet to break any of them. However, as other users have said the Timex is a bit more user friendly and I use all the functions (time, chrono, timer, and alarm). Those bubbles on the G are basically useless, one is a sort of analog minute display, another tells you is it's daylight savings time and other useless junk, the only useful one is the batter/solar charge indicator. I vote Timex unless, but if you want a more useful G go with any of the 5600 models.


----------



## CADstraps

My decision would be based on the intended use. I don't own either of these, but I have lots of G's and a similar Timex. Both are equally comfortable. For all intents and purposes, they are equally tough; 'toughness' should be based on real-world use, not which can take more hits from a hammer, etc - that kind of toughness is an excersize in futility (which watch can you destroy faster? Who cares - you're left with 2 destroyed watches). 

I do find the Timex functions better on the intuitive side, but both watches function properly and responsively. I also find the Timex buttons easier to push, but I must say that while it has no happened, it would seem that over time those easy to push buttons would start to fail - they don't feel as sturdy as the Casio ones; including the G models with similar large buttons (7900, etc). 

Other than function, form is obviously important, and there is no comparision - the Timex is obviously 'borrowing' heavily from a few G lines, and I see no originality in it. I wear G's obten as an accessory, not just a tool, and I would never do that with the Timex. The G is much more stylish to my eye, and the 'useless junk' is a non-comment - basically every watch (all brands) is loaded with useless junk - useless junk is why we love watches.


----------



## lumpazi

CDT is setable to the second at *DW*6900 models.


----------



## pegase747

Got a few G-shocks, but I was always lost when doing any settings and adjustments, not intuitive at all, however the build quality is good.

I just ordered the exact same Timex in matte black, and based on the function, I would say it may even be one of the best pilot watch around ; 2 time zones, chrono, CDT to the second, Alarm, intelligent mode setting and backlighting, tough and cheap...

Also the date format can be changed to what I use, i.e Day/Month format to the US/JPN reversed Month/date which is disturbing for me and cannot be changed on G's.

Will receive it soon and think I will love it.

Pierre


----------



## CADstraps

pegase747 said:


> Also the date format can be changed to what I use, i.e Day/Month format to the US/JPN reversed Month/date which is disturbing for me and cannot be changed on G's.


Interesting. So, if someone asks you the date, you would say "the 31st of May"?

I ask seriously, not snarkily - I'm interested. I always reply in the "May 31st" format.


----------



## gloster

I'm American (month then day then year), but I find the European way (day then month then year) more logical going from smallest unit to largest. Note, I am referring to watch displays and writing down the date, e.g. 31/5/12. When asked the date, I think it depends on the language. I believe Americans, Canadians, and the British would all say "It's May 31st" or just "It's the 31st".


----------



## pegase747

CADstraps said:


> Interesting. So, if someone asks you the date, you would say "the 31st of May"?
> 
> I ask seriously, not snarkily - I'm interested. I always reply in the "May 31st" format.


I am french so yes in french, we say "le 31 Mai" ( the 31st of May ).

so that is why it is more logical to me.

Cheers Pierre


----------



## stockae92

I handled both Timex and Casio. Overall, Casio feels like a better built watch, better put together.

Given similar situation and both are working within spec, I think both of them are plenty tough.

Timex is built with better timing features. 

I would go with the features that you need, then style, price, preferences, etc


----------



## George01161

Hi all,
I went from a 5600 Gshock to the Timex especially for the ease of use.

Large digits, good backlight mode (digits only made it easy on the eyes in total dark) and most importantly it is simple to use.
As mentioned above, any use of a mode will cause the next mode press to return to the main screen, a very thoughtful feature.
The setting mode displays plus and minus buttons adjacent to the particular button, very user friendly.

As an aside, the buttons are a great to use, no fingernails required at all. Great for the price, highly recommended! 

regards,
George


----------



## pegase747

George01161 said:


> Hi all,
> I went from a 5600 Gshock to the Timex especially for the ease of use.
> 
> Large digits, good backlight mode (digits only made it easy on the eyes in total dark) and most importantly it is simple to use.
> As mentioned above, any use of a mode will cause the next mode press to return to the main screen, a very thoughtful feature.
> The setting mode displays plus and minus buttons adjacent to the particular button, very user friendly.
> 
> As an aside, the buttons are a great to use, no fingernails required at all. Great for the price, highly recommended!
> 
> regards,
> George


This exactly, received mine today, best watch I had in a long time, and I had many Rolex, Omega and the likes....

Pierre


----------



## CADstraps

pegase747 said:


> This exactly, received mine today, best watch I had in a long time, and I had many Rolex, Omega and the likes....
> 
> Pierre


Yep, Timex makes a better digital watch than Rolex for sure.


----------



## pegase747

CADstraps said:


> Yep, Timex makes a better digital watch than Rolex for sure.


love your sense of humour, was talking of wrist instruments telling time in general, never talk of digital in particular...


----------



## DigitalSurf

CADstraps said:


> Yep, Timex makes a better digital watch than Rolex for sure.


Yep. Actually, Timex also makes better analog watches than Rolex, but don't tell a Rolex owner that!

I still think that G-shock watches are tougher than the Ironman, but the functionality of the Timex watches usually is superior. I even have a cheap 1440 sports Timex, and while I don't like all the display choices, the digit size and design for the main time is superior to anything in the G-shock line. Readability doesn't seem very high on the list of concerns for the G-shock designers.


----------



## wmt029

Timex is definitely easier to use and more legible. But I've never been a very practical person so I like G-Shock watches far more than Ironman watches .

To me G-Shocks seem a lot tougher and better built than Ironmen (Ironmans?). I also love the greater variety of watches available.


----------



## Mike L

I currently don't own a G shock but i do own a Timex Ironman.

Mine's grey.

Reasons that i bought it instead of a G?

2 thing's

In my country timexes shock are way cheaper than a G

Better face ( with this i mean larger digit's and cleaner dial's without those circular graphics, that Casio insist on using )

Better build quality? can't tell you that for sure, the only thing i can say is that my Ironman as already withstand a lot i have it for more than a year.

Hot enviroments; sub zero temperautures; and a hole lot of water ( i snorkel with it ) and so far so good!!!

Cheers


----------



## Sedi

George01161 said:


> As mentioned above, any use of a mode will cause the next mode press to return to the main screen, a very thoughtful feature.


The DW-6900 does that, too.



Toothbras said:


> Those bubbles on the G are basically useless, one is a sort of analog minute display, another tells you is it's daylight savings time and other useless junk, the only useful one is the batter/solar charge indicator.


The DW-6900 is not solar and has no DST setting. You are referring to the GW-6900.

IMHO: G is tougher - Timex has the better features. AFAIK it does not display current time in other modes however which the DW-6900 does - to me that's more important than a stopwatch with a gazillion lap times.

PS: I still need one of those Timexes - just to make sure :-d.

cheers, Sedi


----------



## George01161

Sedi,
I think you should pick one up just to check it out personally.

Be warned, once you feel the awesomeness of the Timex Ironman you may be hooked!!! 

regards,
George


----------



## The Wayfarer

i snagged this one on ebay. T5K253 Ironman Sleek 150-Lap Watch | eBay


----------



## scme

I happened upon this post earlier this week while searching for a cheap beater/weekend watch and figured if I could find a good deal on one I would snatch it up. Low and behold, stumbled in to an Academy Sports store yesterday morning to pick up some golf balls and there in their sales paper was these Timex's on sale for $24.99. Couldn't pass one up for that price so I got the T5K5559J.


----------



## stockae92

that's a good deal. congrats


----------



## LesserBlackDog

I have a Timex Ironman Shock 30 Lap ($30) and a G-Shock GW5600E ($50) - pretty comparable watches as far as specs go, but to me, they are distinctly different watches. As far as functionality goes, the Timex wins by a mile, especially if you're an athlete. The start/stop button is in a perfect location for runners and other athletes, the screen is far more readable, and the watch offers you easy guidance when changing settings with +, -, next, and done indicators that pop up. I've gone running with both watches and I far prefer the Timex. A couple weeks ago I went for a night-time run in pretty heavy rain... even with my headlamp on, I couldn't read the G-Shock to save my life, at least not while I was moving. I regretted not having brought the Ironman.

The G-Shock, on the other hand, just feels like a more solid watch. High build quality, even at its relatively low price point. Mineral crystal instead of acrylic like the Ironman. Metal buttons instead of plastic. The resin strap has less of a wet, rubbery feel than the Ironman's. Basically anything that can break on the G-Shock can be replaced for less than the cost of a new watch. Plus the G-Shock has a proven pedigree of ruggedness, whereas the Ironman Shock line remains untested.

The result is that, up until I bought my Garmin FR 110 GPS/HR monitor, the Ironman was my running/biking/hiking/swimming watch of choice, and I wore my G-Shock as a "beater" for yardwork, housework, and playing outside at my family's lakeside cabin.

I would recommend against getting either watch in white, though. I've heard stories about both white Timexes and G-Shocks discoloring from regular wear. I went with basic black and haven't regretted it.


----------



## JamesAtCT

I made a similar decision recently. Wanted to get back into digital watches - just took a job as a technician so getting out of sales, I wanted something tough enough to not feel bad about wearing while working, wanted an alarm etc

was choosing between Ironman and G-shock, specifically this Timex






Ironman Oversize 30-lap, and a basic Casio 5600.

Honestly for $10 cheaper, I got the ironman. The buttons are way easier to push, it's easier to read, and it's got more features. The Occasion alarms are very neat. The 5600's buttons are kind of a pain to push, although it has a much brighter backlight (visible in the day!) but the Ironman is easier to read.

...mind you i'm still getting a 5600, I just bought the ironman first. Hehe.


----------



## blink of an eye

No one has mentioned it yet - The Timex alarm volume is way louder and the alarm options ie... Weekday alarm, Weekend alarm and Daily alarm are way better than the Casio G Shock.


----------



## JamesAtCT

Also a deciding factor - the Ironman wastes very little of it's available "real estate," it's all display. The G-shock has those three round dials that don't really do a whole lot in non-solar models, and they make the display smaller and thus harder to read.


----------

