Is the Solar/Atomic G-Shock feature set worth getting?

[xevious]

No.


Well, I do need to qualify that. In a general cost-basis sense, it may not be worth it. Why?

The Comparison Basis Costs
First, let's focus on the solar function alone and let's reference a model type that is available with or without solar. The DW-6900 (non-solar) MSRP is $99, and the GW-6900 (solar/atomic) MSRP is $130. That's a $31 difference, and probably a reliable amount when considering both models at discounted prices.

Battery Cost
The other price consideration is the battery. If you're resourceful enough, you can buy yourself a quality name CR-2016 replacement battery for $2 shipped. A CTL-1616 rechargeable battery is usually available for about $15 shipped from most sources, but if you're resourceful enough you can pick up one for $10 shipped. These are prices based in the USA, and of course the prices will fluctuate quite a bit for other countries.

Frequency of Battery Changes
Now, CASIO rates the DW-6900 as lasting for 2 years on a single battery. We've seen plenty of testimonies of standard G-Shock watches lasting much longer than that, even as much as 8-10 years. But let's pick a middle-ground number, where the battery needs to be replaced every 4 years. CASIO neglects to tell you what the solar rechargeable battery lifetime is, because the thought of replacing it is really the "antithesis" of their whole solar watch marketing campaign ("never needs batteries"). But realistically speaking, the CTL-1616 battery will not likely last more than 15-20 years. But let's be a little generous on this and say it lasts 24 years.

Calculations
So, given the assumed details I've set up, it's time to do some generalized calculations.
The DW-6900 incurs a $2 battery cost every 4 years, adding up to $6 every 12 years, assuming of course that battery prices remain the same.

DW-6900, year 1: $99. Year 12: $105 (+$6 for batteries). Year 24: $111 (+$6). Year 48: $123 (+$12).
GW-6900, year 1: $130. Year 12: $130 (+$0 for batteries). Year 24: $140 (+$10). Year 48: $150 (+$10).

Cost Differences
Let's look at the cost difference at the end of 48 years: $27. So, the cost difference reduced by $4 over 48 years. I have to say, good luck about ever living to see your total watch cost ever "breaking even"! If we "played by the rules" and changed the DW-6900 battery every 2 years, you would have to go 52 years before crossing over the "break even" point.

Of course, in this case I've assumed you're prepared to change your own watch battery. If not, I think the usual "discount" service cost is about $10-$15 at your local watch jeweler/technician. If you have to pay this each time, then... well, the solar option starts looking a bit more promising!

--> Battery + Service charge = $10, or $20
DW-6900, year 1: $99. Year 12: $139 (+$40 for batteries). Year 24: $179 (+$40). Year 48: $259 (+$80).
GW-6900, year 1: $130. Year 12: $130 (+$0 for batteries). Year 24: $150 (+$20). Year 48: $170 (+$20).

Difference: -$89, making it more cost effective going with solar.

Conclusion on Solar
So in short, the solar feature doesn't realistically save you any money if you're prepared to change your own watch battery. If you pay to have your battery changed, then it is definitely worthwhile, if you get at least 12 years out of the battery. The solar feature does seem to be required for having the atomic function (purportedly to compensate for the heavy drain on the battery). So if you want atomic, you do need to have solar (at least the way CASIO plays it out).

Caveat
The only caveat here that I can think of, is that in some cases you may not be able to change your watch battery every 4 years. What if you have a requirement to go for at least 12 years without a battery change, due to your lifestyle or job requirements? Then there's the Frogman. It is suggested that the battery be changed by a certified technician to ensure complete water-tightness. If you change the battery every 4 years, the cost involved could be quite high, whereas you'd save a lot on battery change costs going with a solar/atomic Frogman model.

Atomic Sync
Now for the next question: Do you need atomic sync?

G-Shock Accuracy
CASIO watches are generally rated at +/- 15 sec/mo. I've heard of some people reporting that their brand new G-Shock was drifting by +20 sec/mo, and I personally have bought a number of used ones that have gained anywhere from +15 to +60 sec/mo. Yet, I've also seen some people report that their G-Shock gains no more than +1 sec/mo. With atomic sync, you don't have to worry about accuracy as long as you get a consistent signal every few nights. I must point out that I've witnessed atomic watches being inherently prone to greater accuracy drift when not synchronizing nightly, compared to a non-atomic G-Shock. Why? Maybe there's a secondary time adjustment step that is skipped at the factory, because it's assumed that the atomic sync feature will be good enough to compensate. And realistically speaking, if you frequently get a good signal it certainly will compensate.

Time Adjustment
Well, if you're enterprising enough, you can time adjust your G-Shock watch to correct any accuracy drift that is outside your personal tolerance (although you really need to know what you're doing in order to do it safely). If you get lucky, you can get your watch to be within +/-1 sec/mo accurate. That's probably good enough so that you can wait until DST changes for the time to manually synchronize your watch. Or, if you're more a little more obsessive about accuracy, that could entail manually adjusting your watch only once per month, using the atomic clock time display on-line. Certainly, spending one minute per month to do this isn't much at all of an inconvenience and makes having atomic sync superfluous.

Conclusion on Atomic
Basically I'd have to say that if you're motivated and skilled enough to time adjust your own G-Shock, the atomic sync feature is probably not worth getting. That is, if the non-solar/atomic version of the watch you're interested in has all of the features you want, and of course has enough aesthetic appeal for you. Some models seem to have greater visual appeal or added features to them when you spend more for solar/atomic, which of course helps entice the purchase.

Wrap-up
Well, I think the horse has been thoroughly beaten to death. Yes, non-solar/atomic is more cost effective to buy, but... one has to remember that you should be happy with the watch you want to put on your wrist. If CASIO is clever enough to make the solar/atomic version much more attractive to you, then you should probably get it. Also, I do have optimism that CASIO will continue to improve the solar recharging capability, enough so that in time the R&D costs will have been long paid off and the cost difference reduced to where it takes less than 20 years to break even. I believe that buying their solar/atomic watches helps demonstrate interest from the customer base, and fuel the R&D for further improvements.

[xevious]

*** Follow-up ***


In my above post, I make a point about atomic sync not being all that necessary if you time adjust your watch to within a nominal accuracy fluctuation per month. However, I failed to qualify this with an important consideration: temperature and humidity fluctuations.

If you live in an environment where temperatures fluctuate quite a bit, from very cold to very hot, you may find it more difficult to control the time deviations of your G-Shocks. In my experience thus far, an increase in ambient room temperature above a certain threshold can cause an increase in time deviation on a G-Shock. It varies depending upon a number of factors, such as thermal resistance properties of the watch and age of the module.

Thus, my recommendation on time adjustment is to be conservative with the degree of adjustments, and to be sensitive to temperature fluctuations. This isn't something you just jump into and start turning screws. It's better to make minor adjustments and as few as possible. Don't strive to get as close to a +1 sec/mo deviation as possible. Better to simply decrease the deviation enough until you are within +/- 10 sec/mo and leave it at that.

Also, considering the hassle involved with accuracy fluctuations, the positive case for having atomic becomes even greater.

[kore]

Very nice information and wonderfull calculation that you've made!!!
I have both solar and battery

[Dan83bz]

Amusing topic :D

I find it trivial that in the long rung someone will think of these costs, for something like a G-Shock or any other digital for that matter.

For automatics though, the more you paid for it, the more will have to pay for it's maintenance (although is not always proportional).

If you had to go by the book with a Swiss high-end watch that costs let's say 25,000$, in 50 years you will certainly spend another 15-20% or more on having it maintained.

Some cases are even worse, let's take Seiko's SD, marvelous technology, love it to bits myself but service cost run about 10-20% of the price they sell for at the momement and you're supposed to service it every 3 years so, to follow your story, in 48 years, at costs between 6-1000$/service , lets take an average of 750$, multiplied by 16 (the number of services in 48 years) that would add up to 12,000$, assuming you paid 3,000$ to buy it....looks like a Gillette "scam" to me :D Now just imagine how many G-Shocks 12,000$ could buy....you could almost buy a different one for each day of the year.

I say, don't stress yourself too much on the costs...if you like it ......buy it...wear it, if it's a G-Shock , don't baby it, put if through it's paces and if it breaks/malfunctions, get another one, it's one of those things that can bring a lot of pleasure for a little price.

[dboy225]

Great post!!

«Sent via Tapatalk for Android»

[xevious]

Unfortunately I cannot edit my original post... I do have an addendum, regarding the replacement of the solar cell secondary battery.


If you go to any jeweler and hand in your solar enabled G-Shock watch for a battery replacement, keep in mind that they will NOT have the battery on hand. They will have to order it for you. I strongly suggest you do not do this. Instead, order a battery yourself and bring it with you. Otherwise, the price will be greater (the jeweler is going to pay full MSRP on the battery and may even add on a service charge) and increase your cost of ownership (making the non-solar version even more attractive).