It’s been out for a while, but I was more interested in buying a couple of other Gs. However, it seemed appropriate for my 10th G to be a Mudman. The GW looks like a bit of a dog’s dinner, so it had to be the plain vanilla version.
First impressions: it does look slightly too small. Not in terms of overall size, but in terms of the dial. There’s a lot going on in there, and the general appearance is a bit fussy. It’s not a great design, to be honest. Sometimes I look at it, and all I see is a collection of white dots, letters, and numerals; then the dividing ‘arrow’; and only then the time and date. Compared to the DW-6900, DW-5600, or G-8000, the dial is a collection of parts, rather than a unified whole. This means that at a glance, your eyes don't fall upon the time digits, or the date.
Some of the parts are a bit clumsy too, and are not terribly helpful. The silver trapezium, for example, houses a graphic seconds counter, the individual elements of which are too small to see. The little circle at the other end of the 'arrow' contains the 'on/off' indicator for the flash feature, which doesn't need to be permanently displayed.
Then look at how little of the available space is given to the time and date. Casio can do these things very well, but on this watch has chosen (I imagine) to fill the dial with 'technical looking' details that contribute very little to the functionality of the design. None of this matters if you like the end result, but from an ergonomic point of view it's not a success.
Feels well made though, and it’s certainly a proper tough-looking G. The red buttons are great. Good band too, and it’s a decent width (some of the tapering bands look a bit skinny to me).
It doesn’t quite match the G-8000 for functions. Both are excellent, but the Mudman doesn’t show the time in stopwatch mode. It does, of course, have two fantastic stopwatches, but I’ll never use the additional stopwatch, or need to time something for 1,000 hours (minus 1/100th of a second...). The G-8000 displays the year, which I like (even if it’s hardly essential), but the Mudman has a fifth light button, which I prefer. Both have world time, and both have the newer, bigger list of countries (when I’m in Central Europe, I prefer to see BER on my watch - PAR doesn’t seem right). Ultimately, though, the G-8000 is a great design, and the Mudman isn’t.
On the wrist, the Mudman doesn’t, to my eyes, look as good as a 6900. The watch I find myself comparing it to is the 2300 series - similar size, similar rugged appearance, both with extensive (but different) functions. Like others have said, if only the Mudman had solar power… all the same, I like it better than my 2310.
So the Mudman is probably my ‘number 3’ watch. The 6900 is just ‘right’ in terms of size, layout and proportions, and is a true classic. The G-8000 has better functions than either, is a model of clarity, a brilliant piece of design, and is a classic in the making. The Mudman, good though it is, will never be a real classic. It does have those big red buttons though…
Don’t think I’m knocking it – I knew what I was buying, and I like it - but it doesn't have what it takes to be an enduring design. As the 5600 shows, it's simple and timeless design that makes a classic. The appeal of this watch is in the frame, not the picture!
Just what the world needs - another photo of a Mudman -
It was the buttons that made me want it -