I've been undergoing an existential crisis regarding watches lately. I recently deployed to the Middle East, and before coming was looking for a watch to replace my pebble time steel - I was in treat yo'self mode. I really wanted something that would take a beating, definitely solar, and atomic for when I make it back to civilization. I loved the versatility of the pebble time steel, but being limited to a week's battery doesn't work out here, and as a smartwatch it can't be brought in the secure areas I work in. So I went for the Casio Protrek PRW-3000-1A - negative display, solar, atomic, nice small profile. I love this negative display - it's large and very easy to read. I've got small wrists so having the new small sensor is great - it fits very well. I got the G-Shock bug after that though, wondering if the ProTrek would be tough enough to be worn 24/7 and keep on going. So I looked around, and ordered a Rangeman GW9400-3. I'm a big fan of it, it's a little big on my wrist but not too bad. It definitely gives me a better warm and fuzzy on durability than the ProTrek. It's also negative display (which I lean towards), but the display is so hard to see! The digits are much smaller, the display much darker. The digits are almost a coyote brown instead of white like the ProTreks. The beep/alarm is for some reason much softer on the Rangeman as opposed to the ProTrek as well. I desperately wanted to be a Rangeman-wearing kind of guy, but I think I'm sticking with the ProTrek for now. Has anyone else gone through the process of analyzing/testing ProTreks vs. G-shocks?