Bulova Classic Automatic 98A139 vs Casio MTP-S120L Solar Field
Bulova's timepiece meets Casio's field watch
Quick Verdict
The Casio MTP-S120L Solar Field ($100–$150) delivers Casio Tough Solar Quartz technology in the tier below the Bulova Classic Automatic 98A139 ($250–$500). The MTP-S120L Solar Field measures 44.5mm and is rated 100m (10 ATM). The Classic Automatic 98A139 justifies its premium with Japanese Movement heritage and Automatic, 21 Jewels. Both represent excellent choices in the luxury watch category.
Transparency — We earn a small commission on purchases made through our Amazon links. This doesn't affect our editorial independence.
Specifications Compared
| Feature | Bulova Classic Automatic 98A139 | Casio MTP-S120L Solar Field |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $250–$500 | $100–$150 |
| Case Size | 45mm | 44.5mm |
| Movement | Automatic, 21 Jewels | Solar-Powered Quartz |
| Caliber Type | Self-Winding Automatic | Casio Tough Solar Quartz |
| Power Reserve | — | Months on a full solar charge; no battery replacement |
| Water Resistance | 30m (3 ATM) | 100m (10 ATM) |
| Crystal | Domed Crystal | Mineral Crystal |
| Case Material | Black Ion-Plated Stainless Steel | Stainless Steel |
| Origin | Japanese Movement | Casio (Japan) |
Category-by-Category Analysis
Design & Aesthetics
Bulova's design language vs Casio's approach
The Bulova Classic Automatic 98A139 features a Black Ion-Plated Stainless Steel case at 45mm with Domed Crystal protection. The Casio MTP-S120L Solar Field offers Stainless Steel construction at 44.5mm with Mineral Crystal. Both represent their brand's distinct design philosophy and heritage.
Movement & Performance
Automatic, 21 Jewels vs Solar-Powered Quartz
The Classic Automatic 98A139 runs the Automatic, 21 Jewels (Self-Winding Automatic, standard power reserve) at standard frequency. The MTP-S120L Solar Field uses the Solar-Powered Quartz (Casio Tough Solar Quartz, Months on a full solar charge; no battery replacement reserve) at standard. Power reserves are closely matched.
Wearability & Fit
45mm vs 44.5mm — different wrist presence
At 45mm, the Classic Automatic 98A139 has a bolder wrist presence compared to the MTP-S120L Solar Field at 44.5mm. Water resistance differs: 30m (3 ATM) vs 100m (10 ATM).
Value & Cost of Ownership
Casio sits in the lower tier
The Bulova Classic Automatic 98A139 sits at $250–$500 and the Casio MTP-S120L Solar Field at $100–$150. On the specs that outlast any price: the Classic Automatic 98A139 uses Domed Crystal with a standard reserve, against Mineral Crystal and Months on a full solar charge; no battery replacement on the MTP-S120L Solar Field. Service intervals are typically 5-7 years for both.
Water Resistance
30m (3 ATM) vs 100m (10 ATM)
The Classic Automatic 98A139 is rated to 30m (3 ATM) while the MTP-S120L Solar Field handles 100m (10 ATM). The MTP-S120L Solar Field offers superior water resistance.
Our Verdict
Bulova
Classic Automatic 98A139
Choose the Bulova Classic Automatic 98A139 if you prioritize Self-Winding Automatic engineering, Japanese Movement craftsmanship, and 30m (3 ATM) water resistance. At $250–$500, it delivers Automatic, 21 Jewels with solid power reserve.
Check Price on AmazonCasio
MTP-S120L Solar Field
Choose the Casio MTP-S120L Solar Field if you value Casio Tough Solar Quartz technology, Casio (Japan) heritage, and 44.5mm proportions. At $100–$150, the Solar-Powered Quartz with Months on a full solar charge; no battery replacement power reserve makes it a compelling choice.
Check Price on AmazonThe Bottom Line
The Bulova Classic Automatic 98A139 and Casio MTP-S120L Solar Field represent two distinct approaches to fine watchmaking — the Bulova bringing Japanese Movement tradition while Casio delivers Casio (Japan) engineering.
Frequently Asked Questions
More Comparisons
Tag Heuer Carrera Chronograph vs Bulova Classic Automatic 98A139
Tag Heuer's chronograph meets Bulova's timepiece
Tag Heuer Carrera Chronograph vs Casio MTP-S120L Solar Field
Tag Heuer's chronograph meets Casio's field watch
Tissot PRX Powermatic 80 vs Bulova Classic Automatic 98A139
Two timepieces compared — $500–$1,000 vs $250–$500
Explore These Watches
How This Page Was Made
Our comparisons are generated from a hand-maintained specification database and reviewed under our editorial standards. We use AI tools to assemble pages from that data. We don’t invent specs: every number traces back to the database, and when we correct an entry, the fix is applied site-wide. As an Amazon Associate, The Horologist earns from qualifying purchases.