Bulova Classic Automatic 98A139 vs Casio Pro Trek PRG601-1
Two timepieces compared — $250–$500 vs $250–$500
Quick Verdict
The Bulova Classic Automatic 98A139 ($250–$500) and Casio Pro Trek PRG601-1 ($250–$500) are closely matched timepieces at similar price points. The Classic Automatic 98A139 emphasizes Self-Winding Automatic engineering while the Pro Trek PRG601-1 focuses on Casio (Japan) craftsmanship.
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 Pro Trek PRG601-1 |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $250–$500 | $250–$500 |
| Case Size | 45mm | 51.6mm |
| Movement | Automatic, 21 Jewels | Tough Solar (Solar Quartz) |
| Caliber Type | Self-Winding Automatic | Tough Solar Quartz (No Battery Change) |
| Power Reserve | — | 7 Months (Solar, Full Charge); 25 Months Power Save |
| Water Resistance | 30m (3 ATM) | 100m (10 ATM) |
| Crystal | Domed Crystal | Mineral Glass |
| Case Material | Black Ion-Plated Stainless Steel | Bio-Based Resin / 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 Pro Trek PRG601-1 offers Bio-Based Resin / Stainless Steel construction at 51.6mm with Mineral Glass. Both represent their brand's distinct design philosophy and heritage.
Movement & Performance
Automatic, 21 Jewels vs Tough Solar (Solar Quartz)
The Classic Automatic 98A139 runs the Automatic, 21 Jewels (Self-Winding Automatic, standard power reserve) at standard frequency. The Pro Trek PRG601-1 uses the Tough Solar (Solar Quartz) (Tough Solar Quartz (No Battery Change), 7 Months (Solar, Full Charge); 25 Months Power Save reserve) at standard. The Pro Trek PRG601-1 offers a longer power reserve.
Wearability & Fit
45mm vs 51.6mm — different wrist presence
At 45mm, the Classic Automatic 98A139 wears more compactly on smaller wrists compared to the Pro Trek PRG601-1 at 51.6mm. Water resistance differs: 30m (3 ATM) vs 100m (10 ATM).
Value & Cost of Ownership
Same tier — different value propositions
The Bulova Classic Automatic 98A139 sits at $250–$500 and the Casio Pro Trek PRG601-1 at $250–$500. On the specs that outlast any price: the Classic Automatic 98A139 uses Domed Crystal with a standard reserve, against Mineral Glass and 7 Months (Solar, Full Charge); 25 Months Power Save on the Pro Trek PRG601-1. 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 Pro Trek PRG601-1 handles 100m (10 ATM). The Pro Trek PRG601-1 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
Pro Trek PRG601-1
Choose the Casio Pro Trek PRG601-1 if you value Tough Solar Quartz (No Battery Change) technology, Casio (Japan) heritage, and 51.6mm proportions. At $250–$500, the Tough Solar (Solar Quartz) with 7 Months (Solar, Full Charge); 25 Months Power Save power reserve makes it a compelling choice.
Check Price on AmazonThe Bottom Line
The Bulova Classic Automatic 98A139 and Casio Pro Trek PRG601-1 represent two distinct approaches to the timepiece category — 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 Pro Trek PRG601-1
Tag Heuer's chronograph meets Casio's timepiece
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.