Bulova Classic Automatic 98A139 vs Timex Expedition Metal Field "Scout"
Bulova's timepiece meets Timex's field watch
Quick Verdict
The Timex Expedition Metal Field "Scout" ($50–$100) delivers Quartz (Battery) technology in the tier below the Bulova Classic Automatic 98A139 ($250–$500). The Expedition Metal Field "Scout" measures 40mm and is rated 50m (5 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 | Timex Expedition Metal Field "Scout" |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $250–$500 | $50–$100 |
| Case Size | 45mm | 40mm |
| Movement | Automatic, 21 Jewels | Quartz (3-Hand, Date) |
| Caliber Type | Self-Winding Automatic | Quartz (Battery) |
| Power Reserve | — | Battery |
| Water Resistance | 30m (3 ATM) | 50m (5 ATM) |
| Crystal | Domed Crystal | Mineral Glass |
| Case Material | Black Ion-Plated Stainless Steel | Brass (Gunmetal Finish) |
| Origin | Japanese Movement | Timex (USA Design) |
Category-by-Category Analysis
Design & Aesthetics
Bulova's design language vs Timex's approach
The Bulova Classic Automatic 98A139 features a Black Ion-Plated Stainless Steel case at 45mm with Domed Crystal protection. The Timex Expedition Metal Field "Scout" offers Brass (Gunmetal Finish) construction at 40mm with Mineral Glass. Both represent their brand's distinct design philosophy and heritage.
Movement & Performance
Automatic, 21 Jewels vs Quartz (3-Hand, Date)
The Classic Automatic 98A139 runs the Automatic, 21 Jewels (Self-Winding Automatic, standard power reserve) at standard frequency. The Expedition Metal Field "Scout" uses the Quartz (3-Hand, Date) (Quartz (Battery), Battery reserve) at standard. Power reserves are closely matched.
Wearability & Fit
45mm vs 40mm — different wrist presence
At 45mm, the Classic Automatic 98A139 has a bolder wrist presence compared to the Expedition Metal Field "Scout" at 40mm. Water resistance differs: 30m (3 ATM) vs 50m (5 ATM).
Value & Cost of Ownership
Timex sits in the lower tier
The Bulova Classic Automatic 98A139 sits at $250–$500 and the Timex Expedition Metal Field "Scout" at $50–$100. On the specs that outlast any price: the Classic Automatic 98A139 uses Domed Crystal with a standard reserve, against Mineral Glass and Battery on the Expedition Metal Field "Scout". Service intervals are typically 5-7 years for both.
Water Resistance
30m (3 ATM) vs 50m (5 ATM)
The Classic Automatic 98A139 is rated to 30m (3 ATM) while the Expedition Metal Field "Scout" handles 50m (5 ATM). The Expedition Metal Field "Scout" 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 AmazonTimex
Expedition Metal Field "Scout"
Choose the Timex Expedition Metal Field "Scout" if you value Quartz (Battery) technology, Timex (USA Design) heritage, and 40mm proportions. At $50–$100, the Quartz (3-Hand, Date) with Battery power reserve makes it a compelling choice.
Check Price on AmazonThe Bottom Line
The Bulova Classic Automatic 98A139 and Timex Expedition Metal Field "Scout" represent two distinct approaches to fine watchmaking — the Bulova bringing Japanese Movement tradition while Timex delivers Timex (USA Design) 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 Timex Expedition Metal Field "Scout"
Tag Heuer's chronograph meets Timex'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.