Casio Vintage A168WA vs Frederique Constant Slimline Moonphase Manufacture
Casio's chronograph meets Frederique Constant's dress watch
Quick Verdict
The Casio Vintage A168WA (Under $50) offers Casio Quartz (Battery) precision in the tier below the Frederique Constant Slimline Moonphase Manufacture ($2,500–$5,000). The Vintage A168WA measures 36.3mm and is rated 30m (3 ATM). The Slimline Moonphase Manufacture counters with Swiss Made craftsmanship and 30m (3 ATM) water resistance. Both are exceptional watches for their respective tiers.
Transparency — We earn a small commission on purchases made through our Amazon links. This doesn't affect our editorial independence.
Specifications Compared
| Feature | Casio Vintage A168WA | Frederique Constant Slimline Moonphase Manufacture |
|---|---|---|
| Price | Under $50 | $2,500–$5,000 |
| Case Size | 36.3mm | 42mm |
| Movement | Quartz Module 3298 | Automatic FC-705 (In-House) |
| Caliber Type | Casio Quartz (Battery) | In-House Automatic Manufacture |
| Power Reserve | — | 42 Hours |
| Water Resistance | 30m (3 ATM) | 30m (3 ATM) |
| Crystal | Mineral Glass | Convex Sapphire |
| Case Material | Stainless Steel & Resin | Stainless Steel |
| Origin | Made in Japan | Swiss Made |
Category-by-Category Analysis
Design & Aesthetics
Casio's design language vs Frederique Constant's approach
The Casio Vintage A168WA features a Stainless Steel & Resin case at 36.3mm with Mineral Glass protection. The Frederique Constant Slimline Moonphase Manufacture offers Stainless Steel construction at 42mm with Convex Sapphire. Both represent their brand's distinct design philosophy and heritage.
Movement & Performance
Quartz Module 3298 vs Automatic FC-705 (In-House)
The Vintage A168WA runs the Quartz Module 3298 (Casio Quartz (Battery), standard power reserve) at standard frequency. The Slimline Moonphase Manufacture uses the Automatic FC-705 (In-House) (In-House Automatic Manufacture, 42 Hours reserve) at 28,800 vph (4 Hz). The Slimline Moonphase Manufacture offers a longer power reserve.
Wearability & Fit
36.3mm vs 42mm — different wrist presence
At 36.3mm, the Vintage A168WA wears more compactly on smaller wrists compared to the Slimline Moonphase Manufacture at 42mm. Water resistance differs: 30m (3 ATM) vs 30m (3 ATM).
Value & Cost of Ownership
Casio sits in the lower tier
The Casio Vintage A168WA sits at Under $50 and the Frederique Constant Slimline Moonphase Manufacture at $2,500–$5,000. On the specs that outlast any price: the Vintage A168WA uses Mineral Glass with a standard reserve, against Convex Sapphire and 42 Hours on the Slimline Moonphase Manufacture. Service intervals are typically 5-7 years for both.
Water Resistance
30m (3 ATM) vs 30m (3 ATM)
The Vintage A168WA is rated to 30m (3 ATM) while the Slimline Moonphase Manufacture handles 30m (3 ATM). Both offer identical water resistance ratings.
Our Verdict
Casio
Vintage A168WA
Choose the Casio Vintage A168WA if you prioritize Casio Quartz (Battery) engineering, Made in Japan craftsmanship, and 30m (3 ATM) water resistance. At Under $50, it delivers Quartz Module 3298 with solid power reserve.
Check Price on AmazonFrederique Constant
Slimline Moonphase Manufacture
Choose the Frederique Constant Slimline Moonphase Manufacture if you value In-House Automatic Manufacture technology, Swiss Made heritage, and 42mm proportions. At $2,500–$5,000, the Automatic FC-705 (In-House) with 42 Hours power reserve makes it a compelling choice.
Check Price on AmazonThe Bottom Line
The Casio Vintage A168WA and Frederique Constant Slimline Moonphase Manufacture represent two distinct approaches to fine watchmaking — the Casio bringing Made in Japan tradition while Frederique Constant delivers Swiss Made engineering.
Frequently Asked Questions
More Comparisons
Frederique Constant Slimline Moonphase vs Longines Master Moonphase
Two moonphase dress watches under $5,000
Tag Heuer Carrera Chronograph vs Casio Vintage A168WA
Two chronographs compared — $2,500–$5,000 vs Under $50
Tag Heuer Carrera Chronograph vs Frederique Constant Slimline Moonphase Manufacture
Tag Heuer's chronograph meets Frederique Constant's dress watch
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.