Casio Vintage A168WA vs Frederique Constant Classic Quartz Moonphase
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 Classic Quartz Moonphase ($1,000–$1,500). The Vintage A168WA measures 36.3mm and is rated 30m (3 ATM). The Classic Quartz Moonphase counters with Swiss Made craftsmanship and 50m (5 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 Classic Quartz Moonphase |
|---|---|---|
| Price | Under $50 | $1,000–$1,500 |
| Case Size | 36.3mm | 40mm |
| Movement | Quartz Module 3298 | Quartz FC-206 |
| Caliber Type | Casio Quartz (Battery) | Swiss Quartz |
| Power Reserve | — | Battery |
| Water Resistance | 30m (3 ATM) | 50m (5 ATM) |
| Crystal | Mineral Glass | Anti-Reflective Sapphire Crystal |
| 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 Classic Quartz Moonphase offers Stainless Steel construction at 40mm with Anti-Reflective Sapphire Crystal. Both represent their brand's distinct design philosophy and heritage.
Movement & Performance
Quartz Module 3298 vs Quartz FC-206
The Vintage A168WA runs the Quartz Module 3298 (Casio Quartz (Battery), standard power reserve) at standard frequency. The Classic Quartz Moonphase uses the Quartz FC-206 (Swiss Quartz, Battery reserve) at standard. Power reserves are closely matched.
Wearability & Fit
36.3mm vs 40mm — different wrist presence
At 36.3mm, the Vintage A168WA wears more compactly on smaller wrists compared to the Classic Quartz Moonphase at 40mm. Water resistance differs: 30m (3 ATM) vs 50m (5 ATM).
Value & Cost of Ownership
Casio sits in the lower tier
The Casio Vintage A168WA sits at Under $50 and the Frederique Constant Classic Quartz Moonphase at $1,000–$1,500. On the specs that outlast any price: the Vintage A168WA uses Mineral Glass with a standard reserve, against Anti-Reflective Sapphire Crystal and Battery on the Classic Quartz Moonphase. Service intervals are typically 5-7 years for both.
Water Resistance
30m (3 ATM) vs 50m (5 ATM)
The Vintage A168WA is rated to 30m (3 ATM) while the Classic Quartz Moonphase handles 50m (5 ATM). The Classic Quartz Moonphase offers superior water resistance.
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
Classic Quartz Moonphase
Choose the Frederique Constant Classic Quartz Moonphase if you value Swiss Quartz technology, Swiss Made heritage, and 40mm proportions. At $1,000–$1,500, the Quartz FC-206 with Battery power reserve makes it a compelling choice.
Check Price on AmazonThe Bottom Line
The Casio Vintage A168WA and Frederique Constant Classic Quartz Moonphase 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
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 Classic Quartz Moonphase
Tag Heuer's chronograph meets Frederique Constant's dress watch
Tissot PRX Powermatic 80 vs Casio Vintage A168WA
Tissot's timepiece meets Casio's chronograph
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.