Casio Vintage A168WA vs Orient Mako 40 Green
Casio's chronograph meets Orient's diver
Quick Verdict
The Casio Vintage A168WA (Under $50) offers Casio Quartz (Battery) precision in the tier below the Orient Mako 40 Green ($250–$500). The Vintage A168WA measures 36.3mm and is rated 30m (3 ATM). The Mako 40 Green counters with Made in Japan craftsmanship and 200m (20 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 | Orient Mako 40 Green |
|---|---|---|
| Price | Under $50 | $250–$500 |
| Case Size | 36.3mm | 40mm |
| Movement | Quartz Module 3298 | Automatic Caliber F6722 |
| Caliber Type | Casio Quartz (Battery) | Orient In-House Automatic (Hacking, Hand-Winding) |
| Power Reserve | — | 40 Hours |
| Water Resistance | 30m (3 ATM) | 200m (20 ATM) |
| Crystal | Mineral Glass | Sapphire Crystal |
| Case Material | Stainless Steel & Resin | Stainless Steel |
| Origin | Made in Japan | Made in Japan |
Category-by-Category Analysis
Design & Aesthetics
Casio's design language vs Orient's approach
The Casio Vintage A168WA features a Stainless Steel & Resin case at 36.3mm with Mineral Glass protection. The Orient Mako 40 Green offers Stainless Steel construction at 40mm with Sapphire Crystal. Both represent their brand's distinct design philosophy and heritage.
Movement & Performance
Quartz Module 3298 vs Automatic Caliber F6722
The Vintage A168WA runs the Quartz Module 3298 (Casio Quartz (Battery), standard power reserve) at standard frequency. The Mako 40 Green uses the Automatic Caliber F6722 (Orient In-House Automatic (Hacking, Hand-Winding), 40 Hours reserve) at 21,600 vph (3 Hz). The Mako 40 Green offers a longer power reserve.
Wearability & Fit
36.3mm vs 40mm — different wrist presence
At 36.3mm, the Vintage A168WA wears more compactly on smaller wrists compared to the Mako 40 Green at 40mm. Water resistance differs: 30m (3 ATM) vs 200m (20 ATM).
Value & Cost of Ownership
Casio sits in the lower tier
The Casio Vintage A168WA sits at Under $50 and the Orient Mako 40 Green at $250–$500. On the specs that outlast any price: the Vintage A168WA uses Mineral Glass with a standard reserve, against Sapphire Crystal and 40 Hours on the Mako 40 Green. Service intervals are typically 5-7 years for both.
Water Resistance
30m (3 ATM) vs 200m (20 ATM)
The Vintage A168WA is rated to 30m (3 ATM) while the Mako 40 Green handles 200m (20 ATM). The Mako 40 Green 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 AmazonOrient
Mako 40 Green
Choose the Orient Mako 40 Green if you value Orient In-House Automatic (Hacking, Hand-Winding) technology, Made in Japan heritage, and 40mm proportions. At $250–$500, the Automatic Caliber F6722 with 40 Hours power reserve makes it a compelling choice.
Check Price on AmazonThe Bottom Line
The Casio Vintage A168WA and Orient Mako 40 Green represent two distinct approaches to fine watchmaking — the Casio bringing Made in Japan tradition while Orient delivers Made in Japan engineering.
Frequently Asked Questions
More Comparisons
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.