Casio Vintage A168WA vs Seiko Prospex 62MAS Modern Re-interpretation
Casio's chronograph meets Seiko's diver
Quick Verdict
The Casio Vintage A168WA (Under $50) offers Casio Quartz (Battery) precision in the tier below the Seiko Prospex 62MAS Modern Re-interpretation ($1,000–$1,500). The Vintage A168WA measures 36.3mm and is rated 30m (3 ATM). The Prospex 62MAS Modern Re-interpretation 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 | Seiko Prospex 62MAS Modern Re-interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| Price | Under $50 | $1,000–$1,500 |
| Case Size | 36.3mm | 40.5mm |
| Movement | Quartz Module 3298 | Automatic 6R35 |
| Caliber Type | Casio Quartz (Battery) | Seiko In-House Automatic |
| Power Reserve | — | 70 Hours |
| Water Resistance | 30m (3 ATM) | 200m (20 ATM) |
| Crystal | Mineral Glass | Sapphire |
| Case Material | Stainless Steel & Resin | Stainless Steel with Super-Hard Coating |
| Origin | Made in Japan | Made in Japan |
Category-by-Category Analysis
Design & Aesthetics
Casio's design language vs Seiko's approach
The Casio Vintage A168WA features a Stainless Steel & Resin case at 36.3mm with Mineral Glass protection. The Seiko Prospex 62MAS Modern Re-interpretation offers Stainless Steel with Super-Hard Coating construction at 40.5mm with Sapphire. Both represent their brand's distinct design philosophy and heritage.
Movement & Performance
Quartz Module 3298 vs Automatic 6R35
The Vintage A168WA runs the Quartz Module 3298 (Casio Quartz (Battery), standard power reserve) at standard frequency. The Prospex 62MAS Modern Re-interpretation uses the Automatic 6R35 (Seiko In-House Automatic, 70 Hours reserve) at 21,600 vph (3 Hz). The Prospex 62MAS Modern Re-interpretation offers a longer power reserve.
Wearability & Fit
36.3mm vs 40.5mm — different wrist presence
At 36.3mm, the Vintage A168WA wears more compactly on smaller wrists compared to the Prospex 62MAS Modern Re-interpretation at 40.5mm. 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 Seiko Prospex 62MAS Modern Re-interpretation at $1,000–$1,500. On the specs that outlast any price: the Vintage A168WA uses Mineral Glass with a standard reserve, against Sapphire and 70 Hours on the Prospex 62MAS Modern Re-interpretation. 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 Prospex 62MAS Modern Re-interpretation handles 200m (20 ATM). The Prospex 62MAS Modern Re-interpretation 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 AmazonSeiko
Prospex 62MAS Modern Re-interpretation
Choose the Seiko Prospex 62MAS Modern Re-interpretation if you value Seiko In-House Automatic technology, Made in Japan heritage, and 40.5mm proportions. At $1,000–$1,500, the Automatic 6R35 with 70 Hours power reserve makes it a compelling choice.
Check Price on AmazonThe Bottom Line
The Casio Vintage A168WA and Seiko Prospex 62MAS Modern Re-interpretation represent two distinct approaches to fine watchmaking — the Casio bringing Made in Japan tradition while Seiko delivers Made in Japan engineering.
Frequently Asked Questions
More Comparisons
Oris Aquis vs Seiko SPB143 (62MAS)
Swiss independence meets Japanese precision diving
Tag Heuer Carrera Chronograph vs Casio Vintage A168WA
Two chronographs compared — $2,500–$5,000 vs Under $50
Tag Heuer Carrera Chronograph vs Seiko Prospex 62MAS Modern Re-interpretation
Tag Heuer's chronograph meets Seiko's diver
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.