# A-158 or A-168?



## Redcrow (Jun 25, 2011)

Having a bit of fun with some low end Casios lately. Next grab is going to be the A-158 or the A-168. Don't really care much about the differences in functions or the light functions. What I would like to know is the difference in case quality between the two. If anyone out there owns both of these could you please educate me as to whether or not there are any significant differences between the two. As far as appearance goes I'm leaning toward the A-158 because of the simple uncluttered face. Are these models both chromed plastic or do they have actual metal casings? Also is it possible to still find one made in Japan?


Thanks.


----------



## dobber72 (Jul 14, 2010)

I have both the A158W and A168. The main difference is the A168 is noticeably larger than the A158W, The A168 also has two lug holes to take the spring bars out easier and has more vibrant faceplate writing. The size thing is most probably a result of the A168 having the additional Illuminator layer resulting in a deeper module size whereas the A158W has the old style bulb. The other major visual difference is the legibility of the display, it's so much crisper and clearer on the A158W but I think this is a common difference between the older bulb style modules and the newer Illuminator modules.

A168 (on left) A158W (on right)









A168 (on top) A158W (on bottom)









As for place of origin, I can't imagine you would be able to get a Japan made one of either, I don't believe they make the standard Casio's in Japan at all any more, maybe back in the 80's. My A158W has Made in China DH stamped on the backplate whereas the A168 only has Y with no country at all. I have G-Shocks with China Y so I can only assume it's also China Y, the reason they left off the country name on the A168 is a mystery to me.










I like both of them for different reasons, the A158W because it has a smooth sleek shape and subdued faceplate writing and crisp, clear display, the A168 for it's larger more masculine look and of course the incredibly bright backlight. As for the quality feel of each, I would have to say they are identical.

A158W










A168


----------



## Redcrow (Jun 25, 2011)

Hey, thanks for the great info dobber72. 158 is the winner for me(at least for now) I like the clean face and legibility. I'm sure I'll end up with both before long. There's something about those old school Casio that always bring a smile to my face. I remember in the 80's they were the coolest thing around and I always wore one to school, work, everywhere.


----------



## CheapThrills (May 16, 2012)

Nice!

What are the measurements for both, how much bigger is the Illuminator?
Does the Illuminator draw more or less power from batt if used frequently compared to the other one?

edit:
Looks like 168 is: 38.6mm x 36.3mm and 9.6mm in thickness. 51g
158: 36.8mm x 33.2mm and 8.2mm in thickness. 48g (?)

edit2:
For comparison, F91W: 38.2 x 35.2 x 8.5mm / 22g​


----------



## Sgt10p (Dec 21, 2010)

Thanks for this article. I've spent hours trying to find my first Casio watch, which was a digital from the mid '70s I think. Unfortunately I've had to admit defeat but through my hazy memory I believe the A158 is the closest thing to my original. I think it cost my Dad more than £18 which I've just paid at Amazon for 'Old Times Sake'

I've tried to find information of the older models but nothing seems to be out there with the exception of 
http://mygshock.com/wiki/List_of_Every_G-Shock_Model#1983

Have you found any further sources?

Cheers Pete


----------



## dobber72 (Jul 14, 2010)

Sgt10p said:


> Thanks for this article. I've spent hours trying to find my first Casio watch, which was a digital from the mid '70s I think. Unfortunately I've had to admit defeat but through my hazy memory I believe the A158 is the closest thing to my original. I think it cost my Dad more than £18 which I've just paid at Amazon for 'Old Times Sake'
> 
> I've tried to find information of the older models but nothing seems to be out there with the exception of
> List of Every G-Shock Model - G-Shock Wiki | casio watch resources
> ...


You could try here Digital Watch Library, I think the older 70's models were called Casiotrons.


----------



## Sgt10p (Dec 21, 2010)

dobber72 said:


> You could try here Digital Watch Library, I think the older 70's models were called Casiotrons.


This is great. Spotted a Seiko I would have sold my sole for when I was a kid. 
Thanks again


----------



## CheapThrills (May 16, 2012)

Uhh...
Just remembered a digital watch I had.

It was pretty much like these tow Casio's but:
-I think it had a countdown timer, in one minute increments and for several hours I believe.
-Somehow I recall, it had an alarm tone, which could be changed.
-Black and plastic
-Early 90's, 91 or 92 perhaps.



edit: Might have been Casio DW200 or something quite close to that.


I wonder, if available at eBay someday, what prices these run these days??


----------



## dobber72 (Jul 14, 2010)

CheapThrills said:


> Uhh...
> Just remembered a digital watch I had.
> 
> It was pretty much like these tow Casio's but:
> ...


Might be the W71, that has a countdown timer, alarm tone can't be changed though, it is 50m water resist though, which is nice. Unfortunately the W71 is not available any more. They might have one in a brick and mortar store which is where I got mine. I searched online and there were three stores selling them but the only reputable store was selling it for $59.99, I paid $20 for mine. Here's mine


----------



## avusblue (Mar 26, 2009)

Threads like this one are great! These basic-but-good Casio watches deserve to receive respect that goes well beyond their modest pricing. Sometimes the best solution is the simple and basic solution.

I really love these affordable, practical, Casio watches. They just work so darned well. When you stop to think about it, these watches are aesthetic and functional masterpieces, with designs that have endured the years. And I respect Casio for making these watches so well - it demonstrates the organization's respect for its customers, regardless of how much they choose to pay for a watch.

I own the W59, the A158, and the W71, from left to right, in addition to "higher-end" G-Shocks including the mighty GW-5000:



















But you know which watch I pick when it's a hot, humid, steamy summer day and I've got things to do outside? The humble *W59*. Compact, light as a feather, unobtrusive and ultra-comfortable, yet totally functional, good looking, and robust. The three-button ergonomics and simple, easy flow and control of functions has been long-perfected. It is hard to think of how these watches could be improved. The W59 is quite similar to the world-famous, super basic F-91, but with a 50M water rating and (I think) a slightly more appealing aesthetic.



















Back to the OP's 158 versus 168 consideration. With these basic models, I actually prefer the simpler versions with the LED illumination versus the electro-luminescence. For one, the dial markings are just cleaner without shouting "ILLUMINATOR!" at you. But more importantly, the clear LCD displays on the "old-school" models are noticeably more crisp, vivid, and constrasty than the electro-luminescent coated displays. Newer models like the GW-5000 make up for this by having thicker, bolder, slightly italicized digits. But the classic models with LED versus EL provide a more sober, back-to-basics presentation of the time that is just more pleasing to the eye, as well as super-legible at a wide viewing angle. And the LED gives perfectly adequate illumination that works just fine.

My affection for the Casio brand is bolstered as much by the essential goodness of these basic, low priced models than by the excellence of any of their higher-end pieces. Anyone should be able to make a good watch if given several hundred dollars, right? But to sell something for under $20 bucks that is durable, attractive, tough, well made, and high quality? Amazing.

Cheers,

Dave


----------



## CheapThrills (May 16, 2012)

I think I will be getting that A158... Looks better.

Is there any classic looker available, with that count down timer?


----------



## d2mac (Mar 19, 2008)

CheapThrills said:


> I think I will be getting that A158... Looks better.
> 
> Is there any classic looker available, with that count down timer?


Recently casio released the B640W which has a very good module with nice LED backlight and CDT, alarm and STW.


----------



## CheapThrills (May 16, 2012)

Nice find d2mac, I did not know about this model!

Now I only have to decide, do I want to pay the higher price with added size for these extra features! ;-)


----------



## Harrington (Aug 28, 2011)

I hate to resurrect this thread, but has anyone had firsthand experience with the B640WD or B640WB? I've been looking for a basic digital watch for ages, and this one checks all my boxes - just curious if anyone's experienced it themselves. The B640WD is _almost_ as nice as that digital Seiko...


----------



## d2mac (Mar 19, 2008)

Harrington said:


> I hate to resurrect this thread, but has anyone had firsthand experience with the B640WD or B640WB? I've been looking for a basic digital watch for ages, and this one checks all my boxes - just curious if anyone's experienced it themselves. The B640WD is _almost_ as nice as that digital Seiko...


I own the B640W (ok, is my watch on the picture ).

For me its not the perfect retro watch because:
- plastic housing
- plastic lens

The size of the watch is comparable with the A-168 pictured above.

One cool and retro Seiko is the SP001, 10 times the price of the Casio but steel and glas! ;-)
But my one sits in a drawer because im afraid to scratch this beauty.










So the Casio gets more wrist time while beeing not perfect.......


----------



## kknight (Sep 25, 2010)

This thread brought back a memory of my all SS Casio Marlin I had back in the early/mid 80's. Cool watch, sadly stolen out of my truck one night.


----------



## Harrington (Aug 28, 2011)

d2mac said:


> I own the B640W (ok, is my watch on the picture ).
> 
> For me its not the perfect retro watch because:
> - plastic housing
> ...


Yeah, that Seiko's a stunner... I'd love to buy one, but as a broke student it's a bit too dear. Think I'll have to settle for the B640W for now. Thank heaven for Casio, though. If it weren't for them and their fun cheap watches, I'd never be able to indulge in my watch habit.


----------



## AgentK88 (Jul 31, 2014)

Thanks for posting such great pictures!

I was looking for a Casio watch I had from my childhood and it certainly looks like the W71. I'd love to try and buy one if anybody knows of anywhere that has them for sale then please let me know!

I'm also going to be picking up a A168 too for more formal occasions!

I'm really loving this site at the moment!!!


----------



## GregB (Dec 6, 2008)

Resurrecting an old thread.

I just went through the 158 or 168 decision. I also tried an a700.

I preferred the 158 due to not having the bold text and I proudly added it to my watch box knowing I had made the right choice.

And there it sat.

I wore it a few times and just couldn’t get past that it looks like I’m wearing a boy’s watch when I wear it. I’m not especially large - 6ft with 6 3/4” wrists, but it just looked very small. So it sat in the watch box. Same with the a700.

I got a 168 to try and I’m finding it just fine. Still a small watch by today’s standards, but when I look in the mirror I look like I’m wearing a men’s watch. I’m comfortable with the size - kind of a Goldilocks size. Just large enough for proportion on me yet small enough to have retro charm.


----------

