Budget Watches (Chronograph vs Field Watch) - Casio MTP-4500 vs Wenger 72803

Watch Comparison: Casio MTP-4500 vs. Wenger 72803W

I have a fondness for three styles of analog watches: Chronographs, Field Watches, and Divers. Typically, I find that Quartz movements work best for Chronograph complications, while Automatic/Mechanical movements can rival Quartz in Field and Dive Watches. I also like to keep a few budget Quartz watches in my collection as 'beater' watches, allowing me to enjoy some basic styling without the worry of damage.

When I’m not wearing an Automatic/Mechanical, I gravitate towards 'busy' Quartz Chronographs on a metal bracelet, such as the Casio MTP-4500.

Watch Specifications

[Watch #1]

• Brand/Model: Casio MTP-4500
• Style: Chronograph (3 Register, Center Seconds)
• Dimensions: 41mm Case Width, 11mm Case Height, 22mm Lug Width
• Movement: Quartz
• Features: Tachymeter Rotating Bezel, No Date, Metal Bracelet
• Retail Price: $33 @ Amazon (MSRP $80)

[Watch #2]

• Brand/Model: Wenger 72803W
• Style: Field Watch
• Dimensions: 41mm Case Width, 11mm Case Height, 20mm Lug Width
• Movement: Quartz
• Features: Date, Leather Band
• Retail Price: $33 @ Amazon (MSRP $135)

Comparison Breakdown

1. Design

Casio wins.
The Casio features a beautiful 38mm watch face that feels perfectly sized, whereas the Wenger appears larger despite the same case width. The black face of the Casio looks sharp, with polished hour indices that really stand out.

However, the Casio's 22mm lugs feel too large for a 41mm case; 20mm would provide a better proportion. It’s becoming increasingly challenging to find a well-designed 41mm watch case with 20mm lugs. The Casio's metal bracelet is surprisingly comfortable and easy to size, making it ideal for those moments when I need a straightforward Quartz watch.

2. Build Quality

Wenger wins.
The brushed metal case of the Wenger exudes quality, and I’m curious how a Wenger Chronograph would stack up against the Casio. While the Casio is decent and appears solid, its polished surfaces aren’t my favorite, though they are a good compromise for a budget watch.

3. Legibility

Wenger wins.
This was expected since the simpler Field Watch design of the Wenger is easier to read than the busy chronograph dial of the Casio. The Wenger has decent lume on the hour and second hands, making it legible at night. While the Casio also has lume, I haven’t had the chance to charge it fully to evaluate its effectiveness.

Additionally, the date complication on the Wenger is quite handy for me, as I often check the date while filling out forms.

4. Overall

Casio wins.
Though the Wenger is functional and well-crafted, it doesn’t have the same aesthetic appeal on my wrist as the Casio. Wearing the Casio feels like I’m sporting a watch that’s worth more than its price point, while the Wenger gives off a more typical $30 watch vibe. Although value is subjective and both watches serve their intended purpose excellently, I find myself leaning towards the Casio.

If the Casio had 20mm lugs, better lume, and perhaps a simpler bracelet design, it would earn a more decisive victory. Conversely, if the Wenger were more proportionate and featured a better bracelet, it would be a serious contender.

5. Closing

Both watches are great additions to my collection, offering distinct styles and functionalities. I’ve been wearing the Casio for several days now and am very pleased with it. For the Wenger, I’ve tried it on various bands, and so far, the Hirsch Liberty has been a strong choice. Its heavy 4mm thickness helps balance the larger watch face nicely.