As I first saw the AQ-800, the LCD which sits that low in the case, was the main critism point. You permanently have shadows all around on that display. I'm good with chromed resin but they should make it last longer.
Not a big fan of the AQ800, I still think that the AQ230 is the perfect "classic" anadigi from casio. As always, I'm, amazed by the size and variety of your collection. Thanks for sharing
I have got lots of watches mostly Casio the was a great price reduction on the blue version of this watch so I at the get it most of my Casios watches of g shocks because I like all the functionality of them but I also the cheaper Casio ones because they always have a way of making any of the watches look expensive no matter what the price is
I am not sure but it seems due to cost cutting the new vintage models are not that great quality wise compared to old models. The overall weight, material quality & design finishing is far better in older ones.
Regarding the "small" differences between the old and new model and despite Casio stated that the reissue came from the 1980s AQ-450, actually the AQ-800E looks a lot closer to the 1988's AB-100. Though they were Data Bank models. But the AB-100 has the same "chin" on the case and the same look where the bracelet connects to the case. It's not an integrated bracelet. AB-100 also does not have the blue and red markings. Take a look at the AB-100 to check for yourself.
If you want to know if the old one is brass or resin, why not just weigh them both on a kitchen scale and see how close they are. If it's made of brass it should weigh considerably more.
Old watches were made with a noble purpose, not greed. I love Casio watches but these new ones are trash compared to the old ones. Casio obviously is not an exception to this trend. I buy vintage.
@@lookatwrist Think about it, if we can still use it 40 years later they were way cheaper comparatively. Generally speaking though, plastic watches shouldn't exist in the world we live nowadays, they are going to be food for fish in a few years, and then we'll eat that very same fish.
As I first saw the AQ-800, the LCD which sits that low in the case, was the main critism point. You permanently have shadows all around on that display.
I'm good with chromed resin but they should make it last longer.
Yes it does sit low. I didnt like that.
Not a big fan of the AQ800, I still think that the AQ230 is the perfect "classic" anadigi from casio. As always, I'm, amazed by the size and variety of your collection. Thanks for sharing
I have got lots of watches mostly Casio the was a great price reduction on the blue version of this watch so I at the get it most of my Casios watches of g shocks because I like all the functionality of them but I also the cheaper Casio ones because they always have a way of making any of the watches look expensive no matter what the price is
I am not sure but it seems due to cost cutting the new vintage models are not that great quality wise compared to old models. The overall weight, material quality & design finishing is far better in older ones.
Regarding the "small" differences between the old and new model and despite Casio stated that the reissue came from the 1980s AQ-450, actually the AQ-800E looks a lot closer to the 1988's AB-100. Though they were Data Bank models. But the AB-100 has the same "chin" on the case and the same look where the bracelet connects to the case. It's not an integrated bracelet. AB-100 also does not have the blue and red markings. Take a look at the AB-100 to check for yourself.
If you want to know if the old one is brass or resin, why not just weigh them both on a kitchen scale and see how close they are. If it's made of brass it should weigh considerably more.
Old one is definitely metal, just not sure if it's brass or a base steel.
Old watches were made with a noble purpose, not greed. I love Casio watches but these new ones are trash compared to the old ones. Casio obviously is not an exception to this trend. I buy vintage.
The old ones had a more purposeful design, but I bet they cost a lot more comparatively.
@@lookatwrist Think about it, if we can still use it 40 years later they were way cheaper comparatively. Generally speaking though, plastic watches shouldn't exist in the world we live nowadays, they are going to be food for fish in a few years, and then we'll eat that very same fish.