CasioMen's Vintage A178WA-1A Silver Stainless-Steel Quartz Watch with Grey Dial

If you wear a watch as jewelry, if a Rolex or equivalent impresses people you want to impress, fine, spend your money and impress those people.... But, if you just want to know what time it is, this inexpensive watch does the job for me very well. It is accurate, easy to read in daylight or dark. It has functions that I rarely use, but I really like the "dual time zone" feature. I set the "dual time" to whatever time zone I am in, but leave the "primary time" set on my "home time zone" alone. This is simply great for air travel. At a glance, I can see local or home time.I've had a lot of watches, but this basic Casio works well for me. I got this one to replace an old Casio that I had scratched and beat up over the years working on cars, carpentry, exploring, etc... That old one still works, but this one is even better because the light is better, and numbers are larger and easier to read -- something I've come to appreciate as I get older.This watch is stainless, very durable, water resistant, keeps great time.And, the thing I love about it, I don't need to worry about it. I have some nice watches. One, for instance is a very nice gold watch, a special gift for special reasons. OK, fine for a wedding, I guess, but, mostly, they stay in a drawer. This watch is certainly not expensive jewelry. It just a simple, useful tool for me. If I lose it, or break it, or whatever, I can toss it out and get another one. One less thing to worry about.It is an excellent product.

I have quite a few watches, at a wide variety of price points. My weekend lawn mowing and gardening watch is a digital Casio that has a plastic case and a resin band. It is my cheapest, and also most comfortable, watch. Heading into the school year, I decided I needed a chronometer. I studied them, starting at a price of about $100 dollars and up to $250. I realized I would lose the ability to sync the second hand to the school bell since the second has is part of the chronograph function, and that the chronographs' dials would only give me estimates. My trusty Casio, with which I time turning steaks on the grill, would act as a stopwatch much better than the chronographs. The plastic and resin workhorse would look a little too casual though, or maybe I was looking for an opportunity to buy yet another watch.I ordered this watch. The face is significantly larger, and easier to read at a glance, than my old Casio. The procedure to set the time is simpler and more intuitive than on my old Casio and, to my surprise, it isn't difficult to "hack" it. I have it synced to GMT right now. Adjusting the band is easy with the aid of a small screwdriver or similar tool, though the instructions that came with the watch did not address how to do so. I have a 7 1/2 inch wrist, and the band could be adjusted out about another inch. For less than $20 dollars I have a watch that will do more than a $200 chronograph. It won't replace my analog watches, but this is a heck of deal for a decent looking and practical watch. I wore similar watches in the 80's, when these were "cool", and keep expecting to hear the theme from Star Wars when I look at it. That alone was worth the price.

Casio Men's A178WA-1A Illuminator Stainless with 3234 module.Obituary, three years later. First off, let me say I'm about to buy two more of these. That's how satisfied I am with the cost/value/performance of this watch.After 3-years of constant wear, it still looks like almost new. I only remove it to shower.But, just shy of 3-years, while sleeping, one of the band-mounting holes broke and the wrist band cannot be reinstalled. So, it's done, kaput. I paid $15.61 and wore it for 1,048 days. That comes to 1.5¢ per day.-------------------------------------As noted by someone else, the case is not stainless steel, although the band appears to be. Here's hoping the chromed plastic case doesn't get scratched too easily, only time will tell. The back of the case is some type of metal, perhaps stainless steel. As delivered, there is a scratch on the back. Maybe that's why I paid half as much here as this watch goes for elsewhere. If that's the case, I am happy to live with a little scratch. :-)I like this type of watch band, the same as my retired Casio which served me without issue for three years. Length adjustment is easily accomplished with a locking lever. No need for removing segments as I've seen in some previous watches I've owned. And it's perfectly comfortable on my wrist. It doesn't pinch/grab my hairy arm.The included user's manual has such tiny print (standard) that my old eyes required a magnifying lens to read it. Fortunately, the manual is available in PDF on their web site and is much easier on the eyes.Most of the settings are so intuitive and familiar I found no need to use the manual. Exceptions were setting hourly chime [SIG] and the daily alarm.The stop-watch is great! Precision to 0.01 second, with a total elapsed time up to 23:59:59. Another reviewer stated the A178 showed a total elapsed time of 9:59:59, that is incorrect. I wish it had a countdown timer. Countdown WITH repeat would have been even sweeter. In fact, those two features were criteria I had in mind when I decided to buy this watch. I knew it didn't have those features when I ordered. But, it seems the only current models available with them are sport watches and I didn't want an Ironman or other such ... they're just a bit gawdy for my taste.The LCD display characters are larger than on most non-sport watches. This appeals to me. The 6-digit time display (common nowadays) is a feature I paid big bucks for 40 years ago, when it was a hard to find feature.The dual time feature is useless to me. I may wish I was a jet setter, but such is not the case. Besides, on the rare occasions when I have the luxury of travel I've always, somehow, managed to add or subtract the time in my head (am I a genius?). Or even go to the horribly tedious (sarcasm) effort of temporarily re-setting my time to match my location for longer visits. I'd happily trade the dual time feature for an actual countdown/repeat timer. To each their own.Claimed accuracy is 30 seconds per month, which would be terrible if true. But, my experience with other digital watches over the last 40 years is that they're significantly more accurate than their claims. I just set the watch to NIST on 8/17/2016. Only time will tell.[EDIT on 9/27/16] 41 days after setting the watch accurately by the NIST time, it is slow by six seconds. That equals less than five seconds per month ... much better than the claimed 30 seconds. And, I've reached my tolerance for inaccuracy, time to reset the watch. Once a month looks like a good time frame for this.[/EDIT]I am retiring a Casio A159WGEA-1 which I bought June 23, 2013 on Amazon. That watch's battery is indicating signs of weakness (dimming display upon setting time) after only three years. This, in spite of the watch's Amazon ad claiming a seven year battery. And I never used any alarm functions nor any illumination. Also, on the retired watch, the (A) button became almost non-functional within months, making it difficult to set the time. [EDIT 3/28/2017] So far, so good ... it still looks and functions perfectly.[/EDIT]A tag which came attached to this, A178WA-1A, makes a claim of "10 year battery" ... I'm highly doubtful about that claim. But in all honesty, if it lasts 3-4 years I'll be satisfied. It will take time to evaluate accuracy and durability. Even though it lacks a few featured I'd ideally like to have, for this price it's a GREAT deal.P.S. Today is October 8, 2022. So, it's a few years later. I still love this model, but good grief, talk about price increases. Nearly DOUBLE what I paid 3-years ago.