Armitron Digital Watch Review | This Armitron Beats Casio…BADLY!

(This page features affiliate links, for more information, click here.)

It's finally here! Casio has done it! A digital watch with a steel case and decent water resistance! I mean, it's only taken them half a century! It's way cheaper than the steel G-Shocks and better looking than their flawed A1000 range.

Only problem is…it's not actually a Casio.

Despite the appearance, this is the Armitron Rubik, the Casio killer we've been waiting for, or at least it seems that way on paper. Not only does this have improved specifications but surprisingly, it's from a brand with a respectable history.

Armitron Watch History

Armitron was founded in 1975, just one year after Casio released their first digital wristwatch. They capitalized on the quartz crisis, achieving wide recognition in the US during the 1980s due to collaborations with various American sports teams and athletes. I’m going to be honest with you Yanks, I've never heard of any of them, apologies. Armitron still primarily operates in the states, so if you live elsewhere, you'll ship them internationally.

Watch Review

I did just that and bought not only this piece but two others; those being the Rogue, which is a second Casio lookalike, as well as one of their analog models, which looks a bit like a cheap Rolex explorer. They were all in the £43-£48 range, or about $55, though they can be had for much cheaper depending on your location.

We'll mainly focus on the digitals today, as I'm excited to see how these stack up versus the old-guard Casio models, which are overdue a refresh. Timex released an alternative a few years back, but it had fundamental flaws that made it a no-go. Since then, outside of direct Casio rip-offs, there hasn't been much to gnaw on.

Features

Their packaging is better than most Casios. Whether you receive a tin or a box, you'll have an unboxing experience that doesn't feel super cheap.

Let's quickly cover the obvious first, the visual similarities. Of course, these look like Casio digitals. You've got matching colors and shapes across the board, though they aren't exact clones. The Rubik resembles the Casio A158, with its angular shape, standard lugs, and blue accents, with the most similar aspect being the line at the perimeter. From square-on, the likeness is uncanny, though in motion, you'll immediately notice divergences in the case finishing and shape.

The Rubik is chunkier, more in the vein of the bigger Casio A168 Illuminator. It sits at 34mm in diameter, with a thickness of 9.1mm and a lug-to-lug length of 38.9mm. Given its squared profile, it wears a tad larger than those measurements indicate, though it's still pretty compact. Armitron has this listed as 39mm, but I really can't figure out how they've gotten that measurement, as even with the pushers, it's only just over 37mm wide. Maybe they just quoted the lug-to-lug measurement instead for some reason.

Case Construction

As mentioned earlier, unlike the resin Casio, this one is made of stainless steel. It doesn't beat them in terms of durability, but aesthetics too, as the Rubik has a simple, brushed finish that perfectly matches the stock bracelet; something absent from all budget Casio digitals, where the high-shine cases clash with the brushed bands.

The rear of the Armitron feels way more solid too. They advertise a 5bar water resistance for this Rubik, and while it only has a snapback, it still feels more secure than the rudimentary rears on the Casios.

Despite the curvature, the Rogue is similarly proportioned to the Rubik, with the same diameter and lug-to-lug dimensions, though this one is a fraction slimmer, at just 8.9mm.

It's closest in shape to the Casio B640, but is slimmer and wider, resulting in a far sexier, sleeker appearance.

check out the armitron rubik on amazon

check out the armitron rogue on amazon

Watch Finishing

The Rogue has more of a satin brushing effect, as well as high-shine chamfered edges above the pushers, which are pretty classy for a digital watch. Whichever case you prefer, both Armitrons will last better than the resin Casios, which always develop a bunch of bumps and scratches.

Another upgrade by way of the bracelets. While not a huge improvement over the notoriously jangly ones you get on most Casios, these are a bit more substantial. The Rubik has one that looks just like the one on the A158 or A168, with a slide-clamp mechanism.

Again, it's got cheap folded links, but they're thicker, and the clasp feels much stronger. I probably prefer that on the Rogue, which instead has a 70s vibe and much more flexible construction, meaning it's more comfortable on-wrist. With this one, you can also make finer adjustments to the clasp, so finding the perfect fit will be quicker and easier. Also, the smaller holes on the rear seem to make it less likely that your arm hairs will get trapped, which is often overlooked. Both are plenty long enough to accommodate a wide variety of wrist sizes, and they can each be changed for alternative 18mm straps if you want.

Pushers & Functions

Aside from the matte-finish cases, one of the reasons I think these look better than most Casios is the pushers. You'll notice the Armitrons have four, leaving you with a fairly symmetrical look, whereas most Casios have a vacant slot in at least one corner, which just looks less balanced…almost like one has fallen off or been forgotten.

There's no doubt this 4-pusher arrangement looks better, especially for those of you who like to wear your watch on your right arm, where the empty slot usually would be on show near your hand.

Also, this opens up possibilities when it comes to functions. Now, I will say that Casio has always done a good job of making their digitals extremely intuitive; within seconds, you're up and running. Four buttons, in theory, should give even more flexibility, but some brands have really messed this up, like the Timex digital I mentioned earlier. Even after weeks of trying, I couldn't navigate the interface on that one!

Thankfully, Armitron hasn't pulled a similar stunt, and they've kept it all nice and simple. Bottom left cycles through the modes, bottom right is the light, top right is the stop-start, while top left is the reset button.

Even a toddler could probably operate this one. There's the ever-present stopwatch and alarms for you to play around with. A refreshing addition is the second timezone mode, which allows you to monitor the time in a location of your choosing; I wish I'd known about this last month, as I'd have taken one of these to Germany in place of my trusty A700.

As you might imagine, though, it's not all sunshine and rainbows. There is one obvious shortcoming, the night light.

Yeah, this is a side-light system comparable to the old-school F91, and I think the results speak for themselves! These really need upgrading to something like an LED panel, like that on the Casio A168 for this feature to be any sort of selling point.

Display

In a similar vein, the viewing angles on these displays are slightly worse than most Casios. If you look closely, the digits themselves seem to cast a small shadow onto the backdrop.

Luckily, this isn't significant enough to really impact the experience; in fact, the display is sharp and clear in most circumstances, and the typeface is legible too. Battery life and quality control are also something I can't comment on yet.

Final Thoughts

Really, that's not a lot of downsides for a watch that boasts cool visuals and decent construction.

If you can get them at a decent price, I'd certainly recommend giving them a shot. At some point, I'll probably look at their analog watch too.