Sunglasses--$200+?
10-18-18, 01:12 PM
#51
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,208
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18883 Post(s)
Liked 10,646 Times
in
6,054 Posts
Polarizing filters remove some of the sun reflection from a smooth "2D" surface. They don't literally make water and glass invisible.
10-18-18, 01:43 PM
#52
Non omnino gravis
I was consciously focusing on the ground today to see if glass was rendered invisible when it occurred to me: if it actually is, I'll never know! DUN DUN DUUUUNN.
Even if polarization did in fact make pieces of glass less visible (which I don't believe it does) the greater contrast and clarity would be more than worth it.
I put off polarization for several pairs of glasses due to (primarily) cost, and to some degree the fear of the filter in computer screen happening to match up with the filter in the glasses and just giving me a blank display. Because I wanted special lens coatings, it was cheaper to get them with the polarization than without. No problems seeing any screens, either. Matter of fact, I think I can see the Garmin more clearly in bright sun.
Even if polarization did in fact make pieces of glass less visible (which I don't believe it does) the greater contrast and clarity would be more than worth it.
I put off polarization for several pairs of glasses due to (primarily) cost, and to some degree the fear of the filter in computer screen happening to match up with the filter in the glasses and just giving me a blank display. Because I wanted special lens coatings, it was cheaper to get them with the polarization than without. No problems seeing any screens, either. Matter of fact, I think I can see the Garmin more clearly in bright sun.
__________________
10-18-18, 02:42 PM
#53
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,961
Bikes: Specialized Roubaix, Canyon Inflite AL SLX, Ibis Ripley AF, Priority Continuum Onyx, Santana Vision, Kent Dual-Drive Tandem
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 880 Post(s)
Liked 728 Times
in
437 Posts
Polarization makes riding over slightly wet asphalt directly into the sun much better. My commute into the sunset (not to mention over a lake) is blinding otherwise. I haven't used expensive sunglasses and prefer not to because I doubt I'll treat any pair with kid gloves even if they cost a lot. After reading this thread, I'm planning to check out some safety glasses to replace my cheap pairs of sports glasses that seem very easy to scratch.
10-18-18, 02:51 PM
#54
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Melbourne, Oz
Posts: 9,547
Bikes: https://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=152015&p=1404231
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1529 Post(s)
Liked 718 Times
in
510 Posts
It's nice to see a bit of social pressure against blowing craploads of dough in response to marketing...
10-18-18, 02:55 PM
#55
20+mph Commuter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Greenville. SC USA
Posts: 7,518
Bikes: Surly LHT, Surly Lowside, a folding bike, and a beater.
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1434 Post(s)
Liked 331 Times
in
219 Posts
(I get Ti frames with the super-thin lenses and all the coatings)
.
.
.
10-18-18, 03:22 PM
#56
Senior Member
I have to bring up the fact that chinese carbon bike makers can sell carbon fiber bike frames for $300 and still make a profit, yet we pay thousands for a chinese made carbon fiber bike.
Yes there are quality questions raised, but is it even plausible that the bikes are different enough to justify the 10x markup (same as oakely vs. knockoff)?
Yes there are quality questions raised, but is it even plausible that the bikes are different enough to justify the 10x markup (same as oakely vs. knockoff)?
I dont necessarily mean to say this applies to frame builders (though it certainly may...).
10-18-18, 03:32 PM
#57
Non omnino gravis
I don't think price gouging can be applied to non-essentials. Plenty of guys are content with $7 safety glasses, regardless of what Luxottica charges for Oakley. Now price fixing, yeah, absolutely. Luxottica has perfected that.
__________________
10-18-18, 04:47 PM
#58
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Add to that the cost of putting your prescription in them. I'd like to buy a nice pair of cycling glasses and put my prescription in them but honestly, for the cost, and how often I would really use them, it just doesn't seem worth it to me. I don't think I would really wear them out and about when not on my bike.
10-18-18, 04:50 PM
#59
Non omnino gravis
Insurance covered my exam and lenses-- I just paid for the frames and some of the add-ons. It was around $140 out of pocket. But I ride ~15 hours a week, so I didn't even think twice about it.
__________________
10-18-18, 04:56 PM
#60
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Walnut Creek, CA
Posts: 2,669
Bikes: 2023 Canyon Aeoroad CF SL, 2015 Trek Emonda SLR, 2002 Litespeed Classic, 2005 Bianchi Pista, Some BikesDirect MTB I never ride.
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 648 Post(s)
Liked 139 Times
in
90 Posts
Oakleys are excellent optically and they have fantastic product support.
That said, I'd never pay more than $20 for any pair of sunglasses after my dog destroyed my ray bans. Currently using $18 knock-off POCs on the bike and I can't imagine anything about them that could be improved.
That said, I'd never pay more than $20 for any pair of sunglasses after my dog destroyed my ray bans. Currently using $18 knock-off POCs on the bike and I can't imagine anything about them that could be improved.
Contrast that to a company like Julbo, who, on more than one occasion, has shipped me FOR FREE, replacement parts for pairs of mountaineering glasses. Oakley is 1000% built on marketing. Their products are good, but they aren't the best. They are the "Dre Beats" of the sunglasses world.
Last edited by cthenn; 10-18-18 at 05:00 PM.
10-18-18, 05:08 PM
#61
Member
No one has ever refused to ride with me and I've never been shamed for wearing my safety glasses. In fact I've occasionally been asked about them and then where I bought them. As for being polarized...I rarely ride when roads are icy and glass on the roads has never been a problem. In fact there are shiny specks in the road material here that make me "see glass" where it doesn't exist. I always thought that polarized lenses were/are designed to protect against harmful rays from the sun. Whether they truly look like safety glasses or "real" cycling glasses is as you say, opinion. I find that the only real problem between my $7.00 glasses and $100-$200 glasses is that the money I save weighs me down and slows me down. ��
10-18-18, 05:59 PM
#63
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,208
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18883 Post(s)
Liked 10,646 Times
in
6,054 Posts
I wear cheap cycling glasses, but real nice sunglasses off the bike. The non bike ones fit my face perfectly, and they're feather light so I can wear them all day and forget they're there. Optically they're much better than cheap gas station shared.
10-18-18, 07:55 PM
#64
Senior Member
ORR XP55. I get mine free thru work. We have vending machines with personal protective equipment like safety glasses, gloves and ear plugs. I found the tinted safety glasses to work really well on the bike. I just wish we got the amber/yellow lenses for mountain biking.
10-18-18, 10:08 PM
#65
- Soli Deo Gloria -
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Northwest Georgia
Posts: 14,779
Bikes: 2018 Rodriguez Custom Fixed Gear, 2017 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2015 Bianchi Pista, 2002 Fuji Robaix
Mentioned: 235 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6844 Post(s)
Liked 736 Times
in
469 Posts
Oakley Flak 2.0 with progressive lenses, transition and frosted edges. They were $850 before insurance and $200 out of pocket.
I wear them 5x/week for at least 3 hours per ride including night rides.
It was a no-brainer for me.
-Tim-
10-19-18, 09:59 AM
#66
Senior Member
Oakleys are overpriced, but they are still the nicest ones I have owned by a large margin. I use radar prizm and what I notice is - much better clarity and fog resistance. These things never fog up. They also deal with sweat better, it is very rare that I have any sweat distort the lens, it just rolls right off. Cleaning them is easy - I run them under the faucet and they have no sweat residue on the lens after. Basically, the water/sweat resistance on these lenses is top notch.
Additionally, the clarity of vision is best for me. All that and I still think they are over priced because all high end sunglasses are. I’d suggest tracking down a pair on sale. It’s worth it, imo.
Additionally, the clarity of vision is best for me. All that and I still think they are over priced because all high end sunglasses are. I’d suggest tracking down a pair on sale. It’s worth it, imo.
10-19-18, 11:59 AM
#68
Senior Member
Methinks us folks with prescriptions take care of our eyewear a bit better than the rest of you.[/QUOTE]
+1 See how some non prescription wearer handle their eye wear makes me cringe.
200+ for a pair of Sunglasses is all relative..just like bike bling buy what you are comfortable with.
+1 See how some non prescription wearer handle their eye wear makes me cringe.
200+ for a pair of Sunglasses is all relative..just like bike bling buy what you are comfortable with.
10-19-18, 12:24 PM
#69
Senior Member
From 30F-50F, I wear clear safety glasses I snag from my service department. Reminds me...it's like 40 here, and I haven't gotten a pair yet this year lol.
10-19-18, 07:55 PM
#71
For The Fun of It
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Louisissippi Coast
Posts: 5,853
Bikes: Lynskey GR300, Lynskey Backroad, Litespeed T6, Lynskey MT29, Burley Duet
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2136 Post(s)
Liked 1,649 Times
in
830 Posts
I won't pay 200 bucks for a pair of glasses when I know I am going to break them or lose them. I can appreciate quality though. I bought 3 pair of Costa glass lens glasses from Steep an Cheap for $59 a pair. They have a lot of different brands at deeply discounted prices.
https://www.steepandcheap.com/sunglasses?nf=1
https://www.steepandcheap.com/sunglasses?nf=1
10-20-18, 12:35 AM
#72
- Soli Deo Gloria -
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Northwest Georgia
Posts: 14,779
Bikes: 2018 Rodriguez Custom Fixed Gear, 2017 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2015 Bianchi Pista, 2002 Fuji Robaix
Mentioned: 235 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6844 Post(s)
Liked 736 Times
in
469 Posts
If you guys wore expensive prescription glasses to see then you would learn to stop breaking and loosing your glasses fast.
-Tim-
-Tim-
10-20-18, 02:17 AM
#73
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 2,433
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 741 Post(s)
Liked 412 Times
in
230 Posts
I like Oakleys. I like I can replace the lenses. There are some third party companies that also produce lenses for Oakley’s that are very good. I have found them to be durable under normal use. I wear eyeglasses, so I am used to not laying glasses where the can be damaged. All my sunglasses are stored in hard cases. I can see why people would not want to spend a lot of money on their sunglasses also, though.
10-20-18, 07:50 AM
#74
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 8,922
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4717 Post(s)
Liked 1,882 Times
in
998 Posts
I sold my pair of C6 for $10k. The buyer didn't hesitate when I gave him the price.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/OAKLEY-Sunn...S!-1:rk:4:pf:0
https://www.ebay.com/itm/OAKLEY-Sunn...S!-1:rk:4:pf:0
10-20-18, 08:09 AM
#75
Non omnino gravis
Shhhh! If trekmogul gets a look at those, he might snap up 3 or 4 pair. 
I remember a guy talking about relative worth one time-- he asked people what was the smallest amount of money that they would stop to pick up on a busy street/sidewalk. It pretty much always came back to a quarter, 25˘. He said that then, based on the average income of a typical American citizen-- using that 25˘ as a percentage of their wealth, someone like Warren Buffett would have to drop something like $18,000 for it to have the same relative value. Basically, if 17 grand flew out of Buffett's car window, it would be less than you or I dropping a quarter. To those guys, $16k sunglasses? That's bottled water money.
I remember a guy talking about relative worth one time-- he asked people what was the smallest amount of money that they would stop to pick up on a busy street/sidewalk. It pretty much always came back to a quarter, 25˘. He said that then, based on the average income of a typical American citizen-- using that 25˘ as a percentage of their wealth, someone like Warren Buffett would have to drop something like $18,000 for it to have the same relative value. Basically, if 17 grand flew out of Buffett's car window, it would be less than you or I dropping a quarter. To those guys, $16k sunglasses? That's bottled water money.
__________________