I've never had any problems using polarized. But I'm always buying upper end, uber expensive, polarized shades, if that makes a difference.

The issue with polarized lenses is that while they reduce the glare from a horizontal reflective surface (e.g., water and road), they also attenuate the glare from an object in one's peripheral vision, which your peripheral vision would otherwise perceive as a glint at the corner of your eye. Plus the issue with screen glare filter layer mentioned by others above..

At 800+ bucks a pop for progressive lenses, I'm not wearing those on the bike.

Yes, not just Amazon, but also other places that sell economical sunglasses. Call me penny-wise or even stingy, but I feel like it should be possible to buy decent sport glasses for $20 or so.

Right now, I have some non-polarized sport glasses that I've had for at least 10 years. I'm sure I paid less that $20 for them and I've been pretty happy with them, but over the years, they've developed some minor scratches which I find distracting. If I remembered where I got them, and if they were available, I would buy another.

I find the flat front to be just as good at deflecting bugs, and they fog up less when climbing due to better airflow over the lenses. YMMV.

Tifosi do have some reasonably priced wraparounds, but starting at about the $50 mark. I have a pair of photochromatic Tifosi's that cost me $70ish at REI a few years back.

I wear prescription glasses all day, but use Tifosis with near-vision inserts on the bike. They're completely comfortable, the optical quality is as good as polycarbonate can provide, and, best of all, the lenses can be replaced for 20 bucks plus tax and shipping.

Thanks, I just ordered a pair of Tifosi sunglass at Amazon.

I really like my polarized sunglasses, I find them very comforting. They're prescription to boot so I can't speak to the mfg'r. One thing they help with is foggy and overcast days and seem to make distant objects more defined and bike riders seem to stick out better for judging distance when I'm driving. LCD screens emit polarized light; so that's the reason many devices show up as blank when wearing them. Try flipping the device if it can rotate the display output. My android fortunately does not blank on the vertical, but I can turn it 90* horizontal and it will.

I mostly use the same shades on and off the bike.

Here in Seattle, it rains. It can take a while to fully dry, there can be wet spots on the pavement. A rumble strip is the land of ten thousand lakes.

The sunglasses I like are darker at the bottom, and polarized, which both help with this.

I to feel better using non-polarized sun glasses. My cataracts are not bad enough for correction yet but using non-polarized glasses with a green tint helps. I have an old pair or aviator clip-on's that were commonly used on UH1's. The green tint is effective in that it adds contrast and as humans we see more shades of green than any other color...

Maybe not needed for those suicidal cyclists flipping off of mountains cause they are not Human...

I wear polarized when road biking to cut down on glare from car windows, body paneling, and even the road itself.
When mountain biking, glare is not a problem, so I save a few bucks and use non-polarized and with less tint, since I'm often riding in darker areas

I love Smith optics. I’ve used their sunglasses for years for my biking. Polarized and unpolarized lenses. They’re expensive but have a warranty on all frames and are totally worth it.

Just marketing?
 

What’s just marketing to you is essential to me.

I’m very sensitive to light, so I walk, drive, and ride with prescription polarized sunglasses.

Enough said.

Polarized glasses were created for a variety reasons. Your niche use case is one of them. Riding a bicycle under normal conditions is not one of them.

My experience has been towards problems with scratches on the lenses. It seems to matter how careful I am, after a season or two the lenses get scratched and bug me enough that I want to replace them. So I've gone to some rather inexpensive safety glasses. I've tried the polarized and non-polarized types and like them - haven't had any issues with viewing phone or computer screens. So I'm saving my Maui Jim's for walking. :-)

I agree, Polarized is a must for fishing but you don't need it for cycling. However, I have cycling glasses from POC and two from Oakley and none of them are polarized so there's plenty our there.

Pretty sure my Oakley Prizm lenses are not polarized. For a while I was riding with polarized lenses but at the right angle I had a hard time reading my bike computer. Nothing serious and I only had it happen maybe once or twice a season. And never in a dangerous situation. Definitely something to keep in mind though when looking for new sunnies.

Thanks for posting that - I was looking at getting some Tifosi phototec sunglasses and that's a good piece to know.

I buy safety glasses with good wrap around and a good fit with my nose. That keeps dirt from hitting my cheek bones and ending up in my eyes. The safety glasses have been a good fit overall, and ones like the DeWalt ones for tradespeople sell for less than $15. I have clear ones and tinted ones and yellow pairs depending upon the conditions. All are bi-focal readers which I need to read the bike computer display.

Plastic lenses are easily scratched and even the special coatings sold by opticians do not really help.Glass lenses make for a heavier pair and not good for use when I am active as with bicycling and these can break and the idea of glass going into my eyes from eyeglasses is not appealing.

Polarized eyeglasses are great out on the water but then the actual polarization or filtration is strongest when the rays of the light are at a 90 degree angle and the filtration falls off rapidly at the sides. For driving I have found polarized sunglasses to be relatively worthless and of no help when their is glare from a car window or chrome bumper in front of me. My polarized sunglasses are the most expensive ones I own but they are the ones I would never use when driving or riding a bike.

And a polarizing coating does not block UVA or UVB which is what damages ones eyes and leads to cataracts.

I didn't quite have the numbers correct. I blame the fact I was on my phone and searching is a pain. Directly from the Tifosi website:

• Smoke: A classic gray tint. This also has a polarized option. Polarized can be beneficial if your activity has you near water, snow, or sand. Light transmission: 47.7-15.2%, polarized: 32.1-11.9%
• Light Night: This tint will provide the best range for low light conditions. Light transmission: 75.9-27.7%
• Brown: A contrast-enhancing tint. This too, comes in a polarized version. Light transmission: 75.9-27.7%, polarized: 28.7-9.4%
• High Speed Red: It’s all in the name–this is the top performer, made for the fastest athletes! Light transmission: 35.3-13.5%

No worries - it was more the reminder of the difference in transmittance, and that for what I'm looking to accomplish the non-polarized would be better suited.

Interesting - I do find polarized sunglasses helpful in reducing reflections from car windshields / glass when driving in traffic. Doesn't completely eliminate the glare, but does reduce it substantially.

When out running, I find it much easier to see the driver of stopped cars at driveways / entrances waiting to pull out onto the road. Particularly when I'm approaching from their right - I can see if they've looked in my direction or are looking left at traffic and more likely not to look to the right before moving.

Cycling, I'm indifferent at this point. My polarized sunglasses don't impact using my electronics but I also wouldn't necessarily go out of my way to choose polarized. I'd say folks should see for themselves.

fujidon FWIW, I've owned Tifosi sunglasses for several years at this point and they've held up very well. They have many options - both polarized and unpolarized, as well as options for reader insets. Many bicycling shops around here tend to carry the brand, or you can do Amazon or you can go directly to tifosioptics.com

I mostly wear Tifosi either

I've also noticed the narrow range with my Tifosi polarized fototecs. Excellent for sunny or cloudy bright conditions on the road, but they don't lighten up enough for riding through dark woods or with dark clouds. I've begun to pull out some of my old non-polarized sunglasses with various defects (missing or broken nose bridge, or missing temple tip coverings, or super scratched up lenses) but interchangeable lenses (smoke, rose, or clear) for the lower light conditions.

Thanks for the Tifosi recommendation. I ordered the non-polarized with the AC (all condition) lens. It's exactly what I was looking for and I'm very happy with them.

In fact, I like them so much, I ordered another pair with the smoke lens for sunny days... BUT, these glasses create an odd distortion when looking anywhere but dead center. The AC lens don't have this issue at all. I'm going to return them. Amazon makes it easy.

If I got a "lemon", I'd consider ordering again. Anyone have similar or opposite experience?

I'm in SE Florida where the sun can get brutal in the summer. So I start many Summer Saturday rides in the dark so I'm back inside by 11:00 AM. I've tried both non-polarized and polarized, and I prefer the polarized lenses. I also wear prescription polarized and have recently purchased transition- polarized lenses, since I start many rides in the dark. I like this combination the most. The transition-polarized won't dull the sun as much as just polarized lenses when it is super bright outside, but I find it quite adequate. I use a Garmin bike computer and have no problem seeing it when I'm on the bike. If I have a problem seeing the computer when I'm off the bike, I can take a step or two to get closer and see it. I also have not noticed any difference in seeing hazards between the non-polarized and polarized lenses. Maybe there is, but I have not noticed it.

For bicycling I rely on "safety glasses" that block 100% of the UVA and UVB rays.Both ultraviolet-A (UV-A) and UV-B induce cataract formation and are not necessary for sight. Ultraviolet radiation is also a risk factor for damage to the retinas of children. The removal of these wavelengths from ocular exposure will greatly reduce the risk of early cataract and retinal damage.

Even the slightly more expensive reader type which I need to read the bike computer display cost me less than $20 per pair. These cost less than $10 and are available in different colors. I like gray in bright sunlight and the yellow on overcast days.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...?ie=UTF8&psc=1

When I have looked for polarized sunglasses it was often not stated whether they blocked 100% of the UVA and UVB rays so I doubt that they did filter these damaging rays.