-
• #402
Photochromic do not go so dark as a 'tinted' lens, don't buy fake Oakley lenses, buy the real ones from Oakley, the coatings are utter shit on the fakes and will fail and look scratched in very little time.
Get the black iridium polarised lens, it's dark, reduces glare very efficiently due to polarisation and looks good. Your jade iridium lens is a high contrast lens so tends to make things fairly bright, it also allows 17% of outside light through, the black polarised iridium allows only 10% of light through and is neutral, not high contrast.
I'm an optician
-
• #403
Just to be clear the walleva lens' aren't cheap fakes - they are good quality, although perhaps not quite as high end as Oakley ones
-
• #404
You're the man (or lady?) to speak to then!
The Jade ones are good, but I definitely need a touch darker. Given that I find things a bit brighter with my contact lenses in, will polarised make much difference over non-polarised?
Thanks in advance!
Photochromic do not go so dark as a 'tinted' lens, don't buy fake Oakley lenses, buy the real ones from Oakley, the coatings are utter shit on the fakes and will fail and look scratched in very little time.
Get the black iridium polarised lens, it's dark, reduces glare very efficiently due to polarisation and looks good. Your jade iridium lens is a high contrast lens so tends to make things fairly bright, it also allows 17% of outside light through, the black polarised iridium allows only 10% of light through and is neutral, not high contrast.
I'm an optician
-
• #405
Polarised is a benefit, though the difference is subtle. In very bright light it will result In a more comfortable lens and has no downside apart from an increase in price. They are great on water (fishing/ sailing) and helpful for skiing too.
-
• #406
Might as well go Polarised I guess. I've just gone to order and seen there's lack iridium and vr 28 black iridium? What's the difference!? Too complicated FFS
-
• #407
Vr 28 is slightly pinkish looking, (I'm off today so can't see my charts) but I'm pretty sure it's again a high contrast tint, play safe and get 'polarised black iridium'.
-
• #408
Any recommendations for photochromic cycling glasses you can get prescriptionalised?
I have glasses with a clip in prescription insert currently which are OK, but looking to upgrade...
-
• #409
So I'm a sunglasses noob. I have some dhb jobbies (triple lens pro?) that have been fine, but when I#m riding in an aggressive position on the drops, the top bar obscures my vision. Quite a bit in fact. Enough for me to want to drop some cash on something better.
So many choices on wiggle, so confused. What do I need? Rudy Rydon? Evil eye? Radar?
-
• #410
Oakley Radars. For everything.
Thread ends.
-
• #411
@dan is right. I know it's a huge wad of cash to spend on plastic, but Radars are just great. Mine have never fogged-up, even when riding in ~35c temps and just stay put, which is important for me as I'm more of a runner these days. I've had my pair for about 4 years now, my 1 year old had nicked them a few times and they're still scratch-free and look like new.
-
• #412
Alright, radars it is. Is Radarlock a newer slightly fancier version of radar? Also, whats this malarky about Pitch and Path?
-
• #413
If you like Radars but price is a factor Lazer Magneto M1 are really good and can be found really cheap if you search around , I paid £40 for mine on e-bay but here's another pair that might be cheap
Review of them here -http://www.cycleboredom.com/what-im-riding-lazer-magneto-m1-glasses/
-
• #414
^Nvm. Did some UTFSing and found the differences.
-
• #415
@Hovis
XL Blades, Pitch, Path and Range are the different lens shapes on offer. I think 'Path' is the most common and has the slimmest profile. I think it's all down to personal preference really. I think I read somewhere that 'Range' offers the most coverage and is aimed at golfers - or something. -
• #416
I think pitch is the golf one.
They really are ace. So easy to swap lenses too. I've had mine 2 years now and never think about them (usually a sign that something is good) and am constantly swapping lenses for track under lights or night rides. No issues.
-
• #417
Don't get the old Radar, Get Radarlocks, there's no stress on the frame when switching lenses. As no one has mentioned Adidas Evil Eyes, I will . They're great and slightly smaller if you don't have a massive head, you can adjust the angle of the lens using a neat little clicky mechanism, they're cheaper and you can have a prescription insert fitted cheaply too. I left mine on a hillside in Wales. I now have Oakley Fast Jackets, they don't make you look like such a roadie douchbag (as the Radar / Radarlock) and are more solid feeling.
-
• #418
Radar xl if you really want 'looking through your eyebrows' coverage.
I hate the frames getting in the way. My new salice seem really good too.
Although ultimately you won't beat a pair of radars.
-
• #419
Radar xl if you really want 'looking through your eyebrows' coverage.
I hate the frames getting in the way. My new salice seem really good too.
Although ultimately you won't beat a pair of radars.
The XL lens shape extends lower but not higher than the regular Radar if you see what I mean. It's for people with loooong faces, like a horse or Will Self. You can fit an XL, Pitch, Path, Range or fricken Putt lens into any Radar frame, all that changes with the different names if the lens shape.
-
• #420
Surely the XL have a longer 'I' link over the nose, which extends them upwards. Like snooker glasses. They still sit at the same point on the nose. I had a pair, and Ive seen a youtube clip of a standard pair of radars being converted with a longet bridge and an XL lens.
-
• #422
difficult internet vid to fap to admittedly
-
• #423
Well bugger me, I stand corrected. Good information there from @Smallfurry
Though I did manage to fap to it.
Twice
-
• #424
Rep for dedication.
Means they look a bit silly in the E press bar though.
-
• #425
All Radars look a bit silly. Path the least silliest tho.
Ummm. Probably not but I would ask others too.
I have a standard dark brown Oakley lens and the polarised (and photchromic) walleva ones and I don't really notice much difference in reflections tbh.