Cycling sunglasses

JMcP92

Hey folks,

Just a general question, what sunglasses does everyone use?
I have a pair of Ray Bans I use for everything, but in bright sun (such as I found yesterday) on singletrack, the shading by rocks and such just becomes black and makes the trail very unnerving as you're not sure what is where.
I use some Iridium lensed goggles for MX that seem to get round this problem, which could work, but anyone recommend brands etc.

John

njee20

I like Oakleys, Radars and Jawbones. Got some photochromic lenses for the latter which are very good in dull conditions, must say if it's sunny I don't really have any problems with a Jade Iridium lense.

.blitz

Endura Mullets

Mildy photochromic the lenses go from pale grey to medium grey. Too dark to use at night but great in a wide range of daylight conditions especially in the woods on bright days. Optical clarity is a notch below Oakleys but loads better than safety specs and those 10 Euro Fakelys you got on holiday in Turkey. Frames are solid with metal hinges and non-slip ear socks and nose bridge. The only possible negative is that they are pretty big and might not be suitable if you have a small face.

p44cmb

Out of all the glasses I have bought, the ones that I rate and use the most are a pair of Bolle Safety specs from Screwfix.

Cheap as chips so you don't need to worry if they get scratched or broken, don't look too bad and they are also slightly tinted. i've also got a clear pair that I use for night trail riding.

Tinted = http://www.screwfix.com/p/bolle-clear-l ... pecs/95382

Clear = http://www.screwfix.com/p/bolle-silium- ... 1526880530

Stu Coops

For MTB always ten to use clear and tinted for Road as trails tend to go dark then light all to often and as you say can almost seem black at times.

wmorgs

Aldi Had Some Jokleys . . . . Really Good For £2.99 Bought 5 Pairs :}

felix.london

+1 for Oakley Jawbones. Also - looking into (pun intended) a pair of Julbo Zebra Dirt for this season

Jgb1

I use oakley radarlock photochromic. There expensive but crystal clear and I dont have to mess with lenses as they darken off in bright sun and clear in the shade.

Cheapies seem to make every thing look big big as well. I had one pair that made me feel 10' in the air when riding

Vegman

+ 1 for the Bolle's. I got mine from our indusrial supplies co when I went to get some cleaning stuff, I paid less than a fiver a pair. Clear for when its not shining, tints for when it might. I had previosly spent shed loads on Bolle's as ski glasses **ck knows why... optically these seem just as good. Only slight downside is that after a couple of years the metal rimmed ones (clear) I think, are showing signs of a little corrosion due to sweat....must get fitter to sweat less.

Kowalski675

JMcP92 wrote:

?
I have a pair of Ray Bans I use for everything, but in bright sun (such as I found yesterday) on singletrack, the shading by rocks and such just becomes black and makes the trail very unnerving as you're not sure what is where.

Rayban may have changed since I worked in optics (it's been a long time), but they used to almost all have glass lenses (mine all are), which really isn't a good idea for activities like mountainbiking - ideally you want polycarbonate (virtually shatter proof, although easier to scratch).

houston26

Look at sunwise glasses. Cheap and do the job. Don't be fooled into thinking if you buy oakleys and such that your getting better lenses! If they were prescription then fair enough, but otherwise a rip off

grenw

Jgb1 wrote:

I use oakley radarlock photochromic. There expensive but crystal clear and I dont have to mess with lenses as they darken off in bright sun and clear in the shade.

Cheapies seem to make every thing look big big as well. I had one pair that made me feel 10' in the air when riding

Got these myself - Xmas pressie. A bit pricey, even after shopping around, but worth it. Much better than the photochromic Enduras I had. A much wider range and the Oakleys you can wear in twilight conditions.

njee20

There are a couple of Oakley photochromic lenses. I've got the Clear Black Iridium and have no problems wearing them at night.

paulbox

p44cmb wrote:

Out of all the glasses I have bought, the ones that I rate and use the most are a pair of Bolle Safety specs from Screwfix.

Cheap as chips so you don't need to worry if they get scratched or broken, don't look too bad and they are also slightly tinted. i've also got a clear pair that I use for night trail riding.

I used the Bolle safety glasses for a while but the optics are absolutely terrible.

I have some Oakley bottle tops (think that's what they're called) with pink'ish lenses which are great in dull conditions, but they aren't big enough and you do get crap coming in under the lenses.

Recently bought some Jawbones, good deal from the Oakley outlet (Southampton), £129 down from £189, case, 2 sets of lenses & soft pouch. Very pleased with them so far.

apple eater

wmorgs wrote:

Aldi Had Some Jokleys . . . . Really Good For £2.99 Bought 5 Pairs :}

I think the one's i bought are Crane. They have three different shades of lenses smoked - yellow- clear. So far they have been great and they were just a couple of pounds

paul20v

I use Madison D'Arcs
have done for over 15 years
there good allrounders and come with interchangeable lens
im only on my second set as i broke the arm off the frame about 6 months ago
i contacted madison and they sent me a whole new D'Arcs quad glasses set foc
now thats service you cant ever fault

felix.london

p44cmb wrote:

Out of all the glasses I have bought, the ones that I rate and use the most are a pair of Bolle Safety specs from Screwfix.

Might be fine for the UK but I'd be careful if you head somewhere sunnier. Over here proper shades with decent lenses are a must

houston26 wrote:

Don't be fooled into thinking if you buy oakleys and such that your getting better lenses! If they were prescription then fair enough, but otherwise a rip off

Not in my experience. The lenses in the cheap glasses I've tried are nowhere near as good as my Oakley lenses. Especially in the snow and also going from very bright sunshine to dark, shaded trails and back into the sun again

chiefinspector

houston26 wrote:Don't be fooled into thinking if you buy oakleys and such that your getting better lenses! If they were prescription then fair enough, but otherwise a rip off


Not in my experience. The lenses in the cheap glasses I've tried are nowhere near as good as my Oakley lenses. Especially in the snow and also going from very bright sunshine to dark, shaded trails and back into the sun again

Agree with the above comment. I have 2 pairs of Oakley's. Straight Jacket which are prescription and a pair of Flak Jackets that have interchangeable lenses. The Oakley lenses are far superior and although they are more expensive, you certainly get what you pay for.

supersonic

Some of the ultra cheap ones have poor lenses. But from about a tenner upwards there are some very good ones, that meet a lot of safety standards. You pay more for photochromic lenses though.

I have Red Frog glasses - they do a large range, many that use optical quality, shatterproof polycarbonate lenses, that meet the EU standards and UV400. 10 quid, nothing I have seen works any better for non photochromic.

felix.london

supersonic wrote:

Some of the ultra cheap ones have poor lenses. But from about a tenner upwards there are some very good ones, that meet a lot of safety standards. You pay more for photochromic lenses though.

I have Red Frog glasses - they do a large range, many that use optical quality, shatterproof polycarbonate lenses, that meet the EU standards and UV400. 10 quid, nothing I have seen works any better for non photochromic.

Any particular model Sonic? Looking for a cheap set to use as a spare to keep in the Camelbak.

felix.london

felix.london wrote:

supersonic wrote:

Some of the ultra cheap ones have poor lenses. But from about a tenner upwards there are some very good ones, that meet a lot of safety standards. You pay more for photochromic lenses though.

I have Red Frog glasses - they do a large range, many that use optical quality, shatterproof polycarbonate lenses, that meet the EU standards and UV400. 10 quid, nothing I have seen works any better for non photochromic.

Any particular model Sonic? Looking for a cheap set to use as a spare to keep in the Camelbak.

Hold on...think I've found them...must be the Biker Radar ones surely!?

http://www.redfrogstore.co.uk/biker-radar-choice-of-8-colours-1034-p.asp

trailpuppet

For "good" glasses Bloc are my first choice for fit. Having a large, high bridge of a nose getting something that fits is a first priority :roll:
My latest find for "cheap" glasses are Tesco F&F ones, polarised for £10. I prefer full framed glasses having seen the damage frameless ones can do in the event of an accident.

Those Froggies look interesting

leythervegas

http://www.mauijim.com/hot-sands.html

If you can stretch to a pair of these they are well worth it. I work in an opticians and trust me, they are the best lenses available. The clarity is unbelievable. I've also got a pair of standard transitions in an old smith optics frame for when it's gloomy/going dark. (Always get original transitions not the specsavers copies as they are truly shite.)

Kowalski675

leythervegas wrote:

http://www.mauijim.com/hot-sands.html

I work in an opticians

I used to work in an opticians too, that's where my sunglasses fetish began ,lol.

leythervegas

You'll be the same as me then pal, all these 2.99 Oakley copies just won't do. We can tell the difference between tat and the real deal.

botch

I recently bought a pair of Sunwise Equinox glasses a few weeks back (http://www.tredz.co.uk/.Sunwise-Equinox-Sunglasses-With-4-Interchangeable-Lenses_36335.htm - the indigo frame version). Previous to this I'd just been wearing normal sunglasses, or occasionally just glasses when I didn't have contacts in.

These are the first set of cycling glasses I've owned and didn't want to spend much as I just wanted to try some and get a feel for them. Having spend the last bank holiday weekend blasting around the trail centres in North Wales I've been impressed with them. The only slight issues were that they steamed up a couple of times (but only when stopped and moving them a fraction down the nose immediately solved it), and they don't come with a hard case.

I'm sure they won't be as good as some of the more expensive sets but for a basic set I'm happy with them and will likely stick with them for a while.

Kowalski675

leythervegas wrote:

You'll be the same as me then pal, all these 2.99 Oakley copies just won't do. We can tell the difference between tat and the real deal.

True, but I wouldn't wear £200 Oakleys riding off road, sooner or later they'd get trashed (I took my helmet off the other day, forgetting I was wearing sunglasses and the glasses fell off onto rock - I would've been mighty annoyed if they'd cost me a three figure price tag. There is a happy medium between cheap shite and spending a fortune.

felix.london

...but you'll happily chuck a £2K bike down a mountain Any performance kit is expensive. If I get 4 or 5 seasons out of a set of goggles or glasses (snowboarding or biking) I think it's money well spent.

You can send Oakley stuff back to them and they will 're-fresh' them for you - new lenses and various bits and pieces - they come back like a new pair - there's a charge but cheaper than buying new

Tried on a pair of Julbo Zebra Dirt yesterday - very nice fit and very nice chromatic lenses...stuck them on the never ending shopping list...

and btw - performance Oakley's can take a serious beating..they're designed for abuse

bennett_346

I'm afraid i'm still on high performance £8.99 safety goggles.

Kowalski675

felix.london wrote:

...but you'll happily chuck a £2K bike down a mountain Any performance kit is expensive.

My bike cost me a tenth of that, and if I tried to chuck even a £2k suspension bike down a moountain I'd be broken long before anything on the bike was, lol. I know Oakleys are quality kit (as I said, dispensing optics - including prescription Oakleys - used to be my job), I'm just saying that you don't need to spend that kind of money to get something that's good enough and safe enough for most people's requirements. I know that performance kit is expensive in any field - for example my favourite of my Arai helmets has a retail price tag of £500, I have gloves with RRPs of up to £170, boots up to £330 or an £800 shock absorber and I'm a firm believer that the old adage "buy cheap, buy twice" usually holds true, but you don't always need to have the very best gear, and for a beginner like me £200 for sunglasses (when I paid £220 for my bike) would be somewhat excessive, when a £20 pair will adequately protect my eyes (from UV and foreign objects) and are a lot cheaper to replace if lost or broken.

mac_man

I think the quality vs price argument runs out pretty quickly with sunglasses. The only real reason (IMO) for buying a pair of Oakleys or similar, over a cheaper model, is: you can afford them. And why not?

Most people wouldn't argue that a £2k bike is massively better than a £300 bike. But is a £20 pair of glasses going to be massively beaten by a £160 pair of Oakleys or a £400 pair of Maui Jims?

A cousin of has a pair of Maui Jims and TBH I just couldn't see where the money was being spent, either in the build or the lenses... again just my opinion.

But I wouldn't knock anyone for buying a pair. It's like pricey watches vs a cheap (but decent) Casio. They both tell the time equally well. Both will last well and do the job intended. But people buy a watch for more reasons than telling the time.