Nice sunglasses?

jim55

What's a half decent pair of glasses ( and none of this 100 quid and up stuff). Realistic stuff please

TheHound

Salice 006

crescent

I've found BLOC sunglasses to be good in the past, although never used them for riding, just as regular sunglasses.

http://www.bloceyewear.com

Also, have a look at Screwfix - some of their tinted safety glasses are worth a try. I currently wear a set of Bolle safefy glasses - impact resistant, tinted and less than a tenner.

http://www.screwfix.com/c/safety-workwe ... =cat850392

rolf_f

PX have some nice discounted sunglasses - I bought a pair of the Areos (retail £59) for less than a tenner for the glasses, three sets of lenses, a semi hard case and a soft bag and they are very nice. http://www.planetx.co.uk/c/q/clothing/e ... ng-glasses

mcvw

I have a pair of Tifosi Seek's. Subtle styling. Good all-round vision, good fit, good price (<£50)

http://www.tifosioptics.com/products/0190304834/

macleod113

i have some of the Tifosi Dolomite sunglasses. around £45 2 years ago and have 3 lens colours. would love some oakleys one day. the Tifosi's do steam up on cold days

rokt

I pick up a pair of Bloc Shifter multi lens from Rutland Cycles in the summer and on offer, only £35 !

I have a pair of Oakley and to be honest, they are not worth the money.

jimmythecuckoo

Used in the pro peloton and really decent price...

http://www.wiggle.co.uk/bbb-select-sport-sunglasses/

Tjgoodhew

TheHound wrote:

Salice 006

This

meanredspider

Rolf F wrote:

PX have some nice discounted sunglasses - I bought a pair of the Areos (retail £59) for less than a tenner for the glasses, three sets of lenses, a semi hard case and a soft bag and they are very nice. http://www.planetx.co.uk/c/q/clothing/e ... ng-glasses

The Areos steam up horribly on my head - only glasses I have to remove when climbing in winter.

I've tried a few of the cheaper shades and it has shown me just how good the likes of Oakley are (if you can source them at the right price). I bought a couple of pairs of Oakley seconds and they are excellent.

jimmythecuckoo

is there an authourised Oakley seconds site anywhere?

johnmiosh

I have two pairs of Oakleys, Half jacket XLJ purchased three years ago for £53, and a new set of Half Jacket 2.0 XL for £68 this year on a black friday deal. Both brilliant, best specs ever tried, but I could not justify paying full price. All specs will steam in certain circumstances, even with expensive hydrophobic layers

For budget specs, look at the safety specs available. Generally dirt cheap. The standard you should be looking for is EN 166-1FT. 166 is the number of the standard. 1 is the optical class (2 and 3 are lower quality, don't bother) and FT or F is impact resistance. F is the lowest impact resistance standard, but more than enough for cycling; it will protect against a 6mm steel ball weighing 0.86g travelling at 45 m/s (S would also be sufficient, these are for small objects with less velocity emitted at a distance from the wearer.)

In a past life, trying to get construction workers to follow site policy of wearing specs, I found that offering Bolle with smoke lenses for sunny days was a brilliant incentive. Looked much more expensive than they were.

jgsi

Best bargain I got was from Wiggle.. it was like russian roulette sale.. price dropping for nearly 6 weeks of constant watching until £45 I hit --- for a normal holiday... I have the inserts to fit thats why and the OH not so keen on the other Rydons "far too young" set I use.
Pays keeping your eyes open...

skyeflyguy

Been using Uvex 202 variomatic sports style race for 6 months. I really like them, moldable, light and no thick frames to impede your vision when your down on the drops. I forget Ive got them on most of the time. On sale a Ribble at the moment.

Matthewfalle

Uvex for me as well. Very good price, very good lenses don't cost the earth.

Manc33

The cycling sunglasses Aldi do, a princely £98 cheaper than the figure you don't want to spend.

mfin

If you count most of the time you spend in bright sunlight (not too much in Scotland?) then even the UV filtering of sunglasses whilst cycling accounts for naff all of the hours in a week. Most cycling sunglasses are vastly OTT for any practical need, the minimum requirements are really that they don't fog up too much and they fit your face shape, and this is pretty individual.

So, buy what you want, at a price that you find reasonable, whether that's £20 or £200 it won't make any real difference to most people no matter what they come out with. Low to mid-range will do everything you need.

MisterMuncher

ZeroRH make reasonably frequent appearances in TK Maxx, usually for £20-30, and are excellent glasses with really nice optics.

meanredspider

mfin wrote:

If you count most of the time you spend in bright sunlight (not too much in Scotland?) then even the UV filtering of sunglasses whilst cycling accounts for naff all of the hours in a week. Most cycling sunglasses are vastly OTT for any practical need, the minimum requirements are really that they don't fog up too much and they fit your face shape, and this is pretty individual.

So, buy what you want, at a price that you find reasonable, whether that's £20 or £200 it won't make any real difference to most people no matter what they come out with. Low to mid-range will do everything you need.

It's actually not the UV filtering that I've found any issues with. Where the cheap shades fall down in some of your other areas are
- steaming up
- causing eyes to water (not protecting eyes from cold air)
- uncomfortable side arms
- artefacts in the corner of the lenses (one cheap pair of Bolles I have keep making me thing there's something behind me when I shoulder check)
- poor sweat protection (I had a good pair from PBK but the hinge rusted through in a year)

Personally, I'd rather pay just a bit more and then look after them (my Oakleys are 3-4 years old and, for much of that, were used on commutes - at half price, they don't owe me much). YMMV

wongataa

I have some Decathlon photochromic sunnies. They were cheap and there were a few different styles to try.

mfin

meanredspider wrote:

mfin wrote:

If you count most of the time you spend in bright sunlight (not too much in Scotland?) then even the UV filtering of sunglasses whilst cycling accounts for naff all of the hours in a week. Most cycling sunglasses are vastly OTT for any practical need, the minimum requirements are really that they don't fog up too much and they fit your face shape, and this is pretty individual.

So, buy what you want, at a price that you find reasonable, whether that's £20 or £200 it won't make any real difference to most people no matter what they come out with. Low to mid-range will do everything you need.

It's actually not the UV filtering that I've found any issues with. Where the cheap shades fall down in some of your other areas are
- steaming up
- causing eyes to water (not protecting eyes from cold air)
- uncomfortable side arms
- artefacts in the corner of the lenses (one cheap pair of Bolles I have keep making me thing there's something behind me when I shoulder check)
- poor sweat protection (I had a good pair from PBK but the hinge rusted through in a year)

Personally, I'd rather pay just a bit more and then look after them (my Oakleys are 3-4 years old and, for much of that, were used on commutes - at half price, they don't owe me much). YMMV

Some of those things you mention are mostly down to either fit as everybody's face is different, or down to the general design of ones that you have picked that are no good, these aren't qualities of all cheaper sunglasses. Spending more on a pair doesn't guarantee to be an answer to this in itself either.

Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with spending lots of money, it's just that you don't necessarily need to. I have and have had shades from £10 to £200 including Oakley and Rudy Project for instance. Oakleys I gave away, Rudys are left in a drawer somewhere as I don't get on with the nose bridge enough for them to seem to disappear and they steam up too often. My two main 'go to' pairs are at the moment Adidas (£50 in a sale) and Sunwise (£20) and I can't find fault with either of them for the purpose they serve.

meanredspider

That's fair. I think people underestimate what it takes to make really good shades though.

skyeflyguy

mfin wrote:

If you count most of the time you spend in bright sunlight (not too much in Scotland?) then even the UV filtering of sunglasses whilst cycling accounts for naff all of the hours in a week. Most cycling sunglasses are vastly OTT for any practical need, the minimum requirements are really that they don't fog up too much and they fit your face shape, and this is pretty individual.

So, buy what you want, at a price that you find reasonable, whether that's £20 or £200 it won't make any real difference to most people no matter what they come out with. Low to mid-range will do everything you need.

Maybe its just me , but the UV thing was way down the list of priority........yes I live in Scotland!
I wanted something without a thick frame, something I could adjust to my face and a pair that could cope with all light conditions without having to change lenses. This far North the weather can be glorious sunshine to hail within the space of 5 minutes.
They dont steam up too bad, and the impact testing Uvex does looks pretty damn good too.
Pricey? maybe but if you can get them in the sales, well worth a punt IMHO.

rolf_f

meanredspider wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

PX have some nice discounted sunglasses - I bought a pair of the Areos (retail £59) for less than a tenner for the glasses, three sets of lenses, a semi hard case and a soft bag and they are very nice. http://www.planetx.co.uk/c/q/clothing/e ... ng-glasses

The Areos steam up horribly on my head - only glasses I have to remove when climbing in winter.

Oh, you are doing that thing again where you assume that because one product of a company doesn't suit you, everything they make is no good. By your own reasoning, it would be fair to say that the Alfa Guila GTA/GTV is a pile of horse manure because of the existence of the Alfa Arna.

As I am sure you remember perfectly well, another bloke on Commuting chat bought several variations of Areo off PX and agreed with you that the sort you had were prone to misting up and the others were not - and were infact very good. I don't recall you tried the rest of the range.

For those who appreciate that different things have different qualities, I would post the link but it looks as though BR has let their web developers loose on the forum again and the search function is no longer generating meaningful results (apparently 'sunglasses' have only ever been mentioned once in commuting chat...... :roll: )

meanredspider

Rolf F wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

PX have some nice discounted sunglasses - I bought a pair of the Areos (retail £59) for less than a tenner for the glasses, three sets of lenses, a semi hard case and a soft bag and they are very nice. http://www.planetx.co.uk/c/q/clothing/e ... ng-glasses

The Areos steam up horribly on my head - only glasses I have to remove when climbing in winter.

Oh, you are doing that thing again where you assume that because one product of a company doesn't suit you, everything they make is no good. By your own reasoning, it would be fair to say that the Alfa Guila GTA/GTV is a pile of horse manure because of the existence of the Alfa Arna.

As I am sure you remember perfectly well, another bloke on Commuting chat bought several variations of Areo off PX and agreed with you that the sort you had were prone to misting up and the others were not - and were infact very good. I don't recall you tried the rest of the range.

For those who appreciate that different things have different qualities, I would post the link but it looks as though BR has let their web developers loose on the forum again and the search function is no longer generating meaningful results (apparently 'sunglasses' have only ever been mentioned once in commuting chat...... :roll: )

Blimey - has your dinner disagreed with you? You're right but I bought the vented ones which, as the other guy agreed, steamed up - suggesting that Areo have a bit to learn about shades design. Also (as your point neatly proves) if you need to buy the entire range to find something good (and I don't remember his test being particularly thorough) it's hardly a ringing endorsement.

Besides all of that, I mentioned my experience of a pair of Areos in contrast with your experience of a pair of Areos - why is my experience any less relevant than yours? Have you tried the entire range?

KonkyWonky

Endura Mullet, can be had for around the £40 mark and come in black, white, green or silver.

Vented and photochromic lenses, feel very well made and come with a drawstring bag and zipped shell case. I'm pretty sure the NetApp Endura team wore them a couple of seasons ago.