2015 Oakley X-Metal Sunglasses

[pjd1234]

He didn't say they were xmetal. He said they're xmetals which they are.

Xmetal is 3 things:
A collection name
A material
A colorway

So in this scenario, and this goes for everyone, the new xmetals apply the xmetal name in only one case, which is correct.

well bro im not gonna argue with you on that one maybe a collection name that's about it material?? colorway which is omat02??. I guess you can validate it as 2015 xmetal cause Oakley said so but I know deep in every ones case especially me THESE ARE NOT "only my opinion".

 

[qtrain23]

well bro im not gonna argue with you on that one maybe a collection name that's about it material?? colorway which is omat02??. I guess you can validate it as 2015 xmetal cause Oakley said so but I know deep in every ones case especially me THESE ARE NOT "only my opinion".

I don't think you understood what I said.

 

[pjd1234]

Just to be clear I did not call this abomination an X-Metal, Oakley did, So being the crack addict I am, I called them X-Metals to clear up there was too many repost about this subject. LOL

well basically its his to its own satisfaction if you are satisfied with them to be in the same category as the x metals of old well good for you on the contrary and I believe most of us old timers who are accustomed to the x metal of old wont, so its basically different in every ones taste some might like it some might not, some loves pepsi, some loves coke that's all that is there to it.

 

[digi7alph0enix]

Why is this such a big deal... When dodge released the challenger and charger remake people were fine with it. Ford canceled the Taurus and then brought it back a few years later. Camaro, same thing. These are items that cost tens on thousands of dollars. Are you guys rioting in the streets over those model names too, or just over some sunglasses?

Seems to me those models used to have a lot more metal in them too, just like Xmetals. How many of you are driving those cars and loving them while owners of the originals scoff at you and look down on your car because it isn't "real"? Does it make you enjoy your car any less? Does it make your car a lesser model because it isn't the first to carry that name? Or are you happy to have it because it's a chance to drive something you couldn't the first time around? Maybe you don't care about the name or history at all and you just like it for what it is, a car (sunglasses).

Seriously, if people can't get off their high horse because they own the originals and Oakley isn't releasing a direct remake of it (which would have people even more pissed off I'm sure) then maybe it's time to start buying some Maui Jim's. Oakley doesn't owe you anything.

 

[pjd1234]

Why is this such a big deal... When dodge released the challenger and charger remake people were fine with it. Ford canceled the Taurus and then brought it back a few years later. Camaro, same thing. These are items that cost tens on thousands of dollars. Are you guys rioting in the streets over those model names too, or just over some sunglasses?

Seems to me those models used to have a lot more metal in them too, just like Xmetals. How many of you are driving those cars and loving them while owners of the originals scoff at you and look down on your car because it isn't "real"? Does it make you enjoy your car any less? Does it make your car a lesser model because it isn't the first to carry that name? Or are you happy to have it because it's a chance to drive something you couldn't the first time around? Maybe you find care about the name or history at all and you just like it for what it is, a car (sunglasses).

Seriously, if people can't get off their high horse because they own the originals and Oakley isn't releasing a direct remake of it (which would have people even more pissed off I'm sure) then maybe it's time to start buying some Maui Jim's. Oakley doesn't owe you anything.

right on bro hahahaha no comparisons to cars though as classics fetch more than new once the Mercedes gull wing for example old school compared to new school not even close in value. Its like comparing xmetals to lambo and the madman/badman to Porsche boxer not a bad comparison but a downgrade I think that's the fuss is all about our beloved xmetal of old is being downgraded vehicles are being upgraded every year with new features and style and tech. The madman/badman not even close in comparison to a Juliet.

 

[digi7alph0enix]

right on bro hahahaha no comparisons to cars though as classics fetch more than new once the Mercedes gull wing for example old school compared to new school not even close in value. Its like comparing xmetals to lambo and the madman/badman to Porsche boxer not a bad comparison but a downgrade I think that's the fuss is all about our beloved xmetal of old is being downgraded vehicles are being upgraded every year with new features and style and tech. The madman/badman not even close in comparison to a Juliet.

You don't think the same is true for our Xmetals? Production has stopped, wearing, losing, damaging them hasn't. The supply isn't infinite so prices will continue to rise. In Oakley's mind these new Xmetals are just as you said for cars, new style, new tech. Maybe now instead of needing special tools and skills to tune a nose bridge you just unscrew one and put in another. Maybe they are lighter. Maybe the finishes won't wear off (24k XX). Maybe the frames won't have pitting. Maybe the orbitals will be the same size on every pair and we won't have to shave down OEM lenses to make them fit.

All I'm saying is people are quick to forget the problems and hassles of the old when they are caught up bitching about something new. I'm glad I'm not in the sunglasses business that's for sure.

 

[MJLSr]

When dodge released the challenger and charger remake people were fine with it...

Not everyone is 'fine' with that. There are some auto enthusiasts that have a strong bias for one generation or another. It does not mean any of them are wrong, it only means what it means - that Challenger, Taurus, or Camaro is defined by what they believe.

Take any one of those models - now close your eyes and think of it... What is the first image that comes to mind? That is likely your preference, for which you will have a bias. The vision and right to it is a wonderful thing!

The interesting thing to me when I compare those models is that all of the different generations of Challengers, Taurus', and Camaros had 4 wheels, an engine, and a metal frame of some sort - the manufacturers did not make part of the newer frame PLASTIC (sorry, O Matter, whatever - it is more a kin to plastic than any metal any day). We're not even talking carbon fiber here... we're talking O Matter and O-luminum.

That said if these were some sort of actual metal then I may be a bit more comfortable calling them "Metal", closer to "X-Metal". I can't be sure, but perhaps... Not to take anything away from my X-Metal belt, which is mostly leather with an X-Metal buckle, or my X-Metal t shirts that have no actual metal in them at all whatsoever - I have no problem with those being referred to as X-Metal.

Its all about CONTEXT.

There is a common sense difference between the X-Metal family of products, concepts, and ideas - and X-Metal sunglasses proper. When I hear about belts and shirts I expect ... belts and shirts, leather and cotton, maybe polyester and other fabrics. When I hear "X-Metal" [in the context of] sunglasses I expect, well, metal ... not plastic (again, O Matter, my bad).

Who here knew about the compromise in lenses when Oakley moved away from Z87.1 (which were OEM in X-Metal, BTW) to Z80.3... not even the internal Oakley employees were aware for the most part. If you go back to the car analogy would you have a problem with your genX Challengers, Taurus', and Camaros if they had a much thinner and weaker windshield - would you question the quality and the intentions of the manufacturer then? Would there be some reservations in grouping them together with previous generations of Challengers, Taurus', and Camaros that had full metal frames and significantly stronger windshields, glass, etc...??

The sad truth is the Badman and Madman are a culmination of years of Oakley/Luxottica cutting corners for cost savings and supply chain efficiencies - all of which to increase profits. Not that there is anything wrong with this - businesses should be in business to make money with few exceptions. That said, anyone who thinks the time and effort put into these are more than a fraction of what went into the original X-Metals has got to be kidding themselves.

If it sound like I am calling out Oakley and Luxottica here - you damn right!
I absolutely am!!

Is this like marketing a Jaguar with Ford parts?
Is it selling a fancy VW as a Lamborghini?
Is there anything wrong with either scenario above?
To some, perhaps...

I get the whole subjective thing here, and I don't necessarily disagree with those who seem to disagree with me. I respect their opinions, even when they are wrong (j/k). There are many newcomers who will not know or care about this debate and in a way I envy them. The reality is Oakley's marketing campaign to ride the coattails of a product they discontinued because they [and the parent company] could not make a significant profit... Only to bring that product back with less expensive lower quality materials at a significantly higher markup is a bad joke at best - anyone with an open mind should be able to see that.

I have spoken to dozen Oakley folks [people I have known for years and trust] and not a single one of them agrees with and/or clearly understands the X-Metal branding outside of a sales and marketing perspective. The company that pushes a product in that manner is a different company than the one that released the original X-Metals once upon a time. If that is their chosen direction good for them. I do not have to agree or follow...

Oakley doesn't owe you anything.

Exactly - and I don't owe them anything - it works both ways.
They won't be getting much from me moving forward either - as a matter of fact they have not gotten much of anything 'new' from in recent years due to their persistent compromises in quality and design. The current product lines are mostly a joke in regards to quality and the marketing of dissimilar products too closely in the same family line is not something I had ever expected from Oakley once upon a time. Now I have very low expectations. I expect innovation with vision, not hybrid PR stunts at markups that protect the bottom line. <sigh>

 

[digi7alph0enix]

Not everyone is 'fine' with that. There are some auto enthusiasts that have a strong bias for one generation or another. It does not mean any of them are wrong, it only means what it means - that Challenger, Taurus, or Camaro is defined by what they believe.

Take any one of those models - now close your eyes and think of it... What is the first image that comes to mind? That is likely your preference, for which you will have a bias. The vision and right to it is a wonderful thing!

The interesting thing to me when I compare those models is that all of the different generations of Challengers, Taurus', and Camaros had 4 wheels, an engine, and a metal frame of some sort - the manufacturers did not make part of the newer frame PLASTIC (sorry, O Matter, whatever - it is more a kin to plastic than any metal any day). We're not even talking carbon fiber here... we're talking O Matter and O-luminum.

That said if these were some sort of actual metal then I may be a bit more comfortable calling them "Metal", closer to "X-Metal". I can't be sure, but perhaps... Not to take anything away from my X-Metal belt, which is mostly leather with an X-Metal buckle, or my X-Metal t shirts that have no actual metal in them at all whatsoever - I have no problem with those being referred to as X-Metal.

Its all about CONTEXT.

There is a common sense difference between the X-Metal family of products, concepts, and ideas - and X-Metal sunglasses proper. When I hear about belts and shirts I expect ... belts and shirts, leather and cotton, maybe polyester and other fabrics. When I hear "X-Metal" [in the context of] sunglasses I expect, well, metal ... not plastic (again, O Matter, my bad).

Who here knew about the compromise in lenses when Oakley moved away from Z87.1 (which were OEM in X-Metal, BTW) to Z80.3... not even the internal Oakley employees were aware for the most part. If you go back to the car analogy would you have a problem with your genX Challengers, Taurus', and Camaros if they had a much thinner and weaker windshield - would you question the quality and the intentions of the manufacturer then? Would there be some reservations in grouping them together with previous generations of Challengers, Taurus', and Camaros that had full metal frames and significantly stronger windshields, glass, etc...??

The sad truth is the Badman and Madman are a culmination of years of Oakley/Luxottica cutting corners for cost savings and supply chain efficiencies - all of which to increase profits. Not that there is anything wrong with this - businesses should be in business to make money with few exceptions. That said, anyone who thinks the time and effort put into these are more than a fraction of what went into the original X-Metals has got to be kidding themselves.

If it sound like I am calling out Oakley and Luxottica here - you damn right!
I absolutely am!!

Is this like marketing a Jaguar with Ford parts?
Is it selling a fancy VW as a Lamborghini?
Is there anything wrong with either scenario above?
To some, perhaps...

I get the whole subjective thing here, and I don't necessarily disagree with those who seem to disagree with me. I respect their opinions, even when they are wrong (j/k). There are many newcomers who will not know or care about this debate and in a way I envy them. The reality is Oakley's marketing campaign to ride the coattails of a product they discontinued because they [and the parent company] could not make a significant profit... Only to bring that product back with less expensive lower quality materials at a significantly higher markup is a bad joke at best - anyone with an open mind should be able to see that.

I have spoken to dozen Oakley folks [people I have known for years and trust] and not a single one of them agrees with and/or clearly understands the X-Metal branding outside of a sales and marketing perspective. The company that pushes a product in that manner is a different company than the one that released the original X-Metals once upon a time. If that is their chosen direction good for them. I do not have to agree or follow...


Exactly - and I don't owe them anything - it works both ways.
They won't be getting much from me moving forward either - as a matter of fact they have not gotten much of anything 'new' from in recent years due to their persistent compromises in quality and design. The current product lines are mostly a joke in regards to quality and the marketing of dissimilar products too closely in the same family line is not something I had ever expected from Oakley once upon a time. Now I have very low expectations. I expect innovation with vision, not hybrid PR stunts at markups that protect the bottom line. <sigh>

This is exactly the type of informed and reasonable opinion I wish was more present in this discussion. I can completely understand and see your points, and I even agree with them. As far as cars go you could make the argument that instead of metal being replaced with plastic, things like wood were replaced with plastic. Cast iron engine blocks for aluminum blocks. Etc etc.

What bothers me the most is the "I hate these so you should hate these, and if you don't I'm going to bad mouth you for it." attitude that has been stirred up. Honestly I won't be buying either the madman or badman, but that doesn't mean I've got to try to make others feel bad for liking them. That isn't directed at anyone in particular by the way, it just seems to be part of the mob mentality these pairs have generated on the forum lately.

 

[kronin323]

I'm just calling them "neXt-metals" to differentiate. It's not a judgment statement.

 

[MJLSr]

What bothers me the most is the "I hate these so you should hate these, and if you don't I'm going to bad mouth you for it." attitude that has been stirred up. Honestly I won't be buying either the madman or badman, but that doesn't mean I've got to try to make others feel bad for liking them.

I could not agree more.

I like to see us all share opinions and make recommendations. It is vital to the health of the forum and our collector community base. In order to do that we all need to develop our own opinions.

Make up your own mind, like what you like, and call them what you want

Full disclosure - I will get a Badman and Madman. I am reserving judgement with very low expectations until I get them in hand. I sincerely hope that I want to keep them! In my mind selling/returning them would be a terrible thing - a worst case scenario for the 'X-Metal family' bloodline. There is a middle ground - where I keep them, but they become more like community pairs, on the 'meh.' shelf where my family knows they can help themselves.