1. Want to see less ads, private areas and be able to post? Register Today to receive all these benefits and more!
Dismiss Notice

Want to see less ads, post content and the ability to buy & sell Oakleys?

Register Today or Login

  1. nlgrav182

    nlgrav182 Oakley Enthusiast

    Messages:
    956
    Trophy Points:
    173
    Doing some reading after realizing my Crosshair is made in China, and it seems that the Crosshair and a handful of other pairs are not held to the ANSI Z87.1 standard for high and low impact protection, but a lesser standard known as Z80.3. This lesser standard only has light transmittance standards and less impact protection.

    From Wiki:
    The U.S. standard is ANSI Z80.3-2001, which includes three transmittance categories. According to the ANSI Z80.3-2001 standard, the lens should have a UVB (280 to 315 nm) transmittance of no more than one per cent and a UVA (315 to 380 nm) transmittance of no more than 0.3 times the visual light transmittance. The ANSI Z87.1-2003 standard includes requirements for basic impact and high impact protection. In the basic impact test, a 1 in (2.54 cm) steel ball is dropped on the lens from a height of 50 in (127 cm). In the high velocity test, a 1/4 in (6.35 mm) steel ball is shot at the lens at 150 ft/s (45.72 m/s). To pass both tests, no part of the lens may touch the eye. [20]


    Oakleys at Z80.3:
    Oakley - The Official Site

    Big bummer for me. I'm going to try to return the Crosshairs for something else. Maybe the Ti model is USA and Z87.1.

    Seems that Lux is having more and more an influence on Oakley...
     
    Shade Station Oakley Sunglasses

    Register to Not see this ad
  2. OakleyGuru379

    OakleyGuru379 What is that thing?!

    Messages:
    7,298
    Trophy Points:
    1,223
    To pass Z80.3 is still impressive though! Some safety glasses don't!
     
  3. whirrx

    whirrx Oakley Beginner

    Messages:
    81
    Trophy Points:
    56
    I believe this has much less to do with cutting cost with construction and more to do with the security of the lens in wire/acetate frames, just judging by the looks of the pairs in the search. I wouldn't fret too much at all, because in the end they're still plutonite lenses and won't shatter when struck, more so the lenses probably separated in a percentage of the tests so they had to be qualified for a lower standards.
     
  4. nlgrav182

    nlgrav182 Oakley Enthusiast

    Messages:
    956
    Trophy Points:
    173
    The old Oakley doesn't settle for "still impressive." It should be Z87.1 or keep working. Moreover, I paid full Oakley price for a pair of glasses that are not full Oakley (USA, Z87.1). Not cool.
     
  5. Rustpot

    Rustpot M Frame Lover Premium Member

    Messages:
    8,330
    Trophy Points:
    2,023
    Call and tell them as much. They'll do it unless people tell them not to.
     
  6. JacketFan

    JacketFan Oakley Beginner

    Messages:
    153
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I wouldn't worry about it, polycarbonate is extremely shatter/impact resistant, 10 times as much as hardened glass. They use it for cheap safety glasses. The marketing geniuses at Oakley have made people think it's a unique feature but it's not. And unless you're in a battle zone or something it's not going to be an issue.
     
  7. Rustpot

    Rustpot M Frame Lover Premium Member

    Messages:
    8,330
    Trophy Points:
    2,023
    Yes, but must we get into ANOTHER discussion in this thread about how inferior you feel Oakley lenses are? We get it, "Oakley just uses polycarbonate, it's the same as $5 safety glasses."

    Not when we're talking impact protection and getting a pair that will take abuse and keep you from going blind. Some of us use our Oakleys for things like safety glasses, bike riding glasses, motorcycle glasses, shooting glasses... you know, things where you have a higher likelihood of getting hit in the face. Working under the previous assumption of all Oakleys being Z87 at minimum was a bit of a relief knowing you could count on any pair in your collection to be certified to stand in the way of harm. Now we find out some frames carry a standard for impact protection that will not allow use in industrial environments or other applications?

    Compare the Z80.3 to the Z87.1-2003

    I have my M Frame 3.0 as my work pair because they are Z87+ and they'll stop whatever the shop can throw at me. I occasionally wear something else into the shop when I'm on my way out to my car or sunny days when I'm going to be working outside. I CANNOT do this with a Z80.3 rated pair.
     
  8. JacketFan

    JacketFan Oakley Beginner

    Messages:
    153
    Trophy Points:
    18
    You are so right.

    Seriously though, we're in a thread where you are literally discussing about "how inferior you feel Oakley lenses are".
     
  9. Rustpot

    Rustpot M Frame Lover Premium Member

    Messages:
    8,330
    Trophy Points:
    2,023
    So there's no difference between anything made from the same materials. Good to know. I'll go buy some Harbor Freight Chinese specials next time I need tools. They're just as good as Mac, or Cornwell, Snap-On, etc, right? It's all made of steel, so what possible difference could there be?

    And this isn't the lens as much as the frame. The impact tests are there to ensure nothing (including the lens) impacts the eye. A frame that allows the lens to come free under impact is much more dangerous and less protective than one that will hold the lens in place and not allow it to reach the eye.
     
  10. Batwolf

    Batwolf Double Team Premium Member

    Messages:
    6,170
    Trophy Points:
    893
    I can't tell if those posts are sarcastic but I don't think all polycarbonate lenses are treated equal.