Oakley New Releases | Spring 2014 - Due April

[MJLSr]

I can't help it - its been a long time since Oakley impressed me, over 10 years... I think this might just do it. I look at each of the colorways and they all pop to me - if they feel half as good as they look - and I know they will be waaaay easy on my eyes - then they are totally worth it!

They better be... there IS a return policy

 

[Dallas O Hog]

More for me!

Haha not serialized or limited. Big price for me

 

[Patient_Cero]

I asked about that today - the run, how many will there be - no one knows and if they do they are not telling. There will also be others like the Fuel Cell, Garage Rock, etc... I can't imagine them making as many as the others but at some point you gotta figure they put it in a fancy box with a CF watch and/or $1500 bottle of scotch, get someone to sign a few... there won't be many of those.

Another aspect may be the lenses. I presume the standard blades will have lenses that can and will be replaced, but the Ferrari's.... Like the IH? perhaps not??

Yea perhaps, if they are playing that angle and the Ruby will be exclusive if accessory lenses become available in the future. I definitely have to try them on still before a commitment to the this platform itself.

 

[MJLSr]

Haha not serialized or limited. Big price for me

Somewhere between 'you only get one set of eyes' and 'my favorite pairs are custom not serialized' - I'm ok with that.

Nice X-metal frame + rubbers + refinish + custom polars... might be cheaper to go carbon.

Granted, carbon does not have that 'X-Metal' factor, literally, but carbon is still a new metal of sorts. I've done some CF prototype work - if it is done right it will be around for a long time and won't be as likely to bend, fade, or corrode over time.

Time will tell?

 

[MJLSr]

One thing y'all can be sure of - I am an X-Metal fan, but not necessarily an Oakley fan... at all. I will be very clear in sharing my opinions on these. There WIIL be REVIEWS, for better or worse! Just because I jumped on them does not mean I am going into this with a bias - I need to be impressed, like '99 Juliet impressed... C'Mon Oakley - DO IT!

 

[Sundalo]

This is actually cheaper than other real carbon fiber sunglasses except ferrari is half frame where as others are full frame.

 

[MJLSr]

Aside from Oakley's previous efforts and those hybrid frames by Ray-Ban, BLAC makes a very nice full-frame CF if you can afford it. I think the full frame CF BLACs start around $700 and quickly go to $1000+

In comparison $350 for most of the standard Oakley CBs is not that expensive.

The Oakley CBs also appear to have more CF in them then their RayBan counterparts, which were/are also somewhat less expensive, or perhaps even 'cheaper', in more way than one. I also hope that the Oakley is more serviceable. A few of the RBs I saw were not so 'user friendly'. Hopefully Oakley has benefited from RayBan efforts and the mother ship's previous experience to get the right balance of CF frame.

 

[Ventruck]

Don't want to get ahead of myself, but I really don't believe in the worth by design. I mean bicycle frames are in the $1-2k range after the brand mark up, as low as $400 when you go the less legit route.

Meanwhile, something a small as a pair of glasses? Sounds like a silly relation but carbon water bottle cages probably use as much CF as the Carbon Blades, and can get as low as ~$30.

There are some intricate interfaces and we are paying for the lenses too, but there doesn't seem to be much going on with the Carbon Blade as far as shape goes. The earstems are simply a flat, curved profile, and the orbitals are a pretty minimalist half rim with an alloy liner handling the nose pads. Of course the price tag is also reflected on the "well how many full CF frames are there on the market?" which MJLSr points out is very few - and I think Blac is the only company making the mold extend to the noespads.

So it's not the price that bothers me, it's just that the frame seems so unimpressive. It's such a token item in my view, probably with outsourced production. Pretty sure it's possible get something with more shape without picking up the price to C6 value - which was limited production and precision machined. I don't even know why O didn't jump ahead with a monocoque pro M frame.

 

[Sundalo]

Don't want to get ahead of myself, but I really don't believe in the worth by design. I mean bicycle frames are in the $1-2k range after the brand mark up, as low as $400 when you go the less legit route.

Meanwhile, something a small as a pair of glasses? Sounds like a silly relation but carbon water bottle cages probably use as much CF as the Carbon Blades, and can get as low as ~$30.

There are some intricate interfaces and we are paying for the lenses too, but there doesn't seem to be much going on with the Carbon Blade as far as shape goes. The earstems are simply a flat, curved profile, and the orbitals are a pretty minimalist half rim with an alloy liner handling the nose pads. Of course the price tag is also reflected on the "well how many full CF frames are there on the market?" which MJLSr points out is very few - and I think Blac is the only company making the mold extend to the noespads.

So it's not the price that bothers me, it's just that the frame seems so unimpressive. It's such a token item in my view, probably with outsourced production. Pretty sure it's possible get something with more shape without picking up the price to C6 value - which was limited production and precision machined. I don't even know why O didn't jump ahead with a monocoque pro M frame.

Ahh, the infamous China carbon

 

[MJLSr]

I see these similar to most other eyewear, accessories, jewelry, etc... probably looking at no more than 25% in parts, 25% in labor/overhead, and then double that for retail/distribution/marketing. Following that logic a $350 pair of glasses might have $80-some in parts. I can see the polars costing $30-something, with $25 of carbon, $15 in rubber and screws, $5-$10 for the bag, hard case, and other stuff it comes with - everything costs something. Does anyone else think there is more than $100 in materials in one of these [Carbon Blades]?

I also understand the labor - they have to be assembled, QC, there are defects, re-runs, other production issues that probably get attributed to labor overhead.

Then we have the Ferrari - add the premium for the 'cool tax' and the Ferrari royalty (presume there is one, I dunno).

Now, considering all of the above it does take a significant investment to make the machines that make the materials [in addition to the raw materials] so they can be reproduced in a cost effective manner. I mentioned before working CF prototypes - the design, molds, etc... These systems are hundreds of thousands of dollars and that has to get factored in somewhere. I have seen six figures go into making a sub-$1000 shell/part/component of CF. This was a part of a larger system, but still the amount of design and effort upfront is often minimized if not forgotten. Oakley [Luxottica] knows this and needs to have objectives for sales to cover these costs. The glasses also have to remain profitable inclusive of returns, warranties, and so on - hence the 100% [or more] markup from the initial parts and labor.

I am not justifying the cost in any way. The Oakley CBs are not cheap, but from a manufacturing perspective it is fair from the business side, to provide a product and remain profitable while supporting them for some reasonable period of time. I am still convinced that is why the X-metals were killed - the profit margin became too low with regards to the materials used. Others can have their opinions, that is mine.

I'll probably have more opinions on the assemblies in question tomorrow evening. I just confirmed my tracking # and UPS says the delivery is due for my 1st 5 pairs, 01-05, tomorrow by end of day.

Happy Wednesday!