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. Funky-Trixtar

    Funky-Trixtar Me ,some time ago............. Premium Member

    Messages:
    3,812
    Trophy Points:
    723
    Allrght, this is something that bugs me. Why change the shape of the earstems (arms) detailing. Why did they 'tart it up'? Essentialy in my eyes, make a nice 'flowing' design and BALL$ it up.....
     
    Shade Station Oakley Sunglasses

    Register to Not see this ad
  2. Romeo Van Frogskinstein

    Romeo Van Frogskinstein Oakley Enthusiast

    Messages:
    925
    Trophy Points:
    273
    I think both are great glasses but prefer the original, the pitfall that I see though is that the first version was cut short by being dropped too soon, I think it could have had a much longer life as a model, then the change was relatively small but the II copied almost every colourway of it's predecessor. With such a large frame there was so much scope for more variation, and perhaps the first releases with the flat arms could have provided interesting options for Artists Series or expansive colour designs. The full potential was possibly never realised with either model. Also, if you were an Oil Rigoholic you would feel a potential need to collect them all thus end up buying the same stuff essentially with II, best option was perhaps to cherry pick the best of each. I wound up with almost every original, and a handful of II.
     
    Craig Perkins likes this.
  3. Funky-Trixtar

    Funky-Trixtar Me ,some time ago............. Premium Member

    Messages:
    3,812
    Trophy Points:
    723
    I like the idea of collabs, Ashley. Also that's a fair point about expensive colour designs. However, I feel that adding
    gairish colours to this frame would not suit it's basc looks (on the original anyway).
    For some reason, I still think they made a mess of a perfectly good piece by over embelishing it. Every time I see the Oil Rig II's Icon, it reminds me of something from Star Wars: just too fussy..........
     
  4. Carrera1963

    Carrera1963 Lover of Juliet Premium Member

    Messages:
    3,535
    Trophy Points:
    743
    I always thought the arms, and probably the whole frame to be honest, were a bit clunky looking. For both models. But the Star Wars reference is telling, the second gen in particular have something of the look of a prop for a low budget sci-fi film...
     
  5. Oakster

    Oakster Oakley Expert Premium Member Lifetime Member

    Messages:
    2,954
    Trophy Points:
    773
    1st gen was easy to fake so most "1st gens" you see are fakes. 2nd gen with the castle icon is far better and nobody will put the time in effort into faking them.
     
  6. Funky-Trixtar

    Funky-Trixtar Me ,some time ago............. Premium Member

    Messages:
    3,812
    Trophy Points:
    723
    I've always like that big bulky look of the Oil Rigs, It suits my face shape perfectly! It just seemed rushed on the II's, so haphazard.

    So it was all down to fakes being made...........didn't know that. Still not convinced though.
     
  7. thatoakleyguy

    thatoakleyguy Oakley Enthusiast

    Messages:
    608
    Trophy Points:
    183
    I've had both a pair of the Nicky Hayden Oil rigs in the new and old style. As far as the styling on the "O" I preferred the first gen. The second gen is jagged on the icons and takes away from the frames that had designs on them. Just my .02
     
  8. OakleyFreak

    OakleyFreak RIP RoTors

    Messages:
    2,288
    Trophy Points:
    693
    Only diff is the Icon and yes the Gen 1 arms are flat
    Gen 1 on left Gen 2 on right
    I like em both

    Who prefers Oil Rigs to Oil Rig II's and why? - IMG_20150325_214607_860.jpg